Talk:Kibbutz/Archive 1

Archive 1

Initial text

Much too much vagueness here.

"There is some skepticism about the future prospects of the kibbutzim. Agricultural life is certainly not very attractive to many modern Israelis. In addition, the growing political instability of the region poses a long-term threat. Nevertheless, most observers contend that, in the near future at least, the kibbutz movement faces no serious danger."

Which observers are being so re-assuring? Do they have names? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Christofurio (talk • contribs) 13:05, 26 August 2004 (UTC)

Explanation of term "shmutznik"?

Can someone add an explanation of the term "shmutznik"-- origins, meanings, use etc.

shmutznik - a slang term for a member of Hashomer Hatzair [1]

shmutznik = Hashomer Hatzair AbuAmir 12:25, 26 October 2006 (UTC) shmutznik is refer to the kibbutz members from Ha'shomer Ha'tzair movement. It's come from the German word 'shmutz' which mean 'dirt', hence it is became as a shame slang for those people. Usualy used by the other movments of the kibbutzes members to describe hashomer hatzair members. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.110.240.4 (talk) 23:32, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

Criticisms

I do not understand why there is no section containing explicit criticism of Kabbutzim. The article praises their virtues, but mentions nothing about the potential harm done by taking children away from parents and thwarting individual ambition and achievement. This thing reads like a Kubbutz advertisement.

I think most long articles reflect some admiration for their subject. If you look at John Vanbrugh, it is pretty clear that that authors think that Vanbruch was a pretty swell architect. Many city articles attempt to persuade readers to visit that city. While I admit that I like kibbutzim, I think the article conveys both sides. There is a long quotation about how being left to cry alone scarred an infant. There is also discussion of kibbutz education possibly producing mediocrity. There is also Begin's "millionaires with swimming pools" quotation. The reason I did not say more about kibbutz education producing mediocrity is that I do not think that assessment is accurate.

Well, a criticism may not be needed, but the article needs to be toned down from looking like a prosy pamphlet advertising Kibbutzism. I just finished reading the article, and it appears to be an advertisement and magical story of history to the average reader. We had the same problem with the "New Coke" article.--ikiroid | (talk) 02:18, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Agreed on the "bruchure" feel but there is some irony here on this particular "criticism" since the Kibbutzniks (i.e. the children of the Kibbutz) seem to have delivered an extremely disproportionately postitive contribution to public life in Israel as the intro clearly explains: go figure! ;-) Mattjs (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 18:41, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

There are many elements in the article that are either promotional or POV, such as the reference to "the Sten guns that won the war"!

There is nothing about the current military role of kibbutz - many of which are run by the army. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.197.15.138 (talk) 06:58, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

The third paragraph of the section "Children" ends with the sentence:

"This is actually a lot more quality time for parents to spend with their kids than in other societies."

The supporting evidence for this statement is a reference to a document dated 1963. I feel that this sentence is not well supported by a document that is so old, given that the conclusion attempts to make a comparison with "other societies" which implies "other modern societies", and a document that is 50 years old, written at a time when most socieities were quite a bit different, is not good supporting evidence. -- I, as an anonymous commenter, added the preceding comments about the "Children" section on Tue Dec 17 2013.

some thoughts on the psychological aspects

Children no longer live seperately from their parents. The Scud missile threat during the first Gulf war put a final end to this system. For security reasons the children stayed with their parents for the duration of the war. At the end of the war the children carried on staying at home.

Volunteers

I thought it was possible/fashionable for non-Israeli non-Jewish youths to spend working time at a kibbutz as a learning experience on commonal life.

- Yes, many non-Israeli non-Jewish youths (18-30, although mostly students 18-22) spend an average of 3 months working on a Kibbutz. There is a problem with providing a social life on some remote Kibbutz and Volunteers go some way to improve the social atmosphere for the young members.

