What does Zionist mean?

[Wiggen]

Not only most, but ALL antisemtes.

Zionist is the label the loons on the Far Left and Far Right use when they really mean Jew. I suppose its progress of a sort.

 

[Wiggen]

In my experience it comes to blind support of Israeli land policy.

then you need to obtain more experience.

 

[alexa]

Doesn't it?

To my knowledge, to be a zionist means to give full, unconditional support to the state of Israel. That is also known as blind support.

Again. Supporting Israel is ok if you must pick a nation from the ME to favor. But blind support is damaging in each and every case. And being such a person in the case of israel makes you a zionist.

I thought it was commitment to the forming of a state for Jews which would mean that to some extent it is over. According to Jewish Virtual Library there were 4 types, political, religious, social and territorial

A Definition of Zionism | Jewish Virtual Library

On territorial

Territorialism preached the formation of a Jewish collective in Palestine, or anywhere else, on the basis of self-rule. The territorialist outlook coalesced in the debate over the Uganda Program. In July 1905, after the Zionist Congress rejected this plan, the Territorialist Jewish Organization was established in Basle under the leadership of the writer Israel Zangwill. It attempted to locate territory suitable for Jewish settlement in various parts of Africa, Asia, and Australia, but with little success. The Balfour Declaration and the resulting Zionist awakening negated the movement and led to its dissolution in 1925.

Other territorialist attempts, meant as counterweights to Zionism, were undertaken in the Soviet Union between the two world wars. The first was in the southern Ukraine and the northern Crimea, where four non*contiguous "national districts" (raiony) were established in the early 1920s and obliterated when the Nazis invaded. The second was in Birobidjan, where a "Jewish Autonomous Region" was proclaimed in 1934. This venture also failed, leaving a small Jewish minority in the region. In 1935, in response to the Nazi accession to power in Germany, Isaac Nachman Steinberg established the Freeland League in the United States. This organization attempted, unsuccessfully, to pursue Jewish autonomy by obtaining a large piece of territory in sparsely populated areas in Ecuador, Australia, or Surinam.

None of the territorialist movements are today viable.

Territorialism

I didn't know they had designs on Australia and Ecuador - completely different world then.

There is now though 'new zionism' and that is concerning

Neo-Zionism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Dr. Chuckles]

I thought it was commitment to the forming of a state for Jews which would mean that to some extent it is over. According to Jewish Virtual Library there were 4 types, political, religious, social and territorial

A Definition of Zionism | Jewish Virtual Library

On territorial



Territorialism

I didn't know they had designs on Australia and Ecuador - completely different world then.

There is now though 'new zionism' and that is concerning

Neo-Zionism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I think alternatives to Eretz Israel were never seriously considered by the larger Zionist congress, and they were mostly pet ideas of Herzl that were soon rejected.

 

[X Factor]

And?

12345

That was a version of the "I have Jewish/black/gay friends" defense.

 

[Rainman05]

I thought it was commitment to the forming of a state for Jews which would mean that to some extent it is over. According to Jewish Virtual Library there were 4 types, political, religious, social and territorial

A Definition of Zionism | Jewish Virtual Library

On territorial



Territorialism

I didn't know they had designs on Australia and Ecuador - completely different world then.

There is now though 'new zionism' and that is concerning

Neo-Zionism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Well, if you wish to be technical about it. But just like some of this is new information to me (the whole neo-zionism part and the classifications of zionism, I knew about the 2 attempts for a jewish state prior to WW2) most people don't use it with that knowledge in mind.
Most people use to express nationalism for the state of israel. And not the good kind of nationalism, the bad kind of nationalism. The kind that you consider it to be the greatest thing ever and anyone saying a bad thing about it must be an anti-semitic slob.

At least that is the popular interpretation or as I perceive it. Only such nationalism is called zionism in the case of Israel. But make no mistake, it is nationalism, the bad kind.

A like for you for the new info

 

[wbcoleman]

Uhh the whole country of Israel as a whole, would be an exampe...

Don't understand. Do you actually follow Israeli politics..... AT ALL???

 

[wbcoleman]

actually the political Zionism that eventually established the state of israel was clearly secular. And can be traced back to the dissatisfaction experienced by the assimilated Jews of the late 1800's early 1900"s. With the largely cited instigating event being the dreyfus affair in france and the eastern european programs. To the zionists, at this point it became clear that no matter what they did, and no matter how much they tried to be european, they would always be seen as the "other" and could only guarantee their safety by establishing themselves as a political majority.

Religious jews were largely against the establishment of Israel until ww2

Correct!

 

[wbcoleman]

In my experience it comes to blind support of Israeli land policy.

