What is Zionism?

[billydan]

ive been reading a lot of things about anti Zionism in Israel so what is Zionism?

[Akshay!]

A combination of right wing Jewish nationalism and racism which led to the creation of a settler colonial state and the occupation of Palestine.

[Bostana]

It's like any other evil nationalist party bent on colonial rule.......but this time it's ok because it's associated with the Jews
It's not really ok

[cyu]

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zionism

Zionism supports a Jewish nation state in the territory defined as the Land of Israel. Zionism supports Jews upholding their Jewish identity, opposes the assimilation of Jews into other societies and has advocated the return of Jews to Israel as a means for Jews to be a majority in their own nation, and to be liberated from antisemitic discrimination, exclusion, and persecution that had historically occurred in the diaspora.

But the more criteria you attach to something, the harder it is to qualify for it.

For example, let's say you wanted everything described above, but encouraged assimilation - for example, you might want everyone in Israel to adopt American culture, or Mediterranean culture, or otaku culture. Would you still be a Zionist?

Or say you wanted everything described above, but had no particular fondness for Palestine, but preferred New York City or South America, would you still be a Zionist?

Or say you didn't care where the Jewish people lived or whether they were a minority or not, but actively worked to organize vigilante forces that would go around the world to defend Jewish people who were not getting some definition of human rights - would you still be a Zionist?

Personally that last one doesn't sound like Zionism to me at all, but still very nationalistic. However, what if it was changed to defend not just Jewish rights, but the rights of others as well? Traditionally, Jews have tended to play a large role in international movements like communism and anarchism - I see it as a universalization of the movement for rights that they saw as being denied not just to themselves, but to other vulnerable sections of society as well.

[Deity]

Zionism is essentially the work to establish a Jewish homeland on the land that was once Palestine.

You hear so much about it because this land they are colonizing to make up Israel was already inhabited. The Palestinians are now being forced from their homes to make way for the new Israeli land, and that is clearly where the controversy comes in.

[Fourth Internationalist]

Zionism is pretty much just Israeli fascism, imo.

[Comrade Nasser]

Zionism is right-wing Jewish supremacy that led to stealing of the land from the palestinians and the concurrent settlers flexing their arms at the palestinians still living there. Basically Zionism led to the Jewish ethnostate, Israel which has been terrorizing it's Arab neighbors for the past 64 years 0_o

[Paul Pott]

Historically, it was an ideology that gained following in the 19th century which held that Jews are a nation (sic) that could never assimilate into European society and thus needed their own homeland. The most popular candidate for this was Palestine since that was the homeland of the ancient Hebrews before the Romans expelled many of them.

As a realized project, Zionism is colonization of the lands that rightfully belong to the Palestinian people, who faced and face ethnic cleansing by the Zionist state in order to secure its "Jewish" ethnic character.

[billydan]

Yeah I support Palestine independence

[barbelo]

Zionism is that jewish thing which prevented the Palestine region from being part of a Greater Syria or Greater Egypt after british withdrawal from there.

[Rurkel]

Zionism is an ideology that aims to establish an exclusively Jewish nation-state in Palestine. Due to history and the geographical lay and economics of the land, its goal is impossible without, at least, ethnic discrimination and, likely, ethnic cleansing against the Palestinians.

[Sasha]

Sigh...
I'll post a longer explaination later (when I'm not posting from my phone) but you'll have to differentiate between historic Zionism, current Zionism, religious Zionism, Labour zionism etc etc etc
The best you can describe Zionism is "the wish to create a place where Jews could be save from persecution"
Early Zionism attempted or theorized this in many places, yes as part of Palestine, but also in Surinam, Russia, Argentine, even to come to a situation in the US like the Mormons have in Utah and a host of other places.
Originally this was a movement with a strong secular and even socialist/comunist influence (the kibutzem movement is a reminder of that)
Sadly, as is inherent to all nationalist-struggle, even more so for a national-liberation struggle for a people who don't really know wheter they are a cultural, ethnic or religous group and one without a nation or claim to it at that, this project got bastardized along the way. Collective trauma and a siege mentally met Nationalism and racism, supremacism, militarism etc etc seeped in.
There are though still Zionists who despise Israel and wish to either pack up and go or intergrate in a pluriform Palestine. Like wise there is a current of Jews who oppose zionism, be it on religous grounds or cultural ones (they feel that the diaspora is what makes judeaism jewish).

[Rurkel]

Early Zionism attempted or theorized this in many places, yes as part of Palestine, but also in Surinam, Russia, Argentine, even to come to a situation in the US like the Mormons have in Utah and a host of other places.
I just think that this definition makes the whole concept of "Zionism" to be useless analytically. Yes, Zionism =/= anything the Israeli state does, but it has to include at least a partial support.

[Sasha]

You know Zionism as a established movement predates the foundation of Israel by 50 years right?

Claiming that Zionism equals (greater) Israel nationalism is like claiming that communism equals Stalinism

[Rurkel]

Yes, but I don't think it's useful to focus on tendencies in the Zionist movement that suffered so complete a defeat, they're not really "Zionist" any longer. I dislike the "Zionists always support current Israeli policies" mantra, since it's obviously untrue, but you go too far in the opposite direction.

Furthermore, if mere presence of Jews in Palestine is to be classified as "Zionist", as you imply here:

There are though still Zionists who despise Israel and wish to either pack up and go or intergrate in a pluriform Palestine. then anti-Zionism advocates an ethnic deportation of all Israeli Jews and is indeed inherently anti-Semitic. I don't think that this conclusion is right, therefore you go too broad in your definition.


Claiming that Zionism equals (greater) Israel nationalism is like claiming that communism equals Stalinism I'm not claiming it, in fact, I'm perfectly willing to describe Sean Matgamma's AWL position (two nations, two states) as Zionist. I also consider it to be unworkable and unacceptable for the Palestinians because of the exact economics and geography of Israel/Palestine, rather then because it's Zionist as such.

[Sasha]

Who said anything about deportation, by packing up an going I meant the theoratical (because totally void of realism) idea to voluntarily leave Israel and the diaspora and start somewhere anew in peace, a silly proposition of course since the Israelis would never leave voluntary and safe for outerspace there is no where uninhabited they can go...

