Zionism is a dirty word frequently parroted in politics, usually followed by something to do with Israel, hostages, or the latest war. For many people in the Middle East, the term is linked to terrible oppression and a bloodshed that has radicalized generations of people. The Zionist movement is controversial in contemporary politics, as both partisan and nonpartisan groups debate a simple, profound question…
“Should Israel exist?”
Zionism and Its Early History
Zionism began in the 19th century as a nationalist movement that sought to colonize lands in pursuit of a home for the Jewish people in reaction to widespread antisemitism in Europe. Theodore Herzl, an Austro-Hungarian Jew, founded the contemporary Zionist movement. This was the very same movement that often referred to its plan as “colonization” and “stealing”. He authored many works such as Der Judenstaat, which spoke of the need for a Jewish state.
In the very book, Herzl himself pondered where they would steal land from. Due to the discrimination that Jews received in Central and Eastern Europe – from boycotts to pogroms – many Jews were already leaving and going to places as foreign to the Jewish identity as Argentina. Due to this, Herzl entertained the idea and even wrote a chapter in Der Judenstaat to the question, “Palestine or Argentina?”. He and other Jewish intellectuals, despite not being religious, decided that Palestine would be the better option, as it would rally moral support from religious Jews. He knew that this colonization would be difficult, but nevertheless urged Jews to buy land in Palestine.
Fast forward not too long after, Arab nationalism began to brew in the now-collapsing Ottoman Palestine. Great Britain wanted to garner the support of the locals (read: Arab Palestinians), and so promised that an Arab state would exist according to the McMahon-Hussein Correspondence. This Correspondence consisted of letters between Sir Henry McMahon and Sharif Hussein of Mecca that promised a Palestinian Arab state in exchange for their support. However, they lied as usual, creating the Sykes-Picot agreement and partitioning the Ottoman Empire’s Arab territories into their own colonies.
From this point on, early Zionists began to purchase land in British Palestine and evicted the Arab tenant farmers that lived and worked on the land for generations. Armed confrontation with Jewish paramilitaries would lead to early struggle against the Jewish colonizers, who also began displacing the Palestinians. I won’t even get started on the Nakba in this article, but I recommend you search it up. It was also from here that the Zionist leadership formulated the idea of ‘the transfer’ (their term for ethnic cleansing) of the Arab population out of the land to develop a Jewish majority – something that would influence Israeli policy for years to come.
But don’t they have a claim? Shouldn’t the left support self-determination?
Zionism, being inherently evil, advocates for an ethnostate based on a hollow claim that simply because they “were there” (even though most of them were not there for much longer than they were) thousands of years ago means they are allowed to displace the native population. This argument makes no sense when you consider that it is no longer the medieval times. Italians do not get to claim every inch of the former Roman Empire because the people we’d now call Italians were found on all frontiers of the Mediterranean just 1600 years ago, but now it’s suddenly okay if Europeans steal Palestine for their own gain. Simply put, the Jewish “claim” to Palestine is nothing more than an excuse to exercise control over the region.
Due to the nature of this movement, no real leftist should support Zionism (or perhaps not in its current form). That is not to say Jewish people are “bad” or some other antisemitic nonsense, nor am I saying something to transmit “A Jewish state shouldn’t actually exist”, I am just saying there should be no room for colonial states in the 21st century that commit genocide. Instead, the working class of the region, regardless of ethnicity or religion should form one, united socialist state in which both can coexist peacefully. Unfortunately, due to bourgeois propaganda and ethnic nationalism, it is unlikely we will see this in our lifetime.
Conclusion
In conclusion, Zionism, as it exists today, cannot be viewed as a movement rooted in justice or self-determination for either Palestinian or Jew. It has become synonymous with colonialism and oppression, built on the weak foundation of ancient claims to land and the systematic displacement of Palestinians. The Israeli state being reliant on the subjugation of other people cannot make it truly democratic nor free.
Rather than continuing the cycle of violence, the best solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is the creation of a single, united, and democratic socialist state—Palestine. In such a state, people of all ethnicities and religions would live as equals, with full civil rights enshrined in a constitution.
The Rose Outlook 
Leave a comment