[History]

Zionism is a challenge to define because it has both a religious and historical basis.

Zion (i.e. Israel) is designated as the homeland of the Jewish people in the opening chapters of Torah; and down the millenia it is always Zion which Jews world-wide have acknowlwedged as our spiritual if not literal home, the center of our faith, the Land which G-d designated as our dwelling place.
Thus "Zionism" is the recognition of Zion/Israel as the homeland for the Jewish people.

Under the depradations suffered by Jews of the Diaspora, in Christian as well as Muslim majority lands, Zion also was synonymous with liberty and freedom: freedom to live fully as Jews without curtailment and restrictions by or fear of violence from non-Jews. Much as many (including Jews) looked toward America as the land of freedom and opportunity, we Jews have similarly looked toward and envisioned Zion. This is given voice in what becane the Israeli national anthem, Hatikvah (The Hope):

As long as the Jewish spirit is yearning deep in the heart,
With eyes turned toward the East, looking toward Zion,
The our hope--the two thousand year old hope--will not be lost:
To be a free people in our land,
The land of Zion and Jerusalem.

http://www.stateofisrael.com/anthem/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hatikvah#Composition

Similarly from a historical and national perspective:
Zionism is the national revival movement of the Jewish people. It holds that the Jews have the right to self-determination in their own national home, and the right to develop their national culture. Historically, Zionism strove to create a legally recognized national home for the Jews in their historical homeland. This goal was implemented by the creation of the State of Israel. Today, Zionism supports the existence of the state of Israel and helps to inspire a revival of Jewish national life, culture and language.

See: http://www.zionism-israel.com/zionism_definitions.htm

Thus, when one claims to be "Anti-Zionist", one is denying the Jewish people what all people acknowledge and demand for themselves: the right to be a free people in their homeland.
And thus for the great majority of world Jewry, anti-Zionism is merely Jew-hatred/antisemtism in another guise.

As with any country, one can oppose and protest government policies and actions. Israelis do so all the time. But to be "anti-Zionist" is to deny the right of the Israelis and Jewish people of our identity, rel;igiously and historically, as a nation, to deny us the same rights that all nations claim as inherent for themselves, the right to be a free people in our homeland.

As the Jewish New Year and the Days of Awe approach, may we open our hearts to each other and strive for greater appreciation and understanding, a world of simcha (joy), a world where we not only wish for others what we wish for ourselves, but strive to help each other ahieve it.

Respectfully,
History

[spike]

Beautiful, History. Thank you.

[typicaldude]

i'm of irish descent and while many do not consider people who were forced to leave ireland due to poverty or oppressive british rule my family does and we keep to our roots. so i can sympathize with wanting to have a homeland for your people.

but i can also sympathize with the palestinians who also wish to live in their homeland, some of the refugees can trace their family back 800 years on the land presently known as israel.

zionism may mean to you what you stated, but to many other people it speaks something else.

and also i say this as nice as possible because i have always wanted to know how jewish people can explain the duality between living in america and europe and working so hard to integrate our societies to the detriment of its local inhabitants, in 100 years there will be no semblance of america and europe as it historically has been for hundreds of in the case of eruope thousands of years.. yet jews support a nation state of one jewish people in israel?

[History]

i'm of irish descent and while many do not consider people who were forced to leave ireland due to poverty or oppressive british rule my family does and we keep to our roots. so i can sympathize with wanting to have a homeland for your people. but i can also sympathize with the palestinians who also wish to live in their homeland, some of the refugees can trace their family back 800 years on the land presently known as israel.

Although Palestinian national identity, as distinct from Arab identity, is historically a very recent development, the rationale that justifies Zionism, and all national identities worldwide, is equally justifiable in Palestinian desire for their own nation state.
That is one of my points.
It is wrong, even hypocritical, to demand recognition of Palestinian rights to their own state, while denying Israelis/Jews the same recognition through anti-Zionism.
The recognition of national identity is mutually suppportive, not mutually exclusive.

zionism may mean to you what you stated, but to many other people it speaks something else.