[Rurkel]

I didn't mean anything like that, I emphasised the "integrating into a pluriform Palestine" part. I meant that with the current realities, people who advocate something like that can hardly be called Zionist without some severe "Huh?"

[Sasha]

I didn't mean anything like that, I emphasised the "integrating into a pluriform Palestine" part. I meant that with the current realities, people who advocate something like that can hardly be called Zionist without some severe "Huh?"

But fact is that that was originally the idea for the Zionists that went to Palestine, that material/historic conditions changed this can't mean you can discard the people who want to return/hold true to this ideal. To invoke Russia again, you would not accept that communism equals Stalinism just because a majority of ignorant people think this to be the case.

[Akshay!]

But fact is that that was originally the idea for the Zionists that went to Palestine, that material/historic conditions changed this can't mean you can discard the people who want to return/hold true to this ideal. To invoke Russia again, you would not accept that communism equals Stalinism just because a majority of ignorant people think this to be the case.

You seem to be saying that it was good that the Zionists settled in Palestine, but later on things changed and Israel was created, etc..etc.. What if 300 million Americans came and settled in India today because of some stupid weird religious reason (which has absolutely no basis at all)? Would that be bad only After an American state is created in India? That's Labor Zionism!

[Sasha]

But those Israeli didn't just show up one day and settled, without the holocaust the Jewish population would have seen a far smaller/steadier increase probably leading to a stable multi ethnic secular state, early labour-zionism unmistakingly helped Palestine devellop from the backwater colonony it was at the time.
Even with the mass imigration and creation of the Israeli state prompted by the historical conditions fact is that (no matter how bad it is, don't get me wrong) Israel has been far less chatastrophic for the native population than say the foundation of the US or Australia, yet there is no widespread tendency that essentially calls for the mass deportation of all non-natives from the US or Australia. The fact that Israel is relatively new can't be the only reason for this.
The existence of Israel is a historical fact, one we can not be happy about, but one we will have to accept if we want to improve the situation.
A correct analysis of the foundations and development of what zionism and Israel are beyond simplistic sloganeering can be benificial for that.

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

It's like any other evil nationalist party bent on colonial rule.......but this time it's ok because it's associated with the Jews
It's not really ok

What is that meant to mean?

[Akshay!]

But those Israeli didn't just show up one day and settled, without the holocaust the Jewish population would have seen a far smaller/steadier increase probably leading to a stable multi ethnic secular state, early labour-zionism unmistakingly helped Palestine devellop from the backwater colonony it was at the time.

Same old colonial mentality. They came there to help the poor backward natives out of their benevolence to create a "multi-ethnic secular state"... Seriously, I can't believe I'm reading this on revleft. I just can't..


Israel has been far less chatastrophic for the native population than say the foundation of the US or Australia, yet there is no widespread tendency that essentially calls for the mass deportation of all non-natives from the US or Australia. The fact that Israel is relatively new can't be the only reason for this.

The fact that the Palestinian population still makes up half of the population of Palestine (and occupied Palestine) can be. The population of Native Americans is not 300 million. Also the fact that this is possible is another reason. Deporting non-natives from US is impossible now. By your logic anybody can go and settle anywhere (out of noble motives of course... like helping the backward colony...??) And when did I say that deporting anyone is necessary?


The existence of Israel is a historical fact, one we can not be happy about,

You seem to be pretty happy about it. NO, the existence of a Zionist-racist settler colonial "jewish" state occupying Palestine can NEVER be accepted as a fact.

Death to Israel! Fuck Zionism! Fuck "left" Zionism/"labor" Zionism/whatever new word the Zionists made up to justify the colonial occupation of Palestine.

[Sasha]

So, just to get this right, you are in favour of the deportation of all Jews, wheter they are born there or not, from Palestine? And I'm the non-leftist?
I oppose all nation states, I just don't play favorism over some crypto anti-semitism...
And Palestine was already a colony, it never was "independent" it just changed hands for the hundreds time..

[Fionnagáin]

You seem to be pretty happy about it. NO, the existence of a Zionist-racist settler colonial "jewish" state occupying Palestine can NEVER be a fact.
Wait, so you're saying that the State of Israel doesn't actually exist, or...? :confused:

[Rurkel]

Originally Posted by psycho
So, just to get this right, you are in favour of the deportation of all Jews, wheter they are born there or not, from Palestine? And I'm the non-leftist?No, Akshay even question-denied it in his post:



Originally Posted by Akshay!
And when did I say that deporting anyone is necessary?In fact, is there actually a substantial number of people who argue that all Israeli Jews need to be deported, or is this a political position whose prevalence is exaggerated?

There was racism in the Zionist movement from the start ("a land without a people for a people without a land"), so the picture of initially benign Zionism is rather rosy. I agree, however, that
without the holocaust the Jewish population would have seen a far smaller/steadier increase


Wait, so you're saying that the State of Israel doesn't actually exist, or...?He probably means that it shouldn't. Awkardly phrased, though.

[Q]

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zionism

Zionism supports a Jewish nation state in the territory defined as the Land of Israel. Zionism supports Jews upholding their Jewish identity, opposes the assimilation of Jews into other societies and has advocated the return of Jews to Israel as a means for Jews to be a majority in their own nation, and to be liberated from antisemitic discrimination, exclusion, and persecution that had historically occurred in the diaspora.

But the more criteria you attach to something, the harder it is to qualify for it.

For example, let's say you wanted everything described above, but encouraged assimilation - for example, you might want everyone in Israel to adopt American culture, or Mediterranean culture, or otaku culture. Would you still be a Zionist?
The answer is simple: No. Zionist ideology is pretty specific and I think your quote from Wikipedia is pretty accurate in describing it.


Zionism is essentially the work to establish a Jewish homeland on the land that was once Palestine.
Actually, that what we now know as "Israel/Palestine" did not exist as such before 1922. Before 1920 Syria, Lebanon, Jordan and Israel/Palestine were one territory, a province of the Ottoman empire. Then they were carved up: The north fell under French influence, the south under British. Both the north and south were then further carved up using the same idea: Lebanon and Syria in the north, Palestine and Transjordan in the south. Both Lebanon and Palestine were designed to be "little Ulsters in the Middle-East" for the French and British respectively. Palestine was explicitly designed with Zionist colonisation in mind.