Indeed. The volunteeers on the kibbutzim (of which I was one) do tend to be seperated from the Kibbutzniks socially. The Kibbutzniks aren't to concerned about getting to know people who will be gone soon enough, and there is the ever present danger of a young kibbutznik falling in love and leaving the kibbutz (although the reverse happens too). Having said this it is my experience that the young kibbutzniks do socialize with the volunteers to some degree. At Kfar Blum we had a disco/nightclub run by the volunteers that was open several nights per week. Young kibbutzniks and even people from the local town would come to dance. Robertbrockway 16:39, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

I agree, but only in part. There are additional factors involved, including the language barrier. However I observed one startling sociological note – Romances between kibbutzniks and volunteers were strictly one way. I saw or heard of only one kibbutz woman involved with a volunteer man (a recent divorcee on the rebound). This discrepancy was clearly a matter of sexual status. Members had more status than young volunteers. Sociologists call it hypergamy – women prefer high status males. (No matter how hard they tried to induce equality, the boys grew up to be men, and the girls grew up to be, alas, girls.) Since the outsiders involved with kibbutzniks were lower status females, there was little danger that a member would leave. I noted that several male members of the kibbutz had married volunteers, including an older man in his fifties, whose wife was less than half his age.Scott Adler 19:52, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

I heard that many young South Africans, Jewish or not, spent time on kibbutzes during the Apartheid years, becuase it was difficult to travel on a South African passport. Does anyone have information on this that they could include? --Totorotroll (talk) 15:48, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Arab Labor

There should be something about the use of Arab labor on kibbutz and debates on the issue, particularly in Kibbutz Artzi Federation kibbutzim where there was a debate in the 1950s about allowing Arabs to become members with a decision against. AndyL 17:45, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Well, the issue of Arab labor breaks down by sponsor, with P.I.C.A. seeking a mutual development that integrated with the Arab communities, and the later Zionist colonies seeking to exclude Arab labor to the maximum extent, starting in the 1920s. This was a period of global depression and of regional drought, so times were tough. The Zionists were dependent on external contributions to sustain the colonies with free capital, while the Arabs (which means, not Arabs, but non-Jews, unless Israel is on the Arabian peninsula) were often slipping deeper and deeper in debt. See "PALESTINE. Report on Immigration, Land Settlement and Development. By SIR JOHN HOPE SIMPSON, C.I.E. 1930" Mulp 00:20, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Good article

I just read it and found it rather informative, Good job. I think it could use more content regarding the day to day life in a kibbutz, as well as the social structure / hierarchy. Cheers, (Sam Spade | talk | contributions) 17:54, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I've been working on this article for a few days now. I'm planning to add sections on Daily Life, religious kibbutzim, and kibbutzim in the 21st century. I want to bring this up to FA status.Dinopup 22:35, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I don't think its all that far off. So is the social structure in any way anarchist, or is it a military style hierarchy, or what? I understand that concensus descision making is used, but outside of that... (Sam Spade | talk | contributions) 23:01, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)

There is at least one anarchist kibbutz that I know of, it is called Kibbutz Samar and is in the far south of Israel, by Eilat. Instead of looking at a daily sheet to see where to go to work, members of Kibbutz Samar simply work where they feel they are needed. If the tropical fish business needs people, or the date palm business needs people, members of Kibbutz Samar work there for the day. Kibbutz Samar does not call itself "anarchist" though, and unlike most kibbutzim, it sees nothing wrong with majority vote. I found this article on Samar, should you be interested.

http://www.anarchistcommunitarian.net/articles/kibbutz/samarkibb.html

http://www.ardom.co.il/heilot/samar/samar.htm

Since when are kibbutzniks opposed to majority vote? That's all they do is vote, vote, vote. See the film "Salah" by Ephraim Kishon for a hilarious example of this habit. (A member wanted to marry a girl from a traditional North African family and it was suggested at a meeting that the dowry come out of the livestock budget.) Scott Adler 19:52, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

There is no military style hierarchy, I think if kibbutzim had been organized in that way they never would have lasted, but almost all decisions have to be made by the group. In the old days, if you wanted to do anything major you would have to get the group's permission, now most kibbutzim have relaxed that. Day to day business decisions are made by managers.Dinopup 23:29, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Ah, ok, thanks! (Sam Spade | talk | contributions) 23:45, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Russian policy

This quote:

It was the official policy of the Russian government to "cause one-third of the Jews to emigrate, one-third to accept baptism, and one-third to starve."

