Frederick Hughes
“Zionist” – once a name used to describe an emerging movement at the close of the 19th century, has become more recently an extremely emotive term used with pride by some and with fierce antagonism by others. Almost as popular as the term “Zionist” is the opposing term “Anti-Zionist”, used increasingly to differentiate criticism of Israel from antisemitism. In order to understand the complexities of Zionism and Anti-Zionism (and whether the differentiation from antisemitism is valid), we must look into the origins and developing use of the terms.
Zionism in the Bible
Zion has its origin in the Tanach – the Hebrew scriptures (the Old Testament in the Christian Bible). It is first mentioned in 2nd Samuel 5v7 – “David captured the fortress of Zion, which is the City of David”. This is a specific location which refers to the historic site which is part of the Old City in Jerusalem. Over time, Zion came to refer to the Temple Mount, and then to the entire city of Jerusalem. Zion occurs subsequently numerous times in the Bible, in relation to the dwelling place of God (e.g. Psalm 132v13), also referring to the future reign of the Messiah (e.g. Zechariah 9v9). Thus Zion plays a very central role both in Jewish and Christian understanding, and has both geographical and spiritual significance.
Modern origins of Zionism
In the late 19th century antisemitism was growing rapidly in Europe and Russia with persecution and pogroms becoming an existential threat to Jewish life and society. In this context a movement was formed, primarily by Jews, to advocate for the establishment of a Jewish state in the approximate location of historic Israel. The movement became known as Zionism, and was led by Theodore Herzl, a Hungarian Jewish journalist and lawyer. The land at this time was under Ottoman rule and was home to a mixed population of Jews and Arabs. As the Zionist movement gained momentum, immigration of both Jews and Arabs increased. The movement received a significant endorsement from the UK in the form of the Balfour Declaration in 1917. This was a statement from the UK government in support of the formation of a Jewish state alongside non-Jewish communities in Palestine. Also in 1917, the land of ancient Israel was liberated from 400 years of Ottoman rule, thereby laying a major foundation for the eventual establishment of a Jewish state. The state was finally born on 14th May 1948, with the Declaration of Independence following the UN vote to partition the land into 2 future states.
What is a Zionist now?
The simplest definition of a Zionist in modern times is someone who argues for the existence of a homeland for the Jews, usually citing geographic Israel as the appropriate location. This can be on a religious (biblical) political, or cultural basis, or sometimes on a combination of various types. Others might claim neither religious nor political grounds for the Zionist cause, but simply the evident need for the Jews to have a state in which to exist without fear of persecution or discrimination.
Religious Zionism
The belief in a divinely-provided homeland in which the Messiah will reign is a fundamental tenet of many strands of Judaism. Thus Religious Zionism is in one sense a common feature of Judaism, as distinct from political or cultural Zionism. The term took on more definition through the work of Abraham Isaac Kook (1865-1935), who held that the formation of a state of Israel is an essential preparation for the coming of the Messiah. This preparation is not simply a matter of divine providence, but something that must be actively worked out by Jews in the land. Kook is considered to be the father of Religious Zionism, believing that all Jews have an innate “spark” that enables them to work toward the coming of the Messiah. Thus Kook was able to encourage the religious Jews to work alongside the secular to this end.
Whilst most faith-based outworking of Religious Zionism is peaceful (and at times actively bridge-building) toward the Palestinian neighbours of Israel, the most widely publicised expression is that of the “knitted kippah” community. This community takes an active approach to settling in disputed land in the West Bank – often peaceably but unfortunately it has been characterised by the media as being generally extreme and violent. Those committing genuine acts of violence and intimidation are harming the cause and the perception of Zionism, but it must be understood that this represents a tiny minority within Religious Zionism.
Christian Zionism
Christian Zionism is the belief among Christians in the validity of the present-day state of Israel as a homeland for the Jews, together with the belief that Israel (specifically Jerusalem) will be the place of Jesus’ return and rule as the Messiah of both Jew and Gentile. More than a political or social viewpoint, genuine Christian Zionism is based in the Bible – in God’s unchanging promise to Abraham as the father of nations and in the numerous references to God’s past and future restoration of Israel as a land and a people. Christian Zionism is found more in evangelical circles, where the Biblical texts are more commonly taken literally rather than figuratively. The present-day Christian church harbours many different views and attitudes toward Israel, but the Christian Zionists are those who will speak and act in favour of the Jewish people, both in Israel and worldwide.
