The resolution makes a dangerous conflation—and quite a few Democrats gave their wholehearted support.

“The resolution suggests that all anti-Zionism—it states—is antisemitism. That’s either intellectually disingenuous or just factually wrong,” said New York Representative Jerry Nadler, who voted present. “The authors if they were at all familiar with Jewish history & culture should know about Jewish anti-Zionism that was and is expressly not antisemitic. This resolution ignores the fact that even today, certain Orthodox Hasidic Jewish communities … have held views that are at odds with the modern Zionist conception.”

  • BraveSirZaphod@kbin.social
    5·
    1 year ago

    Israel has a right to exist

    Under most definitions of Zionism, you are a Zionist. When the term was coined, it referred to the idea that the Jews should move to Israel and establish some kind of formal community.

    Of course, now Israel does exist, so that original frame of reference no longer exists and the term generally means “a perspective towards Israel that matches or opposes what I think”.

    At the beginning, opposing Zionism would mean that you don’t think Jews should move back to the Levant. Of course, that did happen, so now what? Perhaps it means you think that Israel should remain at its current borders and not expand, but is that really anti-Zionism when it’s literally the accomplishment of the Zionist mission? Or perhaps anti-Zionism is the belief that Jews should be forcibly removed from Israel or killed. That is unquestionably anti-Zionist, but it’s also blatantly genocidal.

    Basically, Zionism is a pointless term today and no one should use it. If you oppose Israel’s current government - a perspective shared by most Israelis it should be noted - just say that, and consider avoiding a term that some people will plausibly interpret as advocating for their genocide.