The Zionists were indeed very faithful to the British, as both parties needed eachother: The British wanted a reliable partner and the Zionists needed an imperialist guardian to further their project. After the 1956 Suez-crisis the US took over this role.


The most popular candidate for this was Palestine since that was the homeland of the ancient Hebrews before the Romans expelled many of them.
For a time I believe Kenya was a serious contestor for this project. But anyway, I believe that it is now more or less accepted that the myth of the Roman expulsion is largely that: A myth. Most Jews remained there and, over time, became what we now call the Palestines. So the Zionist "coming home" propaganda is a huge irony if there ever was one.

If people haven't read it yet, I strongly recommend Israelis and Palestinians: Conflict and Resolution (http://www.amazon.com/Israelis-Palestinians-Resolution-Moshe-Machover/dp/1608461483/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1368117121&sr=8-1&keywords=moshe+machover+israelis+and+palestinians) by Israeli anti-Zionist and communist Moshe Machover. It explains the history and context of the Zionist project in great detail and points towards the possible resolution within a unified Socialist Union of the Mashreq (Arab East) in which the Hebrews, Kurds and South-Sudanese would form autonomous parts.

A condition for this would be an end to the Zionist project though and Moshe sees the lever for this in the Arab proletarian struggle to become a united nation. Within this context the US would most likely break its ties with Israel as it would become a dead weight for its interests in the region. Without imperial patronage, there is then no longterm future for the Zionist project.

[Akshay!]

And when did I say that deporting anyone is necessary?

So, just to get this right, you are in favour of the deportation of all Jews, wheter they are born there or not, from Palestine?
You're not just a Zionist, you're also a blatant liar.


I just don't play favorism over some crypto anti-semitism...

Same old trick of equating anti-Zionism with antisemitism. (or in other words anti-racism with racism). Unfortunately, won't work with me!


Wait, so you're saying that the State of Israel doesn't actually exist, or...? :confused:

What's the point in quoting someone out of context?? What I meant is that we can't "accept" it as a historical fact and then sit and do nothing. We can't say, as psycho did, that "Palestine was a backward colony" which was improved by Jews. He also seems to be approving of the settlement of Jews, just not the establishment of a state (and even that, according to him, should now be "accepted as a historical fact")..

We can't accept colonialism, racism, fascism, imperialism, etc.. no matter who did it. The Jews were oppressed by Germany that doesn't mean that it gives them the right to colonize Arabs (who had absolutely NOTHING to do with it).

[Fionnagáin]

What's the point in quoting someone out of context?? What I meant is that we can't "accept" it as a historical fact and then sit and do nothing. We can't say, as psycho did, that "Palestine was a backward colony" which was improved by Jews. He also seems to be approving of the settlement of Jews, just not the establishment of a state (and even that, according to him, should now be "accepted as a historical fact")..

We can't accept colonialism, racism, fascism, imperialism, etc.. no matter who did it. The Jews were oppressed by Germany that doesn't mean that it gives them the right to colonize Arabs (who had absolutely NOTHING to do with it).
I don't think you're getting what Pycho means by "accept", here. He's not saying that we should condone the actions of the Zionist settlers. He's saying that the past is a done deal, and whatever action you want to take has to be concerned with the future, not with somehow undoing that which has already come to pass.

[billydan]

I'm not rascist that stupid I hate fascism

[cyu]

Well, you can't undo the Holocaust, but that doesn't stop various organizations from pursuing former Nazis =]


Israelis would never leave voluntary

I wouldn't say that. Maybe hard-core Zionists wouldn't leave voluntarily, but just because you're a Zionist today doesn't necessarily mean you'll be a Zionist tomorrow. If an Israeli stops believing in Zionism, I could easily see him moving to, say, New York City or something.

Fact is, the world is full of minorities. Whatever happens to Israel in the future, the problems faced by minorities will always exist. The Israel / Zionist issue just happens to be one example of a more general problem. Perhaps this instance would be solved before the others, perhaps not.

If Zionists manage to solve their problems with their current policies (or some alternative), would their solution be applicable to other minority groups? Would we expect in the future, for example, a nation of deaf people? A nation of LGBT people? If not, what kinds of things would make other minorities feel safe in different societies?

[Fionnagáin]

If a military regime succeeded in wiping out every second LGBT person in Europe, I don't think it's beyond imagining that some of them might resort to armed separatism. The US produced armed black and Latino separatists without anything on that scale.

[cyu]

Yes, separatist / independence / liberation movements are all expected. But that's not quite the question I was going for.

What I meant is, what is a workable solution for minorities living in any society? I'm not questioning the motivations behind independence movements, since obviously the motivations are there. But are these solutions workable? How likely are they to succeed? What can improve their chances of success? Are other things more likely to succeed?

[Personally that's one of the reasons I consider myself an anarchist =]

[Rurkel]

If a military regime succeeded in wiping out every second LGBT person in Europe, I don't think it's beyond imagining that some of them might resort to armed separatism. The US produced armed black and Latino separatists without anything on that scale.

Well, the Nazi persecution of LGBT people didn't really produce anything like that. Mind you, there's such a thing as feminist and queer separatisms, although they advocate separation of themselves from society, rather then establishing nation-states.

As for black separatism - does a group like NoI share some qualities with early Zionism? Zionism had been accused of making alliances with anti-semitism, which is to some extent true (though the "zionists helped the nazis to organize the holocaust" thesis is garbage), and some white racists like Tom Metzger praised NoI.

[Ocean Seal]

It has become the description for an international sense of Jewish identity culminating in the creation of a settler state and a nationalism surrounding that state.

[Fionnagáin]

Well, the Nazi persecution of LGBT people didn't really produce anything like that. Mind you, there's such a thing as feminist and queer separatisms, although they advocate separation of themselves from society, rather then establishing nation-states.