Political Zionism
Political Zionism is predominantly a secular expression, fathered by Herzl and then by the physical founders of the state of Israel. Its core principles are Israel’s right to exist, and the right to a secure and permanent home for the Jewish people. The government of Israel comprises many parties of varying size, the majority of which are Zionist in either the secular or religious sense, or sometimes both. A smaller number of non-Zionist parties exist, including some Haredi Jews who do not believe that a valid state of Israel can be formed before the coming of the Messiah.
Negative uses of “Zionism”
The terms “Zionist Entity” or “Zionist Regime” are names commonly used by hostile neighbours of Israel to refer to the state, presumably to avoid naming and thereby validating the state of Israel. The insinuation here is that Zionism is responsible for the displacement and oppression of Palestinans since the formation of the state of Israel – often referred to as the “Nakba” (disaster). Thus Zionism is portrayed as an oppressive movement, expressed in acts of hostility. Amplified by the channels of partisan journalism and widespread social media efforts, this has become perhaps the most common interpretation of Zionism today, at least in Western society.
An open-handed investigation of the Jewish side of this situation will reveal that Jews living in the neighbouring Arab countries suffered widespread expulsion or were forced to flee their homes, leaving their assets behind. Also a closer investigation of the Nakba itself shows that it cannot be portrayed as a direct consequence of Zionism.
Anti-Zionism
If Zionism is the belief that the Jews have a right to a secure existence in their own homeland, then Anti-Zionism is basically the denial of this right.
Conversely if, as described above, Zionism is seen as a philosophy of displacement and oppression, then Anti-Zionism becomes a stance for justice and liberation. It is the latter that has captured the hearts and minds of huge numbers of people, particularly since the horrors of October 7th and Israel’s subsequent war against Hamas.
The most generous view of Anti-Zionism is therefore to view it as a well-intentioned attempt to speak for justice in the face of perceived oppression. However this view breaks down when “Zionist” is used as a term of hate against Jews regardless of whether they support or oppose the actions of the Israeli government and military, or indeed whether they have any interest in the state of Israel. Anti-Zionism is then merely a euphemism for antisemitism and a means of expressing antisemitic views with impunity.
Proponents of Anti-Zionism claim that the accusation of antisemitism is used to deflect legitimate criticism of Israel. It is true that many terms are “weaponised” in the present times – for example a group with right-wing views might be labelled “fascist” while a left-wing group may be labelled “communist”, and there is constant friction between ideological expression and freedom of speech. However, criticism of Israel and the Jews occurs on a vastly larger scale than that of any other country or regime on the current world stage – and has done throughout history. This indicates that Anti-Zionism is not merely criticism of a country and its people on moral grounds, but is underpinned by something deeper and more sinister.
Conclusion
Zionism is a rich and complex term that draws its meaning from various sources – religious, political, and cultural. All of these sources contribute to a basic principle of the need and the right of the Jewish people to a homeland in which they can live in a free and safe society. As mentioned above, the basic principle of Anti-Zionism is therefore the denial of this right. Of course, the outworking of the Zionist vision in Israel cannot be above criticism – any more so than the actions of any other country. Anti-Zionists will often claim that they are advocating for a just and secure environment for Palestinians – a legitimate goal. However, by calling themselves Anti-Zionist, they must acknowledge that they are advocating for the removal of this very right for the Jewish people.
A full understanding of Zionism will accept that its principal goal is a homeland for the Jewish people, as described above. Like any other movement for change, Zionism has its extremes and its minority “bad apples”. However, Zionism has become the latest term to be weaponised and used without understanding by groups who claim to be acting for justice. When this weapon is used against individual people, simply due to their being Jewish, it becomes very difficult to separate criticism of Israel from pure antisemitism.
Leave a Reply