Jump to content

Talk:Benny Morris

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Criticism of Morris' post-2000 views – shouldn't this be merged with Praise and criticism?

[edit]

Do we need really another section here? Especially given that most of the text focuses on criticism of Morris's conclusions as a historian, rather than his political views. Besides, there is nothing in Shlomo Ben-Ami's book about Morris' "post-2000 reversal of position".

Commenting on the post-2000 reversal of position by Morris, Shlomo Ben-Ami, former Israeli Minister of Foreign Affairs, wrote that Morris' more recent "thesis about the birth of the Palestine refugee problem being not by design but by the natural logic and evolution of war is not always sustained by the very evidence he himself provides: 'cultured officers ... had turned into base murderers and this not in the heat of battle ... but out of a system of expulsion and destruction; the less Arabs remained, the better; this principle is the political motor for the expulsions and atrocities' [quoting from Morris' major 2004 work: 'The Birth of the Palestinian Refugee Problem Revisited']".[26]

Amayorov (talk) 20:50, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Besides, this sentence is repeated and can be merged into one:
His work has been criticised by Arab writers for failing to act on the evidence he found of forced evictions.
Morris has also been criticized for being reluctant to accept the implications of the evidence he presents in his work.
Amayorov (talk) 21:24, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Questionable and potentially biased use of blockquotes

[edit]

All the blockquotes are long citations that are critical of Morris and his work. By contrast, support and praise for Morris' work are quoted "in-line". A cursory reader might draw a biased impression from this page. I suggest that this be improved for balance. Amayorov (talk) 22:58, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Superfluous and partisan details

[edit]

There are a few phrases that seem out-of-place and seem to be agenda-pushing. An example is

1948 and After: Israel and the Palestinians (1990) is a collection of essays dedicated to the Palestinian exodus of 1948 and subsequent events. It analyses Mapai and Mapam policy during the exodus, the IDF report of July 1948 on its causes, Yosef Weitz's involvement in the events, and some cases of expulsions that occurred in the fifties. Although Morris dismisses the claim that the Palestinians were systematically expelled due to orders from Israeli officials, he nevertheless cites an IDF Intelligence Report that concludes that 70% of the exodus was caused by Israeli forces and Jewish dissidents.

This subsection is supposed to provide a brief overview of Morris' 1990 work. Instead, the last sentence takes a single source that Morris used, namely an IDF Intelligence Report, and uses it to challenge Morris' conclusions. This is both out-of-place and in bad faith. Amayorov (talk) 15:30, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This paragraph is also unsourced – should we delete it?
In his first book, The Birth of the Palestinian Refugee Problem, 1947—1949, Morris supported Israeli actions during 1948, such as the uprooting of 700,000 Palestinian Arabs, stating that the only alternative to expelling them was the genocide of the Jewish population in Israel. Some critics have alleged this book was biased against Israel, but Morris responded that they failed to read his book with moral detachment, assuming that when he described Israeli actions as cruel or as atrocities, he was condemning them.
Amayorov (talk) 15:58, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I also think that this statement

Scholars have perceived an ideological shift in Morris's work and a departure from the critical scholarship of his New Historian colleagues starting around 2000 during the Second Intifada.

should be restated as

Scholars have perceived an ideological shift in Morris's work starting around 2000 during the Second Intifada.

"Departure from the critical scholarship" is questionable, as Morris has since published plenty of "critical" scholarly work since 2000, such as his discovery of the Haganah's involvement in well poisoning, published only a few years ago. Amayorov (talk) 22:59, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]