As for black separatism - does a group like NoI share some qualities with early Zionism? Zionism had been accused of making alliances with anti-semitism, which is to some extent true (though the "zionists helped the nazis to organize the holocaust" thesis is garbage), and some white racists like Tom Metzger praised NoI.
You're kinda missing the point. I'm saying that Zionism, like other forms of armed separatism, is a reaction to particularly pronounced and violent forms of persecution, and has to be understood in those terms. The early Zionists don't argue that Jews require a separate homeland because every conceivable category of person should be corralled off from each other, but that the particular history of Jews in Europe demonstrate the impossibility of integration in European society. We disagree with this view, obviously, and in practice most contemporary Zionists, Jewish or otherwise, don't see it quite that way (hence all the bullshit about "ancestral homelands" that you won't find in any early Zionist text), but that's what it all goes back to, and it is in part the apparent weight of the Holocaust as evidence in support of their pessimistic account of Jewish integration that leads to the explosion of Zionism and Zionist sympathies in the post-war era.

Likewise, black and Latino separatism was born of the shortcomings of the Civil Rights Movement, which to many people of colour appeared to demonstrate that the white establishment was unwilling and/or incapable of truly dealing with racism and racial disenfranchisement. (A similar logic appears to underline the re-emergence of physical force Republicanism in Ireland after the failure of the Northern Irish Civil Rights Movement, the spread of Islamic fundamentalism after the failure of Arab socialism, the emergence of armed far-left groups in Italy after the failure of the workerist movement, etc, etc.)

[Akshay!]

If a military regime succeeded in wiping out every second LGBT person in Europe, I don't think it's beyond imagining that some of them might resort to armed separatism. The US produced armed black and Latino separatists without anything on that scale.

You mean if every second LGBT person was wiped out in Europe and then they left Europe, colonized India, treated the Indians like animals, tried hard so that every Indian leaves that country and said that India was no longer a state? I'm sure you'd support such a thing. (btw, I don't think they would ever do that.)

There's no question that you and psycho are Zionists. Much worse than Zionists like Alan Dershowitz or Bernard Lewis I might add - at least they're honest enough to admit it.

You probably don't understand (and will never understand) but you all (who support Zionism) are personally responsible for killing people (Yes, even if you add words like "labor" before it to confuse others.) It's a racist, imperialist, right wing nationalist, and in my opinion, fascist ideology. Even the heads of the Shin bet admit that they've learned a lot of the techniques they use directly from the Nazis.

And what can you do, use the anti-Zionism = anti-semetism trick, like psycho did (http://www.revleft.com/vb/showpost.php?p=2615899&postcount=27)? Why not try something else? It's like calling an Algerian a racist because he opposed French colonialism.

[Rurkel]

You mean if every second LGBT person was wiped out in Europe and then they left Europe, colonized India, treated the Indians like animals, tried hard so that every Indian leaves that country and said that India was no longer a state? I'm sure you'd support such a thing. Did Fionnagain claim to support it, though? He said that Islamic fundamentalism grows from a similar sort of logic, I'm pretty sure that he isn't a supporter of that.


but you all (who support Zionism) are personally responsible for killing people This is sort of weird. Is everyone who voted for Bush, Obama or other US presidential candidate that is not anti-war personally responsible, at least, meaningfully, for all the people the US military machine killed? In fact, even this isn't really comparable, since neither (well, psycho, at least) are Israeli, and didn't have the ability to vote for the Zionist parties in Israel.

[Akshay!]

Did Fionnagain claim to support it, though? He said that Islamic fundamentalism grows from a similar sort of logic, I'm pretty sure that he isn't a supporter of that.


NO, he compared Zionism to the Civil Rights Movement and the LGBT movement and tried to justify it. If that's not support, I don't know what is.


This is sort of weird. Is everyone who voted for Bush, Obama or other US presidential candidate that is not anti-war personally responsible, at least, meaningfully, for all the people the US military machine killed? In fact, even this isn't really comparable, since neither (well, psycho, at least) are Israeli, and didn't have the ability to vote for the Zionist parties in Israel.

Yes, ever Nazi shares the responsibility of what Hitler did. Being well intentioned isn't good enough.

[Rurkel]

NO, he compared Zionism to the Civil Rights Movement and the LGBT movement and tried to justify it. If that's not support, I don't know what is.Well, the claim that


Likewise, black and Latino separatism was born of the shortcomings of the Civil Rights Movementcompares it to the mentioned separatist movements, rather then the Civil Rights Movement as such.

Anyway, I think that I'd better leave him to speak for himself.


Yes, ever Nazi shares the responsibility of what Hitler did. Being well intentioned isn't good enough. Does every German who was a Hitler supporter share it? I'm pretty sure that during the initial stages of the war his "rating" was quite high...

[Sasha]

Yes, I'm a Zionist, that's why I refused Israeli citizenship, that's why my friends are getting shot in bil'in, that why I'm a fund raiser for the anti-zionist groups AATW and EAJG. That why I once called the director of the Israeli lobby group in the Netherlands once a "breeder of antisemites" on national television...
Sure, I'm a Zionist and you, a supposed anarchist with multiple quotes of Emma Goldman in his sig supports bourgeoisie nationalism for this and this place only, based on hysteric propaganda void of any and all reality is not anti-Semitism, right...

[Akshay!]

Yes, I'm a Zionist, that's why I refused Israeli citizenship, that's why my friends are getting shot in bil'in, that why I'm a fund raiser for the anti-zionist groups AATW and EAJG. That why I once called the director of the Israeli lobby group in the Netherlands once a "breeder of antisemites" on national television...
Sure, I'm a Zionist and you, a supposed anarchist with multiple quotes of Emma Goldman in his sig supports bourgeoisie nationalism for this and this place only, based on hysteric propaganda void of any and all reality is not anti-Semitism, right...

Saying that Palestine was a backward colony improved by Jews and repeatedly justifying the settlement of Jews and asking people to accept the Jewish state as a "historical fact" - you're saying that all of that combined is Not Zionism? Are you like 12?

Again anti-semitism? What the fuck is the problem with you guys? Don't you have even One argument? One? Why else would you resort to this method? People who equate anti-Zionism with anti-semitism are making anti-semitism seem to be a "good" thing and shame on them for doing that!