Just as Jews do not have the right to define Palestinian nationalism, or American patiotism, or Irish national identity, non-Israelis and non-Jews do not have the right to define Zionism for Jews.
To define Zionism negatively for one's own agenda is both unjust and dishonest.

and also i say this as nice as possible because i have always wanted to know how jewish people can explain the duality between living in america and europe and working so hard to integrate our societies to the detriment of its local inhabitants,

Are you alleging that the integration of "jewish people" into America and Europe is "detrimental to society"?
I want you to clarify this before I begin to disassemble such a terrible accusation.

(in) 100 years there will be no semblance of america and europe as it historically has been for hundreds of in the case of eruope thousands of years.. yet jews support a nation state of one jewish people in israel?

Jews were present at the founding of America, and contributed and fought alongside fellow Americans of all faiths and ethnicities since before the Revolutionary period. Similarly, Jews settled and lived among the people of Europe before there were European nations. According to some studies, 2000 years ago, 10% of the people spread across the Roman Empire from the Atlantic to Arabia were Jews. Historically, there has been "no semblance of America or Europe" which did not include Jews.
Israel is a state where Jewish faith and ethnicity and history play a proment societal role.
This is nothing new in this regard. There are over 26 nations in which Islam plays not only a similar role, but to a far greater degree. Historically the majority of European nations were self-declared "Christian" states. There are many in America who would still stay the same of this country.
While the majority of Israelis are Jewish, there are higher percentages of non-Jews who are citizens in Israel than there are Jews in Christian and Muslim majorrity nations--particularly in Muslim nations, but even the US population is only 3% Jews. I contend there is nothing wrong in having a Jewish majority state, just as there is nothing wrong with a Christianm or Hindu, or Muslim majority state as long as democratic freedoms are present and protected.
Anyway, I wouldn't worry yourself about Jews, TD, in another 50 years America will be mostly non-white (mostly Hispanic, I predict), and Europe possibly well. Jews will not be the issue for you then. But it wil be interesting, as Carlos Mencia said, "how whitey will handle being the minority."

Respectfully,
History

[typicaldude]

Are you alleging that the integration of "jewish people" into America and Europe is "detrimental to society"?

no that was not my point at all, the point is that many jews in america and europe work towards integrating our societies to the point where there is no more national identity when historically there always was. but at the same time push for a nation solely for the jewish people. that was my point.

i argee a nation needs a national identity and in the us and europe that (like you said) won't exist in 100 years as white-christian-anglo saxon cultural identity will be completely non-existent, what happens then? same as what will happen in israel when the jews are minorities to the arabs again i suppose.

i am genuinely interested in that duality. i know very left wing jews who want to tear down every barrier of a national identity and allow mass immigration of every culture and nationality into the US yet are ardent anti-arab jew-only zionists. it is a strange duality and i want to know how it is rationalized.

thanks, i'm not trying to antagonize you, to me a duality and seemingly very contradictory situation exists there.

This post has been edited by typicaldude: 14 September 2009 - 02:06 PM

[Jim]

May I ask...

Im not sure if this is on topic of the original OP so if not just move it to a new thread H2 plz I was reluctant to start yet another thread on Israels policies and over flood the Israel section with topics.

what is the justification for importing massive amounts of immigrants (Russians, Americans, other countries, etc) to Israel to occupy 'controversial' (as many say illegal but ill omit that word for the sake of this discussion) settlements and vastly inflate the population in Israel proper?

I know that just prior to the formation of Israel as a state Jews purchased much of the land that has become the State of Israel and settled there, but these folks have not. They come at a later date and purchase land in these controversial settlements (that are threatened to be dismantled in the process towards peace).

An alarming thing I can see is that in 50 years Israel's population has soared from 80,000 (prior to WWII and 1948 declaration of statehood) to roughly 7,000,000 and immigration is still heavily on the incline. These immigrants are not related to nor do they have a stake in Israel more than those born there and raising families for generations which is already effecting population growth.

I understand that as a zionist (Jewish) state it is a land for all Jews, however you cannot possibly fit all of the Jews in that tiny sliver of land without having a policy for expansion to accommodate such rapid growth. In saying this, I also know that not all Jews want to or will immigrate to Israel, however as the pupolation of Jews worldwide grows, so will the demand for more immigration to Israel and the demand for land to house these Jewish families.

