The question “where to?” has a special importance in Jewish history and to the origins of Zionism. Ma’arav special issue about “The Jewish question in history and the Jewish existence in this day and age” is published alongside the exhibition “Where to?”.

In its simplest form, the Territorialist idea is the establishment of an autonomous entity or, alternatively, a state for the Jews in some territory other than the Land of Israel. This idea was born together with Zionist ideology. Ever since Pinsker, in his Auto-Emancipation, stated that “the goal of our present endeavors must be not the ‘Holy Land,’ but a land of our own,” there were those Jews who clung to the idea of “a land of our own,” aiming to establish either a state or some other kind of autonomous collective somewhere other than the Land of Israel.

Isaac Nachman Steinberg was one of the founders of the “Freeland” league, a Jewish Territorialist Organization. The following speech was authored just after the establishment of the State of Israel. It addresses, among other things, not only the relevance, but the necessity of achieving the objectives of the territorialist movement.

The Jewish-German writer and doctor Alfred Döblin called to revive Zangwill’s plan for a massive settlement in Angola. Döblin envisioned a new territorialist organization that would be even “farther-reaching than Zionism.”

the State of Israel provides a unique case study of the relationships between the homeland and the diaspora. One of the basic premises in the discourse on diaspora and immigration is that in the relationship between diaspora communities and homeland, homeland precedes diaspora, and that the existence of diasporas is the product of forced or voluntary movement of populations from the homeland to other countries.

Udi Edelman talked to Yael Bartana about “The Jewish Renaissance Movement in Poland (JRMiP)” and the ways in which art deals with political images.

The Jewish Question is the Israel Question. There is virtually no conscious Jewish existence today that does not position itself with one form or another of relation to Israel, whether it accepts Israeli hegemony in Jewish life or rejects it, whether it accepts Zionist hegemony in Israeli life or rejects it.

Internet shutdowns, website filtering, overflow, substitution and defamation: Arab regimes and the Internet, a guidebook for dictators

The philosophy of the secret is antithetical to the highest norm of criminal law. The flirtation of law with “truth” is of no help here. Recruiting the well-ordered and logical universe of the law in order to protect secrets leads to the unavoidable violation of fundamental legal principles, and to the creation of a juridical field dominated by an entirely different physics. Israeli law has created such a field.

“Firstly, my intention was to find a way to speak about Palestinians without falling into the inevitability of positing them in relation to Israel or to the conflict”.