needs a reference, preferably something Russian and not from Israel.--Wahoofive

The quotation came from the May Laws article on Wikipedia, and I recall reading the same thing elsewhere. The policy wasn't truly "official," but I know that the quotation was first said by a Russian cabinet minister. Dinopup 23:05, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)

It still should have some kind of attribution. --Wahoofive 23:29, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)

The cabinet minister who made the "one third" quotation was Konstantin Pobedonostsev.Dinopup 00:08, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)

The statement that Pobedonostsev said this was removed from Konstantin Pobedonostsev by an anonymous IP who directed people at [User_talk:Humus_sapiens]]. --Saforrest 00:29, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

Another problem with this "In case any Jews made their way into the Russian capital city, in 1897 the Moscow Chief of Police offered a bounty for the capture of an illegal Jew equal to the capture of two burglars. (Dubnow, Vol. III, 15)". In 1897 the capital of Russia was St petersberg, not Moscow. Is this really correct?

If it helps to clarify, St Petersburg became Capital of Russia in 1712, and was replaced by Moscow in 1918. Regards Lynbarn 13:53, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

There is also a problem with this quote: "During the Russo-Japanese War, many magistrates in Ukraine took advantage of the fact that Jewish men were away...". The period discussed seems to be the 1880's, but the link for the Russo-Japanese war says it took place in the years 1904-1905 (and is also discussed later in the text about the second aliyah). Anyone knows what caused this mistake and how to amend it? Querious (talk) 20:49, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Percent

In the following paragraph:

Kibbutzim also continued to play an outsize role in Israeli society. When only 4 percent of Israelis were kibbutzniks, kibbutzniks made up 15 percent of the Knesset. In the Six-Day War, when Israel lost 800 soldiers, fully 200 of them were from kibbutzim. One twenty-fifth of the population of Israel was making 25 percent of the sacrifice. (Bettelheim, 15)

I removed the last sentence, which seems to add POV without adding any information. --Wahoofive 23:07, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Stalin's support for statehood

Another statement that needs documentation:

One reason Josef Stalin had for supporting the UN partition plan in 1948 was that he assumed a country which practiced pure communism, as Israelis did with kibbutzim, would be an ideological ally of his.

--Wahoofive 00:27, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I could qualify the statement by saying "may have had for supporting the UN . . ." Most historians conjecture that Stalin supported the partition plan because he expected Israel to be anti-British (at the time Jordan, Iraq, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia were completely pro-British, reactionary (in Stalin's mind) monarchies). It's a conjecture that I've seen in non-biased books, but I could delete the Stalin reference if you recommend.Dinopup 04:33, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Just going by the Wikipedia:Verifiability guidelines. --Wahoofive 06:56, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I changed the Stalin bit to something about socialists in general supporting Israel (in its first 2 decades). Many Western Europeans who visited Israel came to kibbutzim. It's funny that these people who would never have worked on a farm in their own country (very few of whom were Jewish) would work on a farm in Israel, but that's what they did.Dinopup 15:05, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Stalin was a schemer and his decision to support Israel's creation in 1948 may have happened for a myriad of reasons (he was also going a bit senile at the time, according to some, so his reasons may have not necessarily been logical). In any case, given that Stalin soon launched a massive anti-Zionist (and anti-Semitic) campaign in the Soviet Union that soon spread to the rest of the Soviet bloc in which Jews were accused of dual loyalites or just plain disloyalty and Zionists (real or suspected) were rounded up and tried .On the other hand, social democrats throughout western Europe and North America were generally quite supportive of Israel prior to the 1967 war and support remained pronounced among many social democrats at least until Likud took power in 1977. While you still can find some in the British Labour Party and Canada's NDP who are supportive of ZIonism today the numbers have greatly diminished over the past three decades and few, if any, hold Israel up today as some sort of socialist beacon. AndyL 16:44, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)

"I think it's safe to say that even if Stalin was supportive of Israel in 1948 his support was tentative and quite short lived." I agree with you. I think the 1947 partition plan vote occurred in a brief window of opportunity for Israel that did not exist two years previously or two years after. The United States' support for the partition plan was certainly short lived. I know of at least one White House aide who conjectured that the US would not have supported the partition plan if FDR had lived. As for Stalin, I think his calculation about Israel must have been motivated by what he perceived as self-interest. He probably thought Israel would be on his side against Britain. Stalinw as slow to grasp the fact that Britain was no longer going to be the dominant capitalist power. The Arab monarchies certainly were not pro-Soviet.Dinopup 20:05, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Israel template

