Haaretz has reported that the concept of "relocation" is back in vogue, with an ever-growing list of proponents every passing minute. This indicates that it's time to discuss the idea with an open mind, willing to shift old perspectives and view it through a more contemporary lens in relation to Israel and its future.
The term "relocation" in this context doesn't refer to the usual practice in Israel of displacing Arabs from their homes and banishing them to perdition, which would involve legal claims and international scrutiny, and necessitate a level of physical coercion that's not moderate. Instead, according to an article by the writer B. Michael in the newspaper, it calls for a bit of creativity, to find human material that is transferable without requiring anyone to leave their home, move from their place, shift their possessions, or engage in any activity that involves movement.
The author considers this type of relocation beneficial with no disadvantages, suggesting that it would be welcomed with thunderous applause worldwide, elevating Israel's stature among nations, and restoring its former glory as a democratic state. It could also lead to an increase in the value of the shekel against the major currencies.
Aside from these virtues, the relocation is easy, according to the writer, and could be executed within days, hours, or perhaps minutes. The candidates for transfer, along with their wives, children, sheep, and guns, are already situated outside, and it would simply require officially notifying them that from now on, they reside externally. Additionally, informing border agents that the Green Line is the eastern boundary of the state of Israel is necessary.
Of course, the article indicates, any astute reader will understand that the settlers are the subject of discussion. This transfer is both significant and beneficial, for a sovereign state that is even remotely sane does not need to tolerate a sectarian, idolatrous faction that barely conceals its ambition to undermine the foundations of the state and replace them with fantastical "sacred" myths from the Middle Bronze Age. Moreover, this faction poses a greater insidious risk to the state's existence, mental health, and values than any external foes.
To Israel, these settlers are akin to extremist groups in other Middle Eastern countries and Iran, and are not different from what evangelical Christians might represent to the United States in the near future. The author describes the settlers as gangs of violent zealots who believe their strange god speaks through their throats, that they are above everyone else, and that everything is permissible for the sake of fulfilling their whims.
The article concludes by asserting that decisive action must be taken swiftly to avert the catastrophe that the settlers yearn for. It ends with a touch of sarcasm, suggesting that compassionate Jews concerned about the fate of the relocated settlers need not worry – following their initial disappointment, they may well convert to Islam or Christianity or perhaps regain their senses.