I think this long term vision of a grand open door policy towards Jewish immigration makes Israel look expansionist and as if they have alternate goals of annexing more land. Biblically speaking (as many Jews use the Jewish Scriptures to justify zionism) Israels rightful borders are not bound by todays borders but extend into Syria, Iraq, Jordan down into Sinai, etc. So I think this sets people on edge when they think of Israel as a long term neighbor.

So, im puzzled as to the justification for allowing such rapid growth to continue? Where will they house these people once there is no more room in Israel (I think its possible that this time is almost there)? Do you think it wise or support a limit to immigration in Israel?

[snoopy]

The only solution as far as I see is Israel being larger than what it is (to the size of the original british palestine mandate), bringing in Palestinians as equals and giving them Israeli citizenship. A senate representing the different areas and thus different groups might need to developed but it makes little sense the way things are today.

Will the Palestinians be won over by such an idea? if they are given equality within Israel along with full Israeli citizenship and the world community invest upwards of $100billion into building new homes, schools, hospitals and microloans in the arab major areas, you'll win the population over.

[SisterK]

The only solution as far as I see is Israel being larger than what it is (to the size of the original british palestine mandate), bringing in Palestinians as equals and giving them Israeli citizenship. A senate representing the different areas and thus different groups might need to developed but it makes little sense the way things are today.

Will the Palestinians be won over by such an idea? if they are given equality within Israel along with full Israeli citizenship and the world community invest upwards of $100billion into building new homes, schools, hospitals and microloans in the arab major areas, you'll win the population over.

Except that equality would never be given, and the Palestinians would not be able to live under Muslim law like they previously were and want so badly to return to.

[thejnk]

Zion (i.e. Israel) is designated as the homeland of the Jewish people in the opening chapters of Torah; and down the millenia it is always Zion which Jews world-wide have acknowlwedged as our spiritual if not literal home, the center of our faith, the Land which G-d designated as our dwelling place.

In a world that is becoming more and more disillusioned by religion the argument that some god has promised you Israel has long lost its appeal and is becoming increasingly tiresome. I mean come on people, this is the 21st century. Isn't it about time we left gods out of international politics ? I think the world is more interested to see what you intend to do with the people that are already living in your chosen land (and who, for their own religious reasons, really, really hate your guts) than listening to stories about covenants with gods and the like.

[History]

In a world that is becoming more and more disillusioned by religion the argument that some god has promised you Israel has long lost its appeal and is becoming increasingly tiresome. I mean come on people, this is the 21st century. Isn't it about time we left gods out of international politics ? I think the world is more interested to see what you intend to do with the people that are already living in your chosen land (and who, for their own religious reasons, really, really hate your guts) than listening to stories about covenants with gods and the like.

I except people believe this is true--in regards to religions/faiths other than their own.
Muslims legaly bar non-Muslims from their holy sites in Saudi Arabia and non-Muslims are restricted in even entering the country--and non-Muslim religious observsances? Not allowed, even severely restricted within our own private camps (speaking from my Gulf War experience. There are similar restrictions, and even persecutions, of non-Muslims in many if not most Muslim nations (the Bahai in Iran, the Yildiz in Iraq, and I am sure you recall inicidences in Afghanistan from 1500 old giant Buddhas were destroyed and, even under "democratic" Afghanistan, a Christian convert from Islam was prosecuted and was exiled as a "compromise" to a death sentence). These Muslim-majority nations, even those who institute their variation of Shariah Islamic Law are respected and internationally recognized.
For Roman Catholics, and even most non-Catholic Christians, the Vatican is the chosen seat of the Church under G-d, and is its own country, internationally recognized and respected.
In comparison, religious freedom is protected in Israel, and there are larger percentages of Christians, Muslims, Bahai, Druze, agnostic/atheists in Israel than there are Jews in all these other countries.

The majority of the people in the world, in this 21st century, believe in G-d and ascribe to a faith/religion.
There are few countries, if any, that completely separate church and state, and a number who will state there can be no separation. As international politics is about peoples, to varying degrees religion (just as with ethnic and geographic/nationalist associations) is invariably intertwined with politics.
This is the reality.