There are plenty of Israelis on both sides of that issue.

 

[wbcoleman]

Doesn't it?

To my knowledge, to be a zionist means to give full, unconditional support to the state of Israel. That is also known as blind support.

Again. Supporting Israel is ok if you must pick a nation from the ME to favor. But blind support is damaging in each and every case. And being such a person in the case of israel makes you a zionist.

Your understanding of Zionism is flawed.

 

[wbcoleman]

I think alternatives to Eretz Israel were never seriously considered by the larger Zionist congress, and they were mostly pet ideas of Herzl that were soon rejected.

I believe that Uganda received serious consideration, but Eretz Yisrael is the only place on earth which actually has an organic connection to the Jews.

 

[alexa]

Well, if you wish to be technical about it. But just like some of this is new information to me (the whole neo-zionism part and the classifications of zionism, I knew about the 2 attempts for a jewish state prior to WW2) most people don't use it with that knowledge in mind.
Most people use to express nationalism for the state of israel. And not the good kind of nationalism, the bad kind of nationalism. The kind that you consider it to be the greatest thing ever and anyone saying a bad thing about it must be an anti-semitic slob.

At least that is the popular interpretation or as I perceive it. Only such nationalism is called zionism in the case of Israel. But make no mistake, it is nationalism, the bad kind.

I think there are probably a few interpretations. UK Jews as far as I can gather use it to mean they support the State of Israel, not all of them are very happy with the way she is going - some have even gone as far as to become anti-zionist - that is a change from being Zionist to not, so although I can see your point, it isn't always so.

What is interesting is that on Internet forums 'zionists', of the type you describe above, get furious with anyone who uses the term zionist. I suspect that is enough to be termed antisemitic and I think it is a banned word in the ME section (might be wrong there)

Without a question chauvinist 'zionists' well overdo their calls of antisemitism to stop discussion..but Israel is there. What do we call people. We have Israeli's that is fine, then we have people who have more interest in Israel sometimes than Israeli's themselves and many of the most nationalistic are not even Jews but Christian Zionists so maybe they are the zionists.

Israeli's are Israeli's and people from outside Israel who support Israel as if their life depended on it are zionists. Logically that sounds possibly right.

Neo Zionists though are where the problems come from. Everyone accepts the State of Israel as a fact now.

 

[Rainman05]

I think there are probably a few interpretations. UK Jews as far as I can gather use it to mean they support the State of Israel, not all of them are very happy with the way she is going - some have even gone as far as to become anti-zionist - that is a change from being Zionist to not, so although I can see your point, it isn't always so.

What is interesting is that on Internet forums 'zionists', of the type you describe above, get furious with anyone who uses the term zionist. I suspect that is enough to be termed antisemitic and I think it is a banned word in the ME section (might be wrong there)

Without a question chauvinist 'zionists' well overdo their calls of antisemitism to stop discussion..but Israel is there. What do we call people. We have Israeli's that is fine, then we have people who have more interest in Israel sometimes than Israeli's themselves and many of the most nationalistic are not even Jews but Christian Zionists so maybe they are the zionists.

Israeli's are Israeli's and people from outside Israel who support Israel as if their life depended on it are zionists. Logically that sounds possibly right.

Neo Zionists though are where the problems come from. Everyone accepts the State of Israel as a fact now.

Sooo, basically what you're saying is...

You want zionism to be a term used for everybody who supports the state of israel... while having another term to describe what I describe as being a zionist?

but that doesn't gell with me well because from all I saw about zionism, it is a nationalist movement. And yes, it can be a nationalist movement that can be populated with non-israelis and non-jews.
Let's face it, there are more non-jews supporters of Israel than there are jews in the world.

 

[Gardener]

That was a version of the "I have Jewish/black/gay friends" defense.

Alexa explained it once a long while back. If a Jewish person hates Israel with the same blood curdling intensity as hers, also justifies terrorism against Israeli Jews and otherwise acts as a mouthpiece for violent Jihad, they get to be placed in the "acceptable Jew" category.



If not, they are your typical bad Jew.

 

[NoC_T]

To me it means supporting Israel's right to exist. Other's have used it simply to mean "Jew" and when it's used that way it's usually not an expression of support.

That's how you choose to interpret it, X. You'd previously insinuated that I'm an anti-Semite, after I referred to Israel as 'Israhell', on account of the Palestinians' plight. Then your Mod buddies closed ranks and supported my infraction, following my appeal.

Really disgusting misconduct on your parts. Talk about partiality. There should be no place for that here.

 

[alexa]

Sooo, basically what you're saying is...

You want zionism to be a term used for everybody who supports the state of israel... while having another term to describe what I describe as being a zionist?