[Fionnagáin]

NO, he compared Zionism to the Civil Rights Movement and the LGBT movement and tried to justify it. If that's not support, I don't know what is.

Well, the claim that

Likewise, black and Latino separatism was born of the shortcomings of the Civil Rights Movement
compares it to the mentioned separatist movements, rather then the Civil Rights Movement as such.
Yeah, Akshay is really getting the wrong of the stick, here. The references to the Civil Rights, Gay Rights, etc., movement were to illustrate how the shortcomings of optimistic, universalist movements has a tendency to give rise to pessimistic and separatist movements, armed or otherwise. In this case, the apparent failure of liberal and socialist integrationism, above all what appeared to be the failure of integration to prevent the physical liquidation of European Jewry, produced an enthusiasm for a form of armed separatism which had until that point been entirely marginal (and, it should be noted, neither quite as armed nor quite as separatist). The Zionist movement is unique in its popularity and its success rather than its premise.

The point being, re: topic, there's not much mileage in critiquing Zionism by attempting to apply its logic universally, because it neither represents nor is intended to represent a universal logic. It's a product of and, in theory, solution to the history of the persecution of a particular ethnic group in a particular part of the world in a particular period of history

[Akshay!]

It's a product of and, in theory, solution to the history of the persecution of a particular ethnic group in a particular part of the world in a particular period of history

NO, it's NOT the Product of the persecution of a particular ethnic group. It IS the persecution of a particular ethnic group. It's NOT a Product of racism. It IS racism. It's NOT a Product of fascism. It IS fascism.

What happened to the Jews had NOTHING to do with Arabs. Do you get that? If you don't, let me know, and I'll repeat.

[Fionnagáin]

I don't know what that has to do with anything I said? :confused:

[Sasha]

That, and the siege mentally so happily exploited by the settler right in Israel got everything to do with semitism, historical Christian, nazi'ist and modern Arab/Islamist..
No one here is defending the occupation, no one is defending Israeli institutional and societal racism etc etc. We just point to the fact that there are only two ways to end the "zionism" you so much depise, global communist/anarchist revolution and a south African style reformist transformation of the Israeli abd Palestinan state (be it as one or two secular, inclusive nation states). The only way either will happen is if the Israeli right is taken the wind out of its sails, your insane hysteria that yes, can only be explained as anti-Semitism (probably through ignorance, not malice though) is anything but helpful.

[Akshay!]

I don't know what that has to do with anything I said? :confused:

I don't know why psycho hasn't thanked your post yet... Do you both disagree on some aspects of your Zionist ideology?


No one here is defending the occupation, no one is defending Israeli institutional and societal racism etc etc.


Saying that Palestine was a backward colony improved by Jews and repeatedly justifying the settlement of Jews and asking people to accept the Jewish state as a "historical fact" - you're saying that all of that combined is Not Zionism? Are you like 12?


your insane hysteria that yes, can only be explained as anti-Semitism (probably through ignorance, not malice though) is anything but helpful.


Again anti-semitism? What the fuck is the problem with you guys? Don't you have even One argument? One? Why else would you resort to this method? People who equate anti-Zionism with anti-semitism are making anti-semitism seem to be a "good" thing and shame on them for doing that!

Your repeated claims about anti-semitism are exactly proving my point. Keep them coming. Why stop at antisemite? Why don't you call me a Nazi? Learn something from other Zionists.

Also add some more lies on top of that like




And when did I say that deporting anyone is necessary?

So, just to get this right, you are in favour of the deportation of all Jews, wheter they are born there or not, from Palestine?
You're not just a Zionist, you're also a blatant liar.


I'm sorry to say but I don't debate with Zionists... so I probably won't respond to any of your posts or of that other dickhead. I just don't understand how these ideologies can be tolerated on a communist forum.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=phgo2S6o2NU

[cyu]

The Zionist movement is unique in its popularity and its success rather than its premise.



Some level of success, certainly, but continued animosity from their neighbors and continued acts of "terrorism" from one side or another wouldn't exactly be the type of success the original Zionists imagined.

History is filled with minorities getting persecuted. LGBT is merely one example. Yet there are also many minorities that aren't persecuted - or at least not persecuted as much. Why not? What is their secret? What are the characteristics about them such that they don't feel they need their own nation?

For example, the deaf and the blind face many difficulties in various societies, yet they are generally accepted. Is it because people tend to feel a natural sympathy with those that automatically remind them of their own semi-charmed life?

What about redheads or people with freckles? What about nose-pickers? What about nudists? How are various other types of minorities, that we hardly even think about, able to get away with living a "normal" life without feeling like they are always under attack?

It must be the Freckled-Faced Illuminati ;)

[Rurkel]

NO, it's NOT the Product of the persecution of a particular ethnic group. It IS the persecution of a particular ethnic group. It's NOT a Product of racism. It IS racism.
Why can't it be both? Perverted result of a perversion, so to speak?

[Akshay!]

Why can't it be both? Perverted result of a perversion, so to speak?

A can't be a result of B, if A was going on decades before B even existed. B can be used as an excuse to carry out A, but that's irrelevant.

I can't go and shoot someone in the head and say "oh, maybe my grandfather was killed by Mussolini so I'm going to kill a Pakistani guy because ... because ... I guess because Pakistanis have nothing to do with Mussolini and because I'm an idiot."

[Rurkel]

A can't be a result of B, if A was going on decades before B even existed.
That only means that A can't be the result of only B, but it doesn't rule out B as a contributing - and even possibly necessary factor. In this specific case, European anti-Semitism, spread of colonialist ideologues and colonialist mentality in Europe in general and some European Jews in particular, and 19th century romantic nationalism were all necessary for Zionism to appear.

[Akshay!]

That only means that A can't be the result of only B, but it doesn't rule out B as a contributing - and even possibly necessary factor. In this specific case, European anti-Semitism, spread of colonialist ideologues and colonialist mentality in Europe in general and some European Jews in particular, and 19th century romantic nationalism were all necessary for Zionism to appear.