I've had objections about one of these Israel templates before and it seems to me as if its placement and layout still hasn't improved. There are many templates for article series that are very good and helpful and {{israelis}} isn't a bad idea, but just like it's "Jewish Languages" counterpart it looks very cumbersome. Did article series template really meant to be this... rowdy? Considering this is now an FA, I must at least drop a hint about trying to improve its placement or design. Consider decreasing it in size, making it horizontal, and placing at the bottom. Like the {{Jewish languages}} it is taking up a lot of space for an interwiki template.

Peter Isotalo 08:22, May 15, 2005 (UTC)

Er...

"Kibbutzim have given Israel a wildly disproportionate share of its military leaders, intellectuals, and politicians." - disproportionate to what exactly? - Ta bu shi da yu 04:16, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

• Presumably disproportionate to the relatively small share of the population living on kibbutzim.--Pharos 04:26, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

• Warning*: "...founded on the dispossession of Palestinians"???? This is an encyclopedia?

Psychological aspects

In this section, it sounds as if it was a widespread view that Kibbutzim create "mediocrity". In fact, it seems to be a fact that the part of Israel's intellectual, political, artistical people educated in a kibbutz is disproportionate. I found this validated in the passage cited above (section "Er..." on this page). Therefore, as it stands the section "psychological aspects" gives the wrong impression. It was never validated in a single study that Kibbutzim create mediocrity. The opposite, however, seems to be quite uncontroversial about sociologists. Maybe the cited passage should be moved there?

I agree with you that kibbutzim did not produce mediocrity. The impression came from Bettelheim though, who I suppose counts as an authority. The problem with Bettelheim is that he spent less than two months on a kibbutz and his theories were just impressionistic.Dinopup 02:46, 19 May 2005 (UTC)

Secular?

"part of one of the largest secular communal movements "

I admit I know very little about kibbutzes, but are we sure they can count as a secular movement? Something like this sounds like at least part of the driving force here would be closely associated with Judaism. How do we arrive at that categorisation?

In fact it was a defiantly secular movement. Their classic claim was that they worked twice as hard on the Sabbath. Jayjg ^(talk) 20:35, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

Most Kibbutzim were/are indeed defiantly secular, and to a large degree even anti-religious, which settled well (ideologically speaking) with their communist/socialist ideology. Kibbutzim observed the major Jewish holidays, but in a distinctly non-religious manner, as an attempt to transform these holidays from religious holidays to national or ethnic holidays. It should also be noted that several Kibutzim were pioneered by religious settlers (Kibbutz Dati). See the discussion in Zionism about the differences vs. Judaism. In general, Zionism is more of a nationalist/ethnic movement, which should not be confused with religion. There are plenty of anti-religious Zionist Jews as well as anti-Zionist religious Jews... altmany 22:10, May 17, 2005 (UTC)

Secular as opposed to monasteries. Catholic and Buddhist monastic movements were much larger than the kibbutz movement, but their purpose was religion. If kibbutzniks are religious it is incidental to their communal life. As mentioned by Altmany and Jayjg, most kibbutzim were secular. Judaism was their culture. Kibbutzniks celebrated Shavuot like Americans celebrate Thanksgiving.Dinopup 02:46, 19 May 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for the answers

Is that supposed to be "defiantly secular movement", or "definitely secular movement"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.197.15.138 (talk) 07:00, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

too long / unfocused

Does anyone else think like half of this should be incorporated into an article on Eastern European Jews or something along those lines? Most of it has very little to do with kibbutz: simply stateing times were tough at various periods for Eastern European Jews and linking to the approperate articles on that subject would be better. – stewacide 00:24, May 18, 2005 (UTC)

It's been three years since this comment was written, but the history section is still too long and includes too much information that is very much peripheral, not just in regard to kibbutzim in general but even for an article on the history of kibbutz movement. I think much of what appears in that section should be removed. Tamarenda (talk) 11:56, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Now there are two parts to this article