No, I am trying to work out what it is. Are you saying that you would address someone as a 'zionist' if you thought they suffered from the kind of nationalism you describe above? It might sometimes be difficult to tell if they were like that so that would be why people see the term as sort of an insult, even if true.

but that doesn't gell with me well because from all I saw about zionism, it is a nationalist movement.

that is true but it has to be more than a nationalist movement given the involvement of Christian Zionists, fundamental Christians and Evangelical Christians. There is more than one thing going on I think.

And yes, it can be a nationalist movement that can be populated with non-israelis and non-jews.

Yes, but they are going to have different reasons for their nationalism.

Let's face it, there are more non-jews supporters of Israel than there are jews in the world.

Absolutely.

 

[X Factor]

That's how you choose to interpret it, X. You'd previously insinuated that I'm an anti-Semite, after I referred to Israel as 'Israhell', on account of the Palestinians' plight. Then your Mod buddies closed ranks and supported my infraction, following my appeal.

Really disgusting misconduct on your parts. Talk about partiality. There should be no place for that here.

Hmmm, I had no idea about any of that. Odd place to bring it up though. You called people Zionist ****bags IIRC. How could I possibly draw any conclusions based on that, I wonder.

 

[NoC_T]

Hmmm, I had no idea about any of that. Odd place to bring it up though. You called people Zionist ****bags IIRC. How could I possibly draw any conclusions based on that, I wonder.

Well, hell. I guess you could misconstrue it as being anti-Semitic, right? Ya know, since every last Jewish person on the planet is both an Israeli and a hardcore Zionist.

It goes to a question of undue censorship. Unless you can explain why criticism of Israel's governmental policies is somehow sacrosanct, on a 'political' discussion forum.

 

[Rainman05]

1)No, I am trying to work out what it is. Are you saying that you would address someone as a 'zionist' if you thought they suffered from the kind of nationalism you describe above? It might sometimes be difficult to tell if they were like that so that would be why people see the term as sort of an insult, even if true.

2)that is true but it has to be more than a nationalist movement given the involvement of Christian Zionists, fundamental Christians and Evangelical Christians. There is more than one thing going on I think.

3)Yes, but they are going to have different reasons for their nationalism.



Absolutely.

1)Yes, I am saying that if someone were to show blind support for Israel, I would call him a zionist. I wouldn't use it as an insult however, just a way of expressing what he is. It's really not that hard to identify people who are zionists, I find. You just look at what they say about Israel or the arab nations around it. Are the polarized? Then most likely they are zionists. If they do take offense from it, well, I can't please everyone. It is not meant as an offense however.

I do not agree with the OP's premise that zionist is an offensive term that denotes evil. Nationalism or better say, blind support for a cause you have no reason to be invested in is not a sign of evil, just a sign of stupidity.

The term zionist can only be considered an offense in areas where the islamic media and anti-israeli culture is prevalent.

2)Not really. Nationalism is of many kinds. there is good and bad nationalism. It doesn't have to be just ethnic nationalism.

3) Yes, there are different reasons. But they all point to the same conclusion. It doesn't matter why you are a zionist, it matters that you are. You can have all manner of motives. Religious. Ethnic. Cultural. Societal. Political. etc.

The evidence lies in the fact that there are jews who aren't zionists. So it can't be just an ethnic thing. And as you said, there are Christians who are zionists... and there are Christians who aren't. So it can't be just an religious thing.

Best guess, to each person is different, but each person who is a zionist finds the idea appealing.

 

[X Factor]

Well, hell. I guess you could misconstrue it as being anti-Semitic, right? Ya know, since every last Jewish person on the planet is both an Israeli and a hardcore Zionist.

I know there are Jewish people who say that Israel's very existence is deplorable and I have no doubt that those people are acceptable to you.

It goes to a question of undue censorship. Unless you can explain why criticism of Israel's governmental policies is somehow sacrosanct, on a 'political' discussion forum.

I see plenty of criticism regarding Israel and it's policies here.

 

[NoC_T]

I know there are Jewish people who say that Israel's very existence is deplorable and I have no doubt that those people are acceptable to you.

Then you'd be in error. I suspect you know it, too.

I see plenty of criticism regarding Israel and it's policies here.

Odd then, that infractions shouldn't be so forthcoming in every instance. But we could speculate forever, couldn't we? It suffices that you make admission of personal bias.

 

[TheDemSocialist]

Yet there are all manner of Israeli groups, individuals, and organizations that support the existence of the Jewish state, yet are extremely critical of said policy ...

Not all Israelis and Israeli groups are zionists.