It was a contributing factor only in the sense that 9/11 was considered the reason (or "contributing factor" if you will) for the Iraq War during the Bush years. I would rather call it an excuse. Read "The Holocaust Industry" by Norman Finkelstein in which he clearly demonstrates how the atrocities have been used to justify colonialism, racism, creation of Israel, occupation of Palestine and what not.

Now I'm waiting for psycho to call Finkelstein an antisemite too.

[Rurkel]

I think it goes further then that. Without European anti-Semitism, Zionism would have never been so popular, many anti-Zionists have noted Zionist crucial dependence on anti-Semitism; whereas the USA proved that it didn't need anything similar to 9/11 to start invading stuff all over the globe.

[Akshay!]

Without European anti-Semitism, Zionism would have never been so popular, many anti-Zionists have noted Zionist crucial dependence on anti-Semitism;

The Iraq war would never have been so popular in America without 9/11 (Remember 75% of the people supported it!). At least not as popular as it was.


I think it goes further then that.

Of course. It's an analogy. Wikipedia says "The word analogy refers to the relation between the source and the target themselves, which is not necessarily a similarity,"


the USA proved that it didn't need anything similar to 9/11 to start invading stuff all over the globe.

It probably didn't "need" 9/11 but it that doesn't mean that after 9/11 happened, it couldn't use it as a propaganda tool (an excuse). And that's exactly what happened.

All that said, my point is that even if all of that is accepted, it still doesn't justify their settlement in and occupation of Palestine. The Arabs didn't carry out the Holocaust and


I can't go and shoot someone in the head and say "oh, maybe my grandfather was killed by Mussolini so I'm going to kill a Pakistani guy because ... because ... I guess because Pakistanis have nothing to do with Mussolini and because I'm an idiot."

[Rurkel]

The Iraq war would never have been so popular in America without 9/11 (Remember 75% of the people supported it!). At least not as popular as it was.That's true, and same holds for anti-Semitism and Zionism as well.


All that said, my point is that even if all of that is accepted, it still doesn't justify their settlement in and occupation of Palestine. That's also true. To understand should not mean to forgive.

[MarxSchmarx]

By your logic anybody can go and settle anywhere

What is so horrible about that? In fact, I think the free movement of peaceful people is considered a human right even bourgeois liberals grant

[Akshay!]

What is so horrible about that? In fact, I think the free movement of peaceful people is considered a human right even bourgeois liberals grant

Out of context again. I'm talking about millions of people occupying another country and kicking out the people who originally lived there.

[blake 3:17]

It was a contributing factor only in the sense that 9/11 was considered the reason (or "contributing factor" if you will) for the Iraq War during the Bush years. I would rather call it an excuse. Read "The Holocaust Industry" by Norman Finkelstein in which he clearly demonstrates how the atrocities have been used to justify colonialism, racism, creation of Israel, occupation of Palestine and what not.

Now I'm waiting for psycho to call Finkelstein an antisemite too.

9/11 wasn't a reason for the invasion of Iraq. It was a criminally fraudulent attempt at an excuse for doing what was already planned. The war against Iraq hadn't ended since Desert Storm. What changed was the full scale invasion and occupation.

The Holocaust Industry is an excellent, useful and very disturbing book. I'm sure on first reaction many might think it anti-Semitic, which it is not. The parts I found most difficult were on Elie Wiesel -- Night was very formative to me as a teenager and learning the guy was a rotten liar was very upsetting. What it is not useful as is as a general catalogue of the ills of Zionism.

[Akshay!]

9/11 wasn't a reason for the invasion of Iraq. It was a criminally fraudulent attempt at an excuse for doing what was already planned. The war against Iraq hadn't ended since Desert Storm. What changed was the full scale invasion and occupation.

That's exactly my point. It was not a reason. It was an excuse. Similarly, the Holocaust is used as an excuse to occupy Palestine.

[Rurkel]

Similarly, the Holocaust is used as an excuse to occupy Palestine.
As of now, I agree. I do think the lines between "reason" and "excuse" were more blurred in the initial stages of Zioist movement. How structurally important should an excuse be to qualify as a reason anyway?

[goalkeeper]

. By your logic anybody can go and settle anywhere (out of noble motives of course... like helping the backward colony...??)

Sure. I think the freedom of movement for all peoples anywhere is a noble goal, is it not? If a bunch of Americans want to go and live in India, fine. Likewise Mexicans in the US, Asians in Britain, Arabs in France, Turks in Germany, Jews in the Levant, and Pacific Islanders in Australia.

[Rurkel]

Sure. I think the freedom of movement for all peoples anywhere is a noble goal, is it not? If a bunch of Americans want to go and live in India, fine. Likewise Mexicans in the US, Asians in Britain, Arabs in France, Turks in Germany, Jews in the Levant, and Pacific Islanders in Australia.
He's referring to the Zionist state-building efforts, not to the immigration as such. Said state-building at the expense of Palestinian Arabs was indeed unjustified, you can hardly debate that particular point.

[Fionnagáin]

That's exactly my point. It was not a reason. It was an excuse. Similarly, the Holocaust is used as an excuse to occupy Palestine.
I've never encountered that. I'm not even how it would work?

[Sasha]

You know, them damn Zionist where just desperate to get their hands on a piece of the about the most contested piece of earth and then this Hitler dude did them all a favour and gave them an excuse to make their move.... Just as the protocols of the elders said it would get down....

[Akshay!]

No, not all Jews are Zionists. Here's an example - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ilan_Papp%C3%A9

There are other examples too. Most Jews I know are completely anti-Zionist. In fact, many non-Jews (Christians etc..) are Zionists.

I know this is all news to convinced Zionists like you because of obvious reasons.


I've never encountered that. I'm not even how it would work?

Read Finkelstein.

[MarxSchmarx]

By your logic anybody can go and settle anywhere Out of context again. I'm talking about millions of people occupying another country and kicking out the people who originally lived there.

But that blunts your own criticism of Zionism. "Zionism" as has been pointed out, was a movement to have jews living elsewhere to emigrate to contemporary Palestine. Even if it was millions of jews, so what? "Millions" of south and south-east asians migrate to the gulf states, does that make them oppressors?