Thus, instead of trying to rail against and attempt to vainly disregard the international influences of religion (ethnicity,et al), we need to accept, appreciate, and even respect the beliefs of all people.
We need to understand what people believe and what inspires and motivates them, and guides their actions, particularly in "international politics"--if one desires to successfully address conflicts between peoples.

This is why understanding and respecting what Zionism, and ftm Palestinian nationalism (which is strongly intertwined with Islamic beliefs), means. To Israelis/Jews, Palestinians/Muslims, and all concerned ... if we are ever to achieve resolution of this conflict.
And being "anti-Zionist" is counter to this goal.

Respectfully,
History

[thejnk]

The majority of the people in the world, in this 21st century, believe in G-d and ascribe to a faith/religion.
There are few countries, if any, that completely separate church and state, and a number who will state there can be no separation. As international politics is about peoples, to varying degrees religion (just as with ethnic and geographic/nationalist associations) is invariably intertwined with politics.
This is the reality.

This still does not answer the question as to what you intend to do with the people that are already occupying the land where you wish to build "your own national home" upon and who are extremely hostile towards your "national culture".

If the conflicts of 1948 and 1967 are any indication then your intention is to oust them from that place by any means necessary. Now although this was standard practice in the pre 20th century world you will find that few people today will stomach such kind of tactics. And I don't think the claim that god told you that you can have it will ease anyone's mind, even the minds of those that believe in the same god as you do (or a close variation thereof).

[History]

This still does not answer the question as to what you intend to do with the people that are already occupying the land where you wish to build "your own national home" upon and who are extremely hostile towards your "national culture".

Who do you mean by "you", btw?
Personally, I neither have the power or capacity "to do" anything to achieve resolution of the difficult issues the Palestinians and Israelis share.
Or do you mean "you Israelis" (which I am not, btw) or "you Jews" (which suggests a bias on your part).
This is a "we" issue, not a "you" one.
The Israelis and Palestinians together will determine what "does" happen. "We" can only promote understanding to support to the achievement of a peaceful resolution.

The "national home" of the Jewish people in Israel includes Arab and non-Arab Israeli citizens of many faiths. That is not going to change. In the Territories there are those "hostile" to the existence of the State of Israel but there are also those (as recent new elections in the West Bank have demonstrated) who will (or do) accept Israel as a nation and instead of seeking her destruction, seek to create an adjacent Palestinian State beside Israel. There may be many who will remain "hostile" to Israel for decades to come, just as there are many "hostile" to the US, or to the UK, etc. Israel will likely "do" as these nations do and as she has done for her first 60 years: be wary, and strive vigilantly for the protection of all her citizens.

If the conflicts of 1948 and 1967 are any indication then your intention is to oust them from that place by any means necessary. Now although this was standard practice in the pre 20th century world you will find that few people today will stomach such kind of tactics. And I don't think the claim that god told you that you can have it will ease anyone's mind, even the minds of those that believe in the same god as you do (or a close variation thereof).

Again with the "you."
If you have studies the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict, you will know that the Arab nations rejected the 1947 UN Partition Plan which the fledgling Israelis accepted that would have created Jewish and an Arab (Palestinian) States west of the Jordan River. In 1948, 5 Arab nations attacked Israel to push "the Jews" out. The West even had transports off shore ready to accept the surviving Jewish refugees. However, like many nations before them, the first Israelis fought for their freedom and right to establish a nation, and won. Similarly in 1967, when Abdul Nasser of Egypt blockaded the Strait of Aqaba, moved his army and rockets into the eastern Sinai and told the UN Peacekeepers to leave (and they did!), and as Assad gathered his troops in the Golan and his artillery rained down on the Israeli villages in Gallilee, the Israelis fought against extermination, "en brera" (no choice), and achieved victory again.
Thus the question to be raised from the "conflicts of 1948 and 1967" when multiiple Arab armies attacked the Israelis/Jews and attempted "to oust them from that place by any means necessary," is whether "such kind of tactics" are no longer desired by the Palestinians, and those nations/people who support them. Similarly, since 1967, the Palestinians need to be assured that once negotiated, the final borders of their Palestinian State with Israel will be respected, while Israel need be assured that the Palestinian State does not become another staging area for rocket fire and other agression against Israeli towns and citizens as occured forllowing the withdrawal from Gaza. And so on.
Conflict resolution is a "we" negotiation, not a "you."
And understanding of each parties' beliefs and motivations are essential to achieving a final peace, be it the belief in Al Quds as the Far Mosque where Mohammed ascended to Heaven in a dream, or the belief of Zion/Eretz Yisrael as the Promised Land by G-d to the Jewish people as "an eternal possession."

