Anonymous #1 8w

Calling Jews colonizers, denying our connection to the land, holding Israel to a higher standard than any other nation, and glorifying terrorist regimes is antisemitic. Unfortunately almost all of those things are rampant within the pro Palestinian narrative and that’s why genuine criticisms get clouded because many sentiments are lathered in most of those things

-1

Anonymous OP 8w

Colonization has an objective definition and that IS simply how Israel was settled? Through settler colonialism. That’s not calling Jews colonizers but the colonizers, colonizers Disagree that Israel is held to a higher standard, it’s the status quo to support it and non-support of it is subject to political targeting and removal.

4

Anonymous OP 8w

I do agree that I sometimes see denial of connection but that’s usually in online comment sections vs principled pro Palestinian movements. Politically minded people don’t typically dispute historical fact

5

Anonymous #1 8w

Jews going to Israel were largely refugees. Are refugees in the US colonizers? Or Ukrainian refugees? Not to mention lots of pro Palestine people would support giving back native Americans land and kicking out the but when Jews tried to go back to their ancestral homeland, its colonization? It’s a double standard. Not to justify everything Jews did when they returned to Israel re war but they should be allowed to go back

-2

Anonymous #1 8w

Also the point that OP made was about Israel’s government (which sucks imo) but you then made it about Zionism and Israel broadly which is a shitty thing to do

-1

Anonymous #1 8w

So if native Americans returned to their ancestral lands after being forced to live on reservations for generations, they would also be settler colonizers too? Not to mention most of the land Jews originally resettled on was purchased by them. Also there definitely are a ton of double standards against Israel and if you think otherwise then you haven’t been paying enough attention

4

Anonymous #2 8w

Yes technically anyone who actively takes part in a colonial project on indigenous land is a settler/colonizer, even if it’s a refugee. And I don’t know of anyone who supports anyone kicking anyone out of America, that’s not what land back is. Having historical and cultural ties to a land doesn’t make you indigenous to it. So no, not a double standard. A misunderstanding of colonialism

6

Anonymous #2 8w

And I don’t see how it’s shitty, it was addressed to Zionists specifically bc whenever I just say “yall” yall are like “what is that supposed to mean” and I’m called antisemitic lmao

7

Anonymous OP 8w

No, bc native Americans are indigenous. They have an unbroken link to the land. The ashkenazi settlers were not indigenous (that doesn’t mean they don’t millennia old ties to the land, it just means they aren’t indigenous). Settlers also purchased Native American land, it doesn’t make it not colonialism

4

Anonymous OP 8w

I mean about 6% of the land was purchased but more than half was settled on so idk how you can use purchasing of land as a justification.

3

Plenty of people are anti Zionist

6

Thinking a settler colony should be disbanded is not at all a radical position, it’s a common sense one

5

Everyone should agree the US should be dismantled if they knew anything about US history

5

Radicals in the actual definition of the word. Yes. Not radical in the ways in which Americans use the word tho

5

Anonymous OP 8w

Diaspora Jews certainly have a connection to the land, but the project of Israel is still colonization. “Colonizer” is a role in a dynamic, the dynamic of colonization, it isn’t an identity category. And I would agree that glorifying terrorist regimes is wrong, but it’s not inherently antisemitic. People glorify a lot of awful regimes if what they’re opposed to also does awful things, lokk at Tankies and people who glorify Russia because of US imperialism; those aren’t rooted in antisemitism

4

Anonymous OP 8w

Now, people who take the same attitude towards Israel that a lot of tankies and Putin apologists take towards the US will often result in those people being easier to indoctrinate by antisemites, but the attitude is not necessarily rooted in antisemitism

3

Anonymous OP 8w

It’s not the returning that makes it colonization, many Jews throughout history have moved to the holy land, it is the dynamic, tactics, and structure of settler colonialism. In the words of Herzl “Zionism is a colonialist venture” There are some genuine arguments for it not technically meeting some of the criteria for that, but it’s not connected to any kind of indigeneity and was still a closely related settler movement that used almost all the tactics in a textbook settler colonialist way

5

No, there are non-Zionists and post-Zionists who think Israel should “not stop existing completely” and there are even anti-Zionists who do Zionism is the belief in and support of Israel as a Jewish nationalist project, if someone thinks that the creation of it shouldn’t have happened but now that it’s here it shouldn’t stop existing, that is a different ideological position