The only reasonable interpretation of your criticism is that as implemented Jewish settlement of Palestine has resulted in Arabs getting the short end of the stick. So your critique is against ethnic cleansing, not zionism much less mass migrartion. No leftist in their sane mind would be in favor of ethnic cleansing, whether it is carried out by Germans, Hutus, Jews, European Americans, Serbs, or Han Chinese. But by singling out Zionism as an ideology, you implicitly seek to link immigration with genocide by an historically persecuted group of people.

Instead of going after zionism as an ideology, you should be focusing your efforts agaisnt racism and colonialism. But people like you mask it all in the over-encompassing term "Zionism". Call a spade a spade. But that doesn't have the same resonance as appealing to historically conditioned Christian prejudice against Jews.

[Akshay!]

But by singling out Zionism as an ideology, you implicitly seek to link immigration with genocide by an historically persecuted group of people.

Don't you see the difference between
1) Immigrating to some place and
2) Immigrating to some place with a plan to establish a Jewish state??

How on earth can you separate colonialism, racism, etc.. from Zionism?

Zionism by Definition is creating a racist and imperialist institution to colonize and oppress a particular group of people.

And to the Labor Zionists (psycho etc..): Adding "socialist", "labor" or "left" doesn't change a damn thing. Hitler's party was also called the National Socialist German Workers' Party.

[MarxSchmarx]

Don't you see the difference between
1) Immigrating to some place and
2) Immigrating to some place with a plan to establish a Jewish state??

How on earth can you separate colonialism, racism, etc.. from Zionism?

Zionism by Definition is creating a racist and imperialist institution to colonize and oppress a particular group of people.

And to the Labor Zionists (psycho etc..): Adding "socialist", "labor" or "left" doesn't change a damn thing. Hitler's party was also called the National Socialist German Workers' Party.

Well at least you had the decency to wait a few pages before invoking Nazi germany.

But seriously, if your objection is to the creation of a "jewish state" than your objection goes beyond ethnic cleansing but to nationalism. Again, no leftist is seriously in favor of a "Jewish/Sikh/catholic"-state. So once more, you are (i'd argue selectively) equating a movement that was motivated by the idea that individual jews should relocate to palestine with another rightwing ideology.

No one is denying that there were rightwing tendencies in the "Zionist movement", just as there are reactionary elements in every movement of any social consequence.

[evermilion]

Antisemitism is the denial of the Jewish people of their right to independence, the opportunity to exist and work free from oppression as an ethnic group. Zionism, however, is the stance that assumes Jewish independence and freedom must come necessarily at the expense of the independence and freedom of the Palestinian people.

[Akshay!]

So once more, you are (i'd argue selectively) equating a movement that was motivated by the idea that individual jews should relocate to palestine with another rightwing ideology.

So according to you Zionism = "a movement that was motivated by the idea that individual jews should relocate to palestine" which also happens to have some reactionary elements (like colonialism, racism, creation of a Jewish state, occupation of Palestine). Right?

Let me quote Wikipedia: "Zionism is a form of nationalism of Jews and Jewish culture that supports a Jewish nation state in the territory defined as the Land of Israel. Zionism supports Jews upholding their Jewish identity, opposes the assimilation of Jews into other societies and has advocated the return of Jews to Israel as a means for Jews to be a majority in their own nation."

Now I'm waiting for you to argue "nono but that's not true Zionism... true Zionism means... blah blah blah... blah blah.."

btw, out of curiosity, in your world (which has Absolutely NO relation to the real world) why did the Zionists (those well intentioned ones who Never wanted to create a state) choose to "relocate to palestine"? Why not relocate to Papua New Guinea? or Tibet? or Sri Lanka? Might that have something to do with their religion?

[Sasha]

btw, out of curiosity, in your world (which has Absolutely NO relation to the real world) why did the Zionists (those well intentioned ones who Never wanted to create a state) choose to "relocate to palestine"? Why not relocate to Papua New Guinea? or Tibet? or Sri Lanka? Might that have something to do with their religion?

no, not much, for the umphteent time, most early zionist where secular,
but no one wanted them anywhere else either, sustained efforts where made to buy land in south-america or to get a mormon-like deal in the US, they where not welcome anywhere. yes, the british offered a piece of uganda in 1903 which was voted on but that was eventually declined and the jewish autonomous oblast in the soviet union was a alternative for a while until stalins anti-semitism made it a lot less apealing, when the state of israel became a fact the oblast fell in decline and most jews there left; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_Autonomous_Oblast

maybe read up a bit further on wikipedia if you really want to understand the evolution of zionism: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Zionism

[cyu]

No, not all Jews are Zionists.


I'm pretty sure Amy Goodman, Noam Chomsky, and Howard Zinn are not Zionists - or at least not in the sense that they support current Likud policies or even many past Israeli Labor policies.

Then there's the strange case of Bobby Fischer... then again, many anti-gay Republicans turned out to be gay...

[Fionnagáin]

Read Finkelstein.
Can you not summarise it?

[Akshay!]

but no one wanted them anywhere else either, sustained efforts where made to buy land in south-america or to get a mormon-like deal in the US, they where not welcome anywhere. yes, the british offered a piece of uganda in 1903 which was voted on but that was eventually declined and the jewish autonomous oblast in the soviet union was a alternative for a while until stalins anti-semitism made it a lot less apealing, when the state of israel became a fact the oblast fell in decline and most jews there left; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_Autonomous_Oblast

maybe read up a bit further on wikipedia if you really want to understand the evolution of zionism: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Zionism

Why didn't they try in Sri Lanka? Did they try somewhere in Bhutan? Why were they not welcome? Were the people afraid that they would do exactly what they ended up doing to the Palestinians? You don't seem terribly unhappy when you say "the state of Israel became a fact" - after all why would you be? You've already admitted that they civilized the "backward colony of Palestine". Did they also want to teach those barbarians some more "secular" enlightenment values etc..? Even honest labor Zionists like Chomsky admit that the binational socialist/kibutz etc.. thing was an extremely tiny minority in the Zionist movement. I disagree with his views but at least he's honest enough to admit that.

"Spirit the penniless population across the frontier by denying it employment... Both the process of expropriation and the removal of the poor must be carried out discreetly and circumspectly." — Theodore Herzl, founder of the World Zionist Organization, speaking of the Arabs of Palestine, Complete Diaries, June 12, 1895 entry.