Please see History of the kibbutz movement for those sections dealing with the pre-state and early state of Israel periods. There was a need to cut this article up into two segments because at over 60k it far exceeded the normal length for Wikipedia articles. Note: No content was removed in this division into two articles. Thanks. IZAK 17:38, 25 May 2005 (UTC)

I like the idea of the history section very much... maybe it should go at the beginning of the article though, so that it provides a background? --Totorotroll (talk) 16:01, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Hierarchisation

Since there were obviously two parts to the article: history, and concept, but the article contents did not reflect this, I changed them accordingly. I haven't changed a single word, only made parts into subparts, and moved some things around. LeoDV 08:01, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

This was made a FA with its history section in. No one would read a separate history article (no one edits or links to my History of the United States Senate, I fear that it is unread). I intended this to be a single article. Most browsers can do 60 k. Dinopup 17:29, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I did not alter anything from the article, I only hierarchised the contents list. LeoDV 29 June 2005 10:29 (UTC)

Zichron Ya'akov founded by Romanian Jews

I have removed Zichron Yaakov from the article and replaced it with Rehovot and Gedera. Zichron was not a Bilu settlement but instead was founded by Jews from Romania who were affiliated with the Hovevei Zion movement. See he:ביל"ו and he:זכרון יעקב for confirmation. RCSB 15:36, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

Co-operative

I saw no mention of co-operatives. How do they compare with kibbutzes?

United Kibbutz Movement and Kibbutz Artzi Movement are now united

Since 1999, the United Kibbutz Movement and the Kibbutz Artzi Movement are now united, why is this not in the article? --Shuki 18:36, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Feminism in Kibbutzim

The following line:

Artzi kibbutzim were also more devoted to equality of the sexes than other kibbutzim. A 1920s, 1930s era kibbutz woman would call her husband ishi – "My man" – rather than the usual Hebrew word, ba'ali,, which literally means "My master."

implies that the Hebrew word for husband holds a different connotation than it does in other languages. The American English Dictionary offers the following etymology of the word husband in English:

ORIGIN late Old English (in the senses [male head of a household] and [manager, steward] ), from Old Norse húsbóndi ‘master of a house,’ from hús ‘house’ + bóndi ‘occupier and tiller of the soil.’ The original sense of the verb was [till, cultivate.]

Could anyone offer a revision to this sentence that would help relativize this? Jadorno 00:06, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

The difference appears to be than "husband" only has one meaning in English, while "Ba'al" still literally means "master" in Hebrew. Mo-Al 20:52, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

English still includes the phrase "animal husbandry." Just an observation. FWIW. --Christofurio 14:42, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Plagiarism?

I found this article http://www.reference.com/browse/wiki/Kibbutz. Anybody else notice any striking similarities between specific sentances in both the wiki and reference.com page?

Example:

A kibbutz (Hebrew: קיבוץ; plural: kibbutzim: קיבוצים, "gathering" or "together") is an Israeli collective intentional community. Although other countries have had communal enterprises, in no other country have voluntary collective communities played as important a role as the kibbutzim in Israel. Their importance can be traced to the creation of the Israeli state, and continue to the present day. (reference.com)

A kibbutz (Hebrew: קיבוץ; plural: kibbutzim: קיבוצים, "gathering" or "together") is an Israeli collective intentional community. Although other countries have had communal enterprises, in no other country have voluntary collective communities played as important a role as the kibbutzim in Israel. Their importance can be traced to the creation of the Israeli state, and continue to the present day. (wikipedia.org)

The concern is that reference.com was not referenced in the article.

The reference.com article appears to have been copied verbatim from the Wikipedia article; see the notices and links at the end of the article. --Woozle 20:20, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Inconsistency?

Which is correct? Or are they both, somehow? :

• "...within the Pale of Settlement, Jews could neither live in large cities, such as Kiev, nor any village with fewer than 500 residents..."
• "The May Laws forbade Jews to live in towns with fewer than 10,000 inhabitants..."

--Woozle 20:21, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

How many?