3

A lot of Jews are post-Zionist or otherwise non-Zionist though, although not the majority today even in the diaspora, and anti-Zionism and non-Zionism used to be the predominant positions among diaspora Jews, it only got wide support during WWII and by that point it had already existed and been in motion for half a century

4

Anonymous #1 8w

Respectfully, as someone who agrees with you on a lot of this stuff, disbanding of a settler colony absolutely is radical (not saying I necessarily oppose it, depending on the form it takes, but it’s radical) What settler colonies have been disbanded in the world? Rhodesia is the first thing that comes to mind, I can’t think of many examples tho

5

Anonymous #5 8w

I should clarify, I mean what settler colonies that achieved independence from the metropole have been disbanded and decolonized, more ones that never got independence and formed their own state certainly have

1

Prior to 48 and since Zionism has been the belief that the Jewish state should have been established, that position has not changed. Post-Zionism formed out of the idea that this was no longer a relevant question, but anti-Zionism is still the belief that it shouldn’t have been established and Zionism that it should

2

I think those people are misidentifying themselves as Zionist. Zionism is a well defined ideology that isn’t something new, and it id a testimony to the hegemony of its propaganda that so many people whose position is closer to a post-Zionist one still perceive themselves as Zionists

2

Anonymous #5 8w

Just to add to what you & 4 have been saying. I think the issue isn’t so much should Israel exist because regardless of how you feel about how it came into existence it currently does exist. The question is how should it exist & I’d argue many anti Zionist believe that Israel shouldn’t exist in it’s current form & view Zionist who as people who are okay with Israel’s existence in its current state. It’s like saying apartheid South Africa shouldn’t exist. South Africa is still here but not in

3

Anonymous #3 8w

The same form that was in during apartheid or you could make the same argument with Nazi Germany & Jim Crow in the U.S. all of these countries still exist but not in those forms more or less

3

Most people who identify themselves as Zionists, not most people who actually adhere to Zionist ideology There is no effective way to have a real conversation about the history and colonial dynamics here without referring to adherents of the Zionist ideology as Zionists. And the thing is the term “Zionism” has not changed in meaning for most people globally, ideological Zionists simply convinced some non-Zionist Jews to identify themselves with the Zionist ideology.

2

I also don’t know where you’re getting the idea even that this is true about most people who identify themselves as Zionists. Most people in the diaspora who do maybe, but I guarantee you that is not the case when talking most people in Israel, most people are very supportive of its founding there

4

Idk about that I’d imagine a ton of people in the 1940’s were saying F Germany & I hate Germany and boo the Germans etc but we in present time make the distinction between Germans & Nazis. As for it being vague idk most of the time I hear people saying Israel shouldn’t exist it’s from Zionist talking about anti Zionist which kinda goes back to what you were saying regarding miscommunications & how the two parties see each other

3

The people who use it aren’t just Jews. Look, when a Jew I know identifies themselves as Zionists I recognize they don’t necessarily mean the ideology, more of a political/cultural coalition with people of that ideology, but the term is in reference to an ideology and within that ideology the term still has the same meaning

1

I live in the US, my whole life is here, I would not exist if not for this country and I have a deep love for my home, I’m still not supportive of the fact it was founded

2

Suggesting opposing Israel’s founding means opposing Jewish refugees being taken in is not accurate. Without the Zionist Yishuv and then Israel after it, there would’ve still been Jewish refugees that’d have to go somewhere, I imagine there’d have been a big refugee crisis in Europe some Jews were also taken in by Palestinian families, I imagine more would have been than were if not for Zionism (although probably less than the amount that were taken in by Israel I assume)

1

I also think it’s kind of impossible to imagine the modern Middle East and especially the place for Jews in it if there hadn’t been Zionism. There would’ve still likely been some amount of import of antisemitism from Europe, but Arab nationalism would’ve developed on such a different way it’s just difficult to conceptualize, especially in the Levant where the movement was largely secular and explicitly inclusive of Arabic-speaking Christians and Jews at the start

3

Idk about that. Again are we saying Germany in general or Germany how it was in the 1940’s because I view that as two different things & imagine people were saying Germany’s existence was wrong during the 1940s while using academic language to back it up.

1

Idk why you say you guys because I never said anything positive or negative about the founding of Israel I simply said “regardless how you feel about it’s founding it currently exist” & then never brought up the founding again. I also never once even mentioned anything about it being a net positive or negative for Jews. So I feel like the you guys thing is unwarranted.

