Comment by vladgur
1 year ago
Modern-day Zionism to me and many others means that Israel has the right to exist.
It does not absolve many, including self-proclaimed Zionists, from criticizing some of Israel policies.
On other hand, my interpretation of people who are self-proclaimed anti-Zionists logically flows from above statement that they believe that the present state of Israel DOES NOT have a right to exist. Which implies deportation of extermination of 6 million Jewish Israelis
In my opinion, the word Zionism has been hijacked by activists who know that being anti-Jewish is not good optics, but anti-Zionizm is still something that can be sold to the masses.
> Modern-day Zionism to me and many others means that Israel has the right to exist.
I think the framing of this argument is so tricky, because states don't have any rights. States aren't human beings. There is so much to unpack in the statement "X state has a right to exist".
> On other hand, my interpretation of people who are self-proclaimed anti-Zionists logically flows from above statement that they believe that the present state of Israel DOES NOT have a right to exist. Which implies deportation of extermination of 6 million Jewish Israelis
I am not saying that Israel's borders should be dissolved, but if Israel and Palestine were integrated into a single state where Jews and Arabs had equal rights, would this not still be a home for Jews?
Destruction of the state of Israel is not equivalent with the genocide of all Israeli Jews, unless your definition of genocide is the same as the one used by white supremacists in the US, who believe that letting non-whites into the country is genocide.
The point I am trying to make is that is Zionism, by your definition, exclusionary? If so then what you are describing is an ethnostate, which many would argue is a fascist idea.
Jews, Roma, Kurds, and all ethnic minorities deserve human rights. However, they are not entitled to statehood and their states are not entitled to any rights themselves.
Also, I do agree there are antisemites who say "zionism" as a dogwhistle for "jews".
Do you really think this is possible? Can you name a single state in the world with a majority muslim population that hasn't adopted any laws based on religion or passed any laws that discriminate against non-muslims?
Do you think it's realistic that if Israel is replaced by a new state tomorrow that has a majority arab muslim population it won't quickly become somewhat theocratic and enforce some degree of religious law against people of other religions? I think this outside view of a one state solution pretends the entire population of Israel believes in some sort of Western Democratic values and will provide a strong foundation of individual rights. I just don't see good evidence for that.
> Can you name a single state in the world with a majority muslim population that hasn't adopted any laws based on religion or passed any laws that discriminate against non-muslims?
I don't know that Turkey has zero discriminatory laws against non-muslims, but they managed to operate as a secular state for almost 100 years before Erdogan.
> Do you think it's realistic that if Israel is replaced by a new state tomorrow that has a majority arab muslim population it won't quickly become somewhat theocratic and enforce some degree of religious law against people of other religions?
I have no way of knowing this.
> I think this outside view of a one state solution pretends the entire population of Israel believes in some sort of Western Democratic values and will provide a strong foundation of individual rights. I just don't see good evidence for that.
Noam Chomsky and Norm Finkelstein both agree with you on this point, and I tend to agree with them. My argument was not that a one-state solution was viable, but I was trying to get the OP to say if their idea of Zionism was exclusionary or not.
Personally I do not think that a one-state solution would be possible unless mass de-radicalization took place, because Israeli ethno-nationalists see coexistence as genocide. I think the most viable option is a two-state solution, where a competent Palestinian standing army could hopefully force some sort of detente.
> Can you name a single state in the world with a majority muslim population that hasn't adopted any laws based on religion or passed any laws that discriminate against non-muslims?
Ironically this can be applied on isreal which declare itself Jewish state and have law of return [1] which allow any Jewish a right to "come" to isreal but does not extend the same to arab who were kicked during establishment of isreal
[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_Return
3 replies →
I'm Jewish and I believe that Palestine should be a single democratic state that guarantees rights to all. No one has a right to an ethnostate, not even us. You see directly where this thinking leads — genocide.
As a westerner, I have never heard a single person in the western sphere mention a peaceful, non-occupational one state solution. How common is the idea of a democratic single state solution in Israeli politics? Do the advocates for it have a plan for dealing with the backlash from extremists on both sides? I'd like to read more about it. Now in the west it seems like even the two-state solution isn't up for discussion post-Trump.
The idea is common, but is rejected by the Israeli mainstream because they fear demographic changes - Palestinians are poor, so they have bigger families, hence eventually they would outnumber ethnic Jews and <insert fear here>.
If this sounds very similar to "great replacement" fears in US and Europe, it's because it is based on the exact same principles: the concept that a state's ethnic composition should be fundamentally immutable, and it's legitimate to fight against any threat to this immutability with discriminatory laws (or worse).
Unsurprisingly, that means that the European right, these days, have largely dropped their traditional antisemitism, and will happily share a platform with the Israeli government. The fact that a purposely Jewish state now cooperates with the heirs of Hitler and Mussolini should surely appear revolting to Israeli citizens. Alas, it does not.
1 reply →
It is a marginal opinion, but in my view the only one that offers a chance at real peace.
Here's a piece on it:
https://www.palestinechronicle.com/one-democratic-state-pale...
Jewish people have been murdered & driven out of almost every other middle-eastern country (where they used to be substantial parts of the population). What are their chances of surviving in an Arab-dominated Palestine? Note that neither Hamas nor the Palestinian authority is particularly keen on democracy.
> What are their chances of surviving in an Arab-dominated Palestine?
Absolutely zero, and the people proposing this know that. That tells you all you need to know, really.
[1] https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/images/maps/jew...
Okay. So get behind a two-state solution then.
> No one has a right to an ethnostate
Israel is one of the most ethnically diverse countries in the western world. In particular, it is more ethnically diverse than almost every single country in Europe. What ethnostate?
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_ranked_by_et...
How it is is not the same as how some would wish it to be.
Israel has a 20% Arab population who have the same rights as non-Arab citizens. They work in schools, hospitals, government, including the supreme court.
On other hand, Palestinians living in Gaza have elected a terrorist group[1] to govern them nearly two decades ago and have been subject to UN-sponsored education that teaches kids to hate Jews[2] for decades.
A single democratic state of Palestine with Palestinians and Israelis co-existing is impossible with current Palestinian leadership and the generations taught hatred.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_Palestinian_legislative_e...
[2] https://unwatch.org/un-teachers-call-to-murder-jews-reveals-...
Last time the Palestinians in Gaza got a vote, they voted Hamas, which has a charter based on eradication of the Jews. Are you sure you want them voting in the same state as you?
You must recognize that Hamas was elected after the continuous failure of the PLO to win concessions after Oslo, which abandoned the guiding principles of International Law in favor of "trusting the parties", but Israel, the more powerful party was able to dictate terms. A return to root cause analysis combined with the just principles of international law will see a fair deal. Arabs do not want to fight, they just want to be able to go home.
The fascist behavior I see coming from Israelis is completely repulsive and against everything I thought my religion stood for.
From the Hamas charter (2017).
"6. Hamas affirms that its conflict is with the Zionist project not with the Jews because of their religion. Hamas does not wage a struggle against the Jews because they are Jewish but wages a struggle against the Zionists who occupy Palestine. Yet, it is the Zionists who constantly identify Judaism and the Jews with their own colonial project and illegal entity."
https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/hamas-2017-document-full
This is a very convenient interpretation. Lots of people acknowledge Israel as having that right without identifying as Zionists. Lots of anti-Zionists are just anti-colonialists.
This argument is used to shutdown legitimate criticism of a multi-generational occupation, land theft and discrimination. Those things are not inherent to being Jewish. So the distinction holds.
Can you explain how precisely you can steal from yourself?