I came to this article wondering the Kibbutz population and found no answer. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 209.206.165.57 (talk) 23:44, 21 January 2007 (UTC).

PARTIALITY

"...the Russian autocracy allowed and encouraged its discontented peasants to take out their frustrations on their Jewish neighbors."

This text is just too partial... I am sure that "take frustrations on somebody" can actually be translated into rational basis. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 200.196.125.95 (talk) 23:17, 11 February 2007 (UTC).

The tone in general is a bit worrying. I'm tagging this. The intro is positively gushing. Just because something was successful and popular doesn't mean Wikipedia needs to fawn over it. Chris Cunningham 22:30, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

the Russian state did indeed encourage peasants to attack Jews. you are trying to rationalize genocide. See May Laws.

Telaviv1 (talk) 15:37, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Not expecting Arab opposition?? Really??

I believe the Simpson report notes that outside of Israel, the Zionists were determined to argue that they were going to live in harmony with the Arabs, but inside of Palestine the policy was to exclude Arabs, except in the older P.I.C.A. colonies. Or perhaps I'm making a faulty assumption that colonies were kibbutz? Mulp 00:32, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

They weren't. They were communities of private farmers. And this "exclusion of Arabs" is a red herring – How many Arab girls would live collectively with Jewish boys?Scott Adler 19:52, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Editing style/grammar/language

I've had a go at editing the first half of the article - just neatening some of the sentences etc to read better. (Note: content has NOT been altered). i'll do the rest of it asap but also some of the info needs re-organising into subject paragraphs and sections, and sorting these out may mean a more substantial re-org. As it is, its a bit random and scattered, with some short paras inserted any old where. If someone else wants to take it on or help out, please do! Plutonium27 (talk) 15:50, 16 January 2008 (UTC) (Ramat Ha'Kovesh, '85)

Referencing

I really think this article is close to being GA - what is holding it back is the referencing. If anyone has time and can do this, I really do think it is close. Flymeoutofhere (talk) 18:39, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Astonishingly POV

Much of this article reads like a neo-liberal attack-piece against collectivism.

No Mention Of New Urban Kibbutzim

I'm new to this whole everyone's-a-historian thing but I'd like to point out something I think is missing from the "The change process in the kibbutzim" section.

One significant change in kibbutzim in the last decade is the growth of urban kibbutzim. In an attempt to renew the kibbutz movement, there are currently well over 1,000 young Israelis living in collective communities primarily concentrated around "Development Towns" ([2]) and urban centers.

These collective communities are also referred to as Kvutsot (from the Hebrew for "group"). Often a number of smaller Kvutsot are organized together as one Kibbutz.

Almost all of these Kvutsot focus their skills and time toward educational work with youth from the entire range of Israeli society. The idea is that the old model of Kibbutz did the necessary work of establishing the young society and that a new model is needed to do the necessary work of strengthening and developing today's society.

I'm admittedly biased on this topic so for now I won't attempt to write an actual entry, but I'm willing to if people agree that it's important. There have been a number of articles about this in the Israeli press, I can search for these if asked.

A Wikipedia reference: [3] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.188.142.63 (talk) 03:48, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Poor english

I find this section to be difficult to understand:

With a changing of the generations in the kibbutzim societies, several wide changes occurred in the structure and culture of the kibbutzim. In general, the process could be described in which a significantly weakening happened to the different communal characteristic. With time, the kibbutz members’ sense of identification with the kibbutz and its goals significantly decreased. This process originated both from personal frustrations among the kibbutz members which development as a result of internal processes which happened in the kibbutz, and from the growing stratification and inequality of kibbutz society because of the capitalistic cultures of inter-kibbutz organizations headed by kibbutz elite members and capitalistic cultures adopted by many kibbutz factory managers who followed the lead of the former elite.[11] In addition, over the years some of the kibbutz members made professional careers outside the kibbutz and followed the norms of capitalist society and much like the two former elites also accumulated power, privileges, prestige and other capitals by which some of them or the former elites ruled over the kibbutzim and made their democracy largely ineffective [12] As part of this process, remoteness was created between the individual and basic values of the kibbutz. This weakening resulted in the breach of the balance which existed between the individual values and the values of the kibbutz. This gap was reflected also in with motivation problems at work.