"It is the duty of Israeli leaders to explain to public opinion, clearly and courageously, a certain number of facts that are forgotten with time. The first of these is that there is no Zionism,colonialization or Jewish State without the eviction of the Arabs and the expropriation of their lands." — Yoram Bar Porath, Yediot Aahronot, of 14 July 1972.


Can you not summarise it?

His basic argument is that the Holocaust has been exploited to carry out the atrocities in Palestine - every single (serious) Holocaust historian (including the leading Holocaust historian Raul Hilberg, and people like Chomsky, etc..) say that he didn't go far enough. And I agree with them. He didn't go far enough. Why? Because he himself is a labor Zionist. At the end of the day, he's Not against the existence of Israel. He supports the "2 state solution"..

[blake 3:17]

I'm pretty sure Amy Goodman, Noam Chomsky, and Howard Zinn are not Zionists - or at least not in the sense that they support current Likud policies or even many past Israeli Labor policies.

Then there's the strange case of Bobby Fischer... then again, many anti-gay Republicans turned out to be gay...

Chomsky, while a very lucid and fine commentator on international politics including the Middle East, is a strong supporter of a two state solution and a critic of the BDS movement.

Finkelstein is too...

I've no idea, what Goodman's position is, but that's because she's great at her job. She's not there to editorialize, she's there as a journalist to interview and present ideas which wouldn't be out there or out there as clearly otherwise.

One of the most best talks on Zionism I've ever heard is Azmi Bishara's presentation given at Soweto during Israeli Apartheid Week 2008: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5i56hTHCS6U

[blake 3:17]

Why? Because he himself is a labor Zionist. At the end of the day, he's Not against the existence of Israel. He supports the "2 state solution"..

A single democratic secular state with the abolition of all racist laws and some steps towards economic equality and fairly basic land rights and health and education for the Palestinians is what many of us would like to see happen.

But... There were serious proposals for a two state solution, which when proposed, were actually fairly practical, and came largely from the Israeli Right and different wings of the PLO. If the Israeli Zionists want to maintain a racist ethnic homeland and not commit genocide and start World War 3, let them. They would have to give up massive territory and respect borders.

[Akshay!]

They would have to give up massive territory and respect borders.

But why do you think they would? That's the whole point. We, who support the one state solution, don't think that the 2SS is even possible (let alone the fact that it's highly immoral).

[Sasha]

for a good anti-zionist work from a jewish perspective i would recommend the book "the end of judeaism" by Hajo G. Meyer: http://www.gmeyerbooks.com/the_end_of_judaism.asp

[Akshay!]

for a good anti-zionist work from a jewish perspective i would recommend the book "the end of judeaism" by Hajo G. Meyer: http://www.gmeyerbooks.com/the_end_of_judaism.asp


He also wrote the book Het einde van het Jodendom (The End of Judaism) in 2003, which accuses Israel of abusing the Holocaust to justify crimes against the Palestinians. He is a member of the International Jewish Anti-Zionist Network. He participated in the 2011 "Never Again - For Anyone" tour. Meyer also claimed that Zionism predates fascism, that Zionists and fascists had a history of cooperation, and that Israel wants to create anti-Semitism in the world to encourage more Jews to migrate to Israel.[3] He has spoken in favor of Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions against Israel.

That's what I've been arguing for the last 4 pages... I totally agree with him.

[Nicolas_Cage]

There's an excellent list of companies which we can all boycott who have in one way or another shown unreasonable support for the actions of Israel. I can't link it (I need a 25 post count to do so) so just search "inminds boycott Israel" and you'll find it.

Unfortunately they only ship out their leaflets within the UK. If you live in the UK, however, you should organize picking up their leaflets to spread around in your community.

-NC

[Rurkel]

Zionists and fascists had a history of cooperation, and that Israel wants to create anti-Semitism in the world to encourage more Jews to migrate to Israel.Tbh I've always considered that particular accusation to be oveblown and exaggeratedly histrionic, and I am no fan of Israel and agree with all the rest Meyer says.

[Sasha]

Its also not what Meyer actually says, he says that the ties between the great mufti (islamic leader) of jerusalem and the nazi's benefitted the seperatist (extreme-) right wing of the Zionist movement in the sameway as how the anti-israelism in the west and Arab-world moves all too easy into full blown anti-semitism benefits the likud and extreme right narative now.
In this way there is a mutual benificial relationship between anti-Semitism and Israeli right-nationalism, one can and should be angry about this on those "zionists" who exploit this, but likewise one should see, esp if one associates with it, the deep ingrained virulent anti-semitisn under so called "anti-zionists", if you can't disassociate with all out neo-Nazis, protocols of Zion thumbers and holocaust deniers one is part of the problem, not the solution (except the final one maybe)...

[cyu]

is a strong supporter of a two state solution

Personally, as any good anarchist, I'd have to stick with my usual support of a no state solution ;)

That being said, I would say it is in fact possible to be both a Zionist and be opposed to every oppressive action done in the name of the Israeli or Jewish people... which usually leads you to be in conflict with Likud and often Labor as well - much like being an anti-capitalist would tend to lead you into conflict with both American Republicans and Democrats.

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noam_Chomsky

supporters of Israel are in reality supporters of its moral degeneration and probable ultimate destruction. I don't think a Jewish or Christian or Islamic state is a proper concept. I would object to the United States as a Christian state." In May 2013, Chomsky advised Professor Stephen Hawking to boycott an Israeli conference.


I've no idea, what Goodman's position is, but that's because she's great at her job. She's not there to editorialize, she's there as a journalist to interview and present ideas which wouldn't be out there or out there as clearly otherwise.

I would say bias is unavoidable - and the selection of the stories she does on Israel is in clear contrast to the stories you hear in mainstream media. If you wanted others to believe the current Israeli government can do no wrong, then you never report anything that shows them in a bad light. If you believed the Israeli government should be held accountable for the things they do, then you might report what Goodman reports. This isn't to say she's definitely an anti-Zionist, but she certainly isn't letting the current self-proclaimed Zionists get away with abusing their power.