1

Anonymous #3 8w

As for you saying “exact problem” not necessarily you’re a random person on an anonymous app who’s opinions I don’t know & the way you’ve talked about it in discussions makes me unsure so I ask for clarification but if I’m outside talking to people it’s much different. I’d say the majority although definitely not all antizionist that I’ve talked to would say they are against Israel’s existence in it’s current form & that view point is popular within the pro Palestine movement so I kinda work

2

Anonymous #3 8w

With that assumption unless said otherwise or they are being weird assuming they are apart of that movement. Same goes for Zionist plenty of self proclaimed Zionist rightfully hate Bibi yet outside of getting rid of him & maybe the settlements don’t really advocate for any changes to the way Israel functions so unless they say otherwise I would operate assuming they are fine with it’s current iteration but want to see some changes

1

Anonymous #3 8w

It’s like BLM based off of the core beliefs or values of the movement I don’t feel a need to ask every single person who says Black Lives Matter if they think we should get rid of white people sure some do but that’s not what the movement is about so I can make a safe assumption said person within the movement doesn’t want to get rid of white people unless they say otherwise or start being weird about white people.

1

I don’t entirely disagree with you. I think a part of the reasoning is many within the movement view it as centering their language around someone who either agrees with Israel’s actions & current formation or at the very least doesn’t really see an issue with it. Kinda like how people would argue changing the slogan of Black Lives Matter to be more inclusive.

1

In your personal opinion would you say the belief that Israel is an apartheid state who’s currently committing a genocide is a popular belief among people who self identify at Zionist?

3

I’m very familiar with Times of Israel and it’s reporting. I personally find it be a better source of information than mainstream western media.

2

Anonymous #3 8w

As for as Israel is concerned & please correct me if I’m wrong but doesn’t most polling show that at least among Israeli Jews the majority is at the very least okay with genocide or at least ethnic displacement of Palestinians?

1

Anonymous #3 8w

Although I apologize because I should have framed my question better I wasn’t asking about Israeli Zionist I meant here in the U.S.

2

Anonymous #3 8w

While I have also met many who would say they don’t agree with all of Israel’s actions or even go as far as to say Bibi is a war criminal & some war criminals I haven’t met many who would acknowledge what’s happening as a genocide and even fewer that would acknowledge an apartheid. Or that Israel has the power to stop & change things.

0

Anonymous #3 8w

Although that’s just my personal experience & I understand you may have a different experience then me personally

-1

I mean all the major human rights organizations have labeled it as such. But I don’t deny or think that there aren’t Zionist who aren’t critical of Israel. I’d say most liberal Zionist are critical. I think it’s more so to what degree

3

I’ve said this before, and you are not listening It is a lot of *Jews* who understand that term differently, specifically, most other people do not have that understanding of Zionism. Yes, when I talk to someone in my life I don’t fixate on that terminology unless they bring it up because I know that’s not the most important part in many contexts But there are more anti Zionists in the world than there are even self identified Zionists, and that Zionist institutions deliberately obfuscates

0

Yeah but the ideological Zionists haven’t changed the meaning, the people in power haven’t changed the meaning This is not non-Jews not understanding the meaning, this is there being a widely known meaning which is what it has historically meant and a certain portion of Jews, primarily outside of Israel, reinterpreting it from what it has historically meant and is still used to mean That is not a misunderstanding by non-Jews, that is a deliberate conflation by ideological political Zionists

0

The interpretation of the meaning of Zionism that you are referring to is far from universal among Jews, and the outside usage is not a change from the original meaning by an outside group

0

That has historically been a broad selection of different types of Zionism, but all of them are referring to the creation of an explicitly Jewish state in the holy land I am not speaking of “homogenous powerful people,” I’m speaking of the people who started the movement and their ideology, along with the splinters from it Supporting the creation of Israel doesn’t necessarily mean someone supports the way in which it was created, but it does mean supporting the creation of it

0

I would not say every person who calls themselves a Zionist supports the Nakba nor the brutality in Gaza, in the slightest I would say that Zionism, to achieve the creation of a both Jewish and democratic state in the borders it has today, required ethnic cleansing. That does not mean that all self-identified Zionists support this, a lot probably don’t even know about it, but that’s what it required regardless

0

Anonymous #6 8w

I’m genuinely really curious, what do you think is a double standard on this that is antisemitic?