Blank pages in the ArticleHistory template

For some reason the history of this article between the following points is blank.

from: 11:18, 8 January 2005 to: 21:27, 16 May 2005.

this includes the FA markers in {{ArticleHistory}}. Does anyone else notice this? DVD 02:06, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Kubutz

Read the article Kubutz and Shuruk. Kubutz is called "kibutz" in some grammars in English. See, for example Gesenius' Hebrew Grammar, §8c. --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 12:19, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

If someone is reading an article about Hebrew grammar, he is not going to mistake kibbutz for kubutz. So why don't you add every word that starts with a "K" and ends with with "z." We could write a whole paragraph at the top, telling people not to mistake kibbutz for kibitzer or kvutza or kamatz or kolhoz.--Gilabrand (talk) 13:09, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

We're not talking about every word which starts with a k and endz with a z. We're talking about one particular word - kibbutz, which happens to be one of the names for kubutz. --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 14:51, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

The consensus here is to not include this peculiar line. Please do not insert this material without a different consensus. --Shuki (talk) 21:36, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

It's not a consensus. It's two people who fail to explain what's so bad about this disambiguation hatnote.

The name "kibbutz", as i demonstrated, is used to refer to a different thing. So what's wrong about a disambiguation hatnote to help people to find what they are looking for? --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 21:52, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Two people is certainly a consensus when someone brings along some OR. Your demonstration does not hold water and you'll have to find real references in order to justify clutter to this article. --Shuki (talk) 22:08, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Gesenius' Hebrew Grammar, which i already cited, is a written source, and although it's a 100 years old, it's widely used in universities. This name also appears in dictionaries. And if you think that using "kibbutz" for "kubbutz" is obsolete, you're welcome to visit a niqqud lesson in HUJI.

People do come to Wikipedia to search for grammar. Sometimes they happen to find a communal settlement instead of what they were looking for. That's what {{about}} is for. It's used on thousands of articles and it's not clutter. --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 22:30, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Serious editing

This article is in terrible shape. The English is poor and most of the article is unsourced OR. Instead of spending your time adding needless headings at the top of the page and deleting photos, I would urge you all to work on fixing up this mess.--Gilabrand (talk) 07:28, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

It is called a "hatnote" and if you think that it's needless, read Wikipedia:Hatnote.

It has nothing to do with other problems in this article. It's only there to help people find what they are looking for. --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 15:27, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

So maybe you should read this yourself. It states: "When notes feature a trivial detail or use of a term, or links to overly specific and tendentious material, they are unwarranted."--Gilabrand (talk) 15:54, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Or, rather: "When two articles share the same title, except that one is disambiguated and the other not, the undisambiguated article should include a hatnote with a link to the other article.".

Kibbutz is used for kubutz. In Israeli primary schools it's called kubutz, but in universities in Israel and abroad it is often called kibbutz. It's not trivial and not tendentious. --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 15:59, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

You are wrong. It is kubutz (one b) - not the same word at all. Not only that, but you are referring to one grammar book written in the 19th century, which makes your insertion of this hatnote trivia with a capital T. --Gilabrand (talk) 16:28, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

This grammar book is still used in all universities where Hebrew is studied. And the name "kibbutz" is not just written, but actually used in classrooms. As i said, you are welcome to visit a niqqud course in a university. So no, it's not trivia.

It can be written kibbutz, kubbutz, kibutz, kubutz, etc. The double b is because of dagesh khazak. Check Even-Shoshan, for example. --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 17:36, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

At a lecture I attended the other day, the lecturer described a disease that afflicts certain grammarians. He called it psikomania. Anyhow, googling "kibbutz" produces 1,080,000 results, all about collective farms. So I very much doubt anyone studying Hebrew is going to confuse the word with anything else.--Gilabrand (talk) 17:55, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

You actually checked 1,080,000 results one by one? Wow.

But seriously, you are probably right - "kibbutz" these days usually refers to collective farms. That's why this article is called "Kibbutz" and not "Kibbutz (collective farm)" and that's perfectly OK.