Respectfully,
History

[typicaldude]

i just want to clarify my statement that i am not "anti-immigration" just anti-overimmigration"... i think a mix of people is good in a society but a nations cultural identity should be respected and not threatened by over immigration. that may not be pc or popular but i really don't care anymore, it seems like all nations are allowed to follow this rule except western nations.

i do think it's disingenuous to pretend that jews in israel are for integrating their societies and aren't threatened by an arab majority in israel. i do not think that accurately reflects the view of most israelis. i also do see a bit of a hypocritical stance by jews in the west when it comes to europe and america compared to their immigration policies on israel.

[spike]

i just want to clarify my statement that i am not "anti-immigration" just anti-overimmigration"... i think a mix of people is good in a society but a nations cultural identity should be respected and not threatened by over immigration. that may not be pc or popular but i really don't care anymore, it seems like all nations are allowed to follow this rule except western nations.

i do think it's disingenuous to pretend that jews in israel are for integrating their societies and aren't threatened by an arab majority in israel. i do not think that accurately reflects the view of most israelis. i also do see a bit of a hypocritical stance by jews in the west when it comes to europe and america compared to their immigration policies on israel.

What exactly is this "hypocritical stance" you see in Israeli immigration policies? Please be specific as this is a crucial point with many other countries.

And, having been given the facts of Israel's ethnic makeup on this forum if not in this very thread, how can you maintain that 'it is disingenuous of Jews to pretend they are for integrating their societies' because of some Arab majority? That is hip deep.

[Muhi]

Just wait, I will give you the true Zionism/Zionist and down right evil they truly are.

[thejnk]

If you have studies the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict, you will know that the Arab nations rejected the 1947 UN Partition Plan which the fledgling Israelis accepted that would have created Jewish and an Arab (Palestinian) States west of the Jordan River. In 1948, 5 Arab nations attacked Israel to push "the Jews" out.

Of course they rejected it ! Why should they accept it ? Why should they accept the creation of a Jewish state in a predominately Muslim populated area ?

According to a 1922 census (Wikipedia) the population of Palestine consisted of 580,000 Muslims and 80,000 Jews. Since that time an unchecked large scale immigration of Jews from Europe (which Muslims regretted but were unable to control), large scale evictions of hundreds of thousands of Muslims from their homes and the virtual ban of all Muslim immigration to the area tipped the scale over to the Jews and created the Israeli state of today. Is this something that Arabs should have conceded to ? Was it their obligation to give Muslim land for Israel to be created ? And if so why ?

Was it because this was a Jewish land some 2000 years ago ? Should all lands around the Earth be returned to their original occupants then ?

Or was it because Jews lived in that area ? But Jews live everywhere. Should all nations be partitioned in Jewish and non-Jewish states ?

Or is it because the god of the Jews told them that this land belongs to them ?

What is it that made the rejection of the partition plan by the Arab nations unreasonable ?

[spike]

What is it that made the rejection of the partition plan by the Arab nations unreasonable ?

The Arab League.

[snoopy]

Except that equality would never be given, and the Palestinians would not be able to live under Muslim law like they previously were and want so badly to return to.

So dogmatic Islamist belief supersedes individual freedom.

This post has been edited by KawaiiGardiner: 16 September 2009 - 11:55 PM

[SisterK]

So dogmatic Islamist belief supersedes individual freedom.

Irrelevant to the point.

[snoopy]

Irrelevant to the point.

Don't you find it a contradiction that Arab Muslims are clambering to get into Israel so they can experience Democracy and individual freedom then you turning around claiming they want a theocracy. Contradictory?