4

I’m listening to what you’re saying I just don’t think your comparison makes much sense The insurance of a Jewish majority is still very much active policy in Israel, this isn’t a thing of the past Unless you’d consider someone a Zionist if they want Israel to exist with or without a significant Jewish majority? Is that your point?

-1

Okay, but I’m not doing that, you’re arguing against a strawman here. When I’m talking with someone in my life who’d call themself a Zionist, I’m not arguing with Zionism, I’m hearing what they have to say and finding common ground When I’m having a conversation about what Zionism is online, then I’m talking about what Zionism is, I’m not applying it downward to individuals I’m describing an ideology

2

And again, the question of whether Israel should have been created is not irrelevant to current politics. A lot of politics involves looking at the past and reevaluating whether things should’ve happened. Spain shut it down now, but there was a point where finally after over 500 years they acknowledged that expelling Sephardim was a mistake, and we were offered a right of return there That question of whether it should have happened as a lot of implications that affect decisions to be made now

2

What would you consider to qualify for Jewish self determination? Would you consider Morocco having rabbinical family courts—I think similarly to Israel, but I’m less familiar with the Israeli system—Jewish self determination? Do you mean a Jewish majority state? What qualifies?

2

I don’t tell people what their positions are. I might try to show them why their position looks like in practice, but I’m not telling them their position; most people hold positions inconsistent with any ideology they identify with And I have had quite good discussions about people who at the time identified as Zionists where we discussed whether that reflected their position well and they wound up shifting their position, most people who identify as such that I’ve met I’d consider Zionists tho

2

I’d argue that is not a question all Zionists have an answer to except, perhaps, “you don’t,” equal rights for all its citizens has never been the reality on the ground in Israel, and the nationstate law formalized that

3

It absolutely does matter To use an extreme example, the Holocaust obviously was a horrible crime against humanity that shouldn’t have happened and Germany has paid reparations because of it. That matters, a lot, and more countries should do that for their horrible actions

3

Their are ways of ensuring that without inflicting onto Palestinians what many countries have done to is

2

On that particular solution, yes, I’m sure there are others I would support that you wouldn’t though And, personally, I would want a single secular democracy with strong religious and ethnic protections and a right of return, I just think that’s a lot less plausible now with everything that’s happened in 1948 and since The binational confederacy just seems the most viable solution to me at this point that isn’t awful

3

What about a state set up for refugees in general? Being refugees is a shared experience between Holocaust survivors and many Palestinians

1

No, but there are things that can be done like a right of the return for Palestinians and maybe some kind of reparations that can work to heal some of the harm

3

I did not make assumptions about you based on that you didn’t reflect Zionism as strongly as I do, I have known people who identify themselves as Zionists who support a single secular democratic state (but only if it’s named Israel, for whatever reason) I made assumptions about you based on how you talked about Jewish self-determination

1

Anonymous #5 7w

You could very well say the same thing about self identified patriots and the creation of the United Sates. It is history that’s important to be aware of, but it doesn’t really change the here and now.

1

Anonymous #5 7w

I think what #4 is saying is there are some self proclaimed “anti-Zionists” or “pro-Palestinians” who, as a result of viewing the formation of Israel as illegitimate, would support the dissolution of Israel and the forcible expulsion of the Israeli population living there in an attempt to “undo” Israel’s illegitimate formation.

2

Anonymous #5 7w

But it was exactly that kind of reasoning that lead to the formation of Israel on the justification of Jewish indigenousness in the first place, albeit over a larger timeframe. So rather than trying to perfectly even the scoring field and avenge every past harm without regard to the harm it would cause in the present, while it is important to acknowledge our history and past wrongdoings as to how got to where we are, we need to focus on the here and now and how to best move forward.

2

Anonymous #7 6w

The here and now includes the legacy of the founding though. The expulsion of Israelis is not a tenable or a realistic policy although some people certainly want it and would be a humanitarian crisis of its own, but we cannot seriously address the current situation now without taking the Nakba and founding of Israel into account. Israel gives a “right of return” to Jews with no family history in the land for thousands of years but not to Palestinians who were expelled within their lifetime

1

Anonymous #7 6w

The United States was founded hundreds of years ago while Israel was founded within living memory, there are people alive today who were expelled in 1948, it absolutely does change the hear and now, reparations and a right of return are owed.

2