However, students and professors of Hebrew in foreign universities (i know a few is Spain, Russia, USA) often study Biblical Hebrew and they care more about niqqud than about collective farms. Since their approach is completely different from the one you're used to, calling ֻ by the name "kubutz" may not be as obvious to them as it is to you. If they search Wikipedia for "Kibbutz", they'll find this article and they'll think that there's no article about Kubutz. I saw it happen. That's what hatnotes are for.

If you liked that lecturer, consider restoring the article about him. (Did i guess correctly?) --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 18:20, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Hey, man, you are good! So who deleted it? I bet he wrote it himself...LOL--Gilabrand (talk) 18:40, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Well, a B.A. in Hebrew and Linguistics must be useful for something :)

G.Z. has been running around Israel and the rest of the world for a few years now, telling the same jokes about psikopatim, Koala bears, Greek salad with Bulgarian cheese, etc. He used to be controversial; now he's mostly repetitive.

Who deleted it? See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ghil'ad Zuckermann. I think that he is notable enough to have an article, even though i don't agree with some of his ideas and even though there really is a possibility that he wrote it himself. Maybe one day i'll rewrite it in a way that will show his notability in a more convincing way, but i have more important things to do, like improving Wikipedia articles about Hebrew grammar. --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 19:04, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

He is quite a character. Anyway, his article on phono-semantic matching is still alive and well.--Gilabrand (talk) 20:04, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Kfar and Kibbutz

What's the difference in a Kfar, as in Kfar Truman, and kibbutz? — Rlevse • Talk • 10:29, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

External Links

I feel this section needs cleaned up to be more in line Wiki policy WP:EL. I have deleted a couple of links and move a book reference to the "Further Reading" section. Do other editors feel this section need improvement? --BwB (talk) 08:36, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Outside Isreal

http://www.ravennakibbutz.org/blog/stories/2009/04/new-kibbutz-movement

shoudl be added in better. Maybe there is more in other places?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.113.96.60 (talk) 21:48, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Translation of "Kvutzat Degania"

I don't think "Kvutzat Degania" translates as "Wheat of God". I think an acceptable translation would be "Team of Wheat Growers" (generically, Team of Farmers). There is no religious reference here. 193.136.157.71 (talk) 12:31, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

manaced?

The Kibbutz Meuchad and Kibbutz Artzi manaced Ben-Gurion's dominance of Yishuv politics in the 1940s, but they failed gaining wide public support in Israeli elections ever since 1949 because of reverence of Stalin's dictatorship which most Israelis denounced.[26]

Not sure if that is managed or menaced or what. Needs to be fixed.

Khallus Maximus (talk) 08:03, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

From its context, I think that it was meant to be "menaced", so that it what I changed it to. However, it does not seem like it is quite the right word to use. -- Kjkolb (talk) 20:54, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

thhirants ?

Is the word "thhirants" a typo? There is no definition anywhere that I can find - lots of repetitions of the sentence around the net. What is "thhirants"  ?

"History

The first kibbutzim

Bilu'im, forerunners of thhirants went to the United States, but a minority went to Palestine. It was this generation that would include founders of the kibbutzim."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kibbutz

75.10.107.89 (talk) 23:04, 26 May 2012 (UTC) Becky Lindroos (no link, no copyright considerations - just a question)

Really?

"Kibbutzim began as utopian communities..."

Seriously? Am I the only one who sees something wrong with this statement? 212.250.138.33 (talk) 17:39, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Utopian in this context usually means in intent, not that it was an actual "Utopia"...often used disparagingly (e.g. Marx's polemics against "Utopian communism"). 67.180.84.49 (talk) 15:58, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Are some kibbutzniks getting wealthy?

The lede says, "in 2010, Kibbutz Sasa, containing some 200 members, generated $850 million in annual revenue". That's a remarkable $4.25 million per member. Are they receiving a large income? If not, what is being done with the money? 174.24.42.46 (talk) 04:26, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Children

The "Children" section currently says, "The parental tendency is to view the child as a personal possession and to dominate them." It's not a wuote, there is no source cited, and it seems presumptuous, biased and inaccurate. The "Child-rearing" subheading also repeats a lot of the same information as the "Children" heading, and it's very wordy and rambling.Sadiemonster (talk) 13:56, 9 August 2015 (UTC)