 

[alexa]

1)Yes, I am saying that if someone were to show blind support for Israel, I would call him a zionist. I wouldn't use it as an insult however, just a way of expressing what he is. It's really not that hard to identify people who are zionists, I find. You just look at what they say about Israel or the arab nations around it. Are the polarized? Then most likely they are zionists. If they do take offense from it, well, I can't please everyone. It is not meant as an offense however.

Wow. You sound like you pop your emotions in a bag.

I do not agree with the OP's premise that zionist is an offensive term that denotes evil. Nationalism or better say, blind support for a cause you have no reason to be invested in is not a sign of evil, just a sign of stupidity.

Every action you take effects others. Ethnic Nationalism has a history of great harm to others. Even if it is a sign of stupidity, which may be the case sometimes, it harms. You are right though that the term 'evil' does not help whoever it is labelled at.

The term zionist can only be considered an offense in areas where the islamic media and anti-israeli culture is prevalent.

Maybe I am still not getting you. If you accuse me of bad nationalism or ethnic nationalism I would be offended.

2)Not really. Nationalism is of many kinds. there is good and bad nationalism. It doesn't have to be just ethnic nationalism.

Generally ethnic and civil Nationalism are quoted. Civil being when all the citizens of the State also have nationality of the State. Ethnic which favours one ethnicity to the detriment of all others. I do not know of any other Nationalism. Inform me.

3) Yes, there are different reasons. But they all point to the same conclusion. It doesn't matter why you are a zionist, it matters that you are. You can have all manner of motives. Religious. Ethnic. Cultural. Societal. Political. etc.

which is - it hasn't happened yet.

The evidence lies in the fact that there are jews who aren't zionists. So it can't be just an ethnic thing.

I am thinking some of our problems may be with English not being your first language. Ethnic nationalism does not come from something inherent in any ethnicity, it is a choice. With Israel it seems to have come from Germany in the first half of the 20th C. It is a choice and it can be changed.

And as you said, there are Christians who are zionists... and there are Christians who aren't. So it can't be just an religious thing.

Christian Zionism comes from when bibles became available in the 16th C. Puritan Protestant's decided then that Jews had to go back to Israel. Christian Zionists decided on it before Jews and the end game is Armageddon.

Christians were also extremely antisemitic. Since the holocaust because of their long history of antisemitism most of them have felt scared to say boo to Israel even concerning the well being of Palestinian Christians. The Church of Scotland came out with a paper trying to get them to understand that their interpretation of the bible which says that Jews have an inherent right to live in Palestine/Israel is a wrong interpretation. Of course all hell was let loose. It was called 'The inheritance of Abraham? A report on the ‘promised land’'. It was available to download on pdf but after the uproar it is no longer available.

The Christian Zionists and the Nat religious or neo zionists in Israel are together the problem and the end result is death for most Jews and I think most of us....so at base I would say the problem is fanatical religion again.

 

[Rainman05]

Wow. You sound like you pop your emotions in a bag.

if you mean put my emotions in a bag, yes, I don't have emotions for online discourse. Emotions are for my family, friends and real life companions and at certain periods in time, my work.

Every action you take effects others. Ethnic Nationalism has a history of great harm to others. Even if it is a sign of stupidity, which may be the case sometimes, it harms. You are right though that the term 'evil' does not help whoever it is labelled at.

Again, it's not ethnic nationalism in itself that is bad. it's the way it can be implement that makes it bad.

Maybe I am still not getting you. If you accuse me of bad nationalism or ethnic nationalism I would be offended.

I cannot control you and what you will feel offended by. It's not within my power, so I don't bother. FYI. When someone says that they are offended, they are announcing that they are not in control of their emotions so someone has to regulate that for them. It's a sign of mental fragility.

Generally ethnic and civil Nationalism are quoted. Civil being when all the citizens of the State also have nationality of the State. Ethnic which favours one ethnicity to the detriment of all others. I do not know of any other Nationalism. Inform me.

religious nationalism. something you can observe in islam for instance or in hinduism.

which is - it hasn't happened yet.

The conclusion of what you end up. It doesn't matter why you are a zionist, all that matters is that you are. The motives why you are can be as varied as anything.

I am thinking some of our problems may be with English not being your first language. Ethnic nationalism does not come from something inherent in any ethnicity, it is a choice. With Israel it seems to have come from Germany in the first half of the 20th C. It is a choice and it can be changed.

No... ethnic nationalism comes inherent with every ethnicity. How we chose to manifest it is up to us.

Christian Zionism comes from when bibles became available in the 16th C. Puritan Protestant's decided then that Jews had to go back to Israel. Christian Zionists decided on it before Jews and the end game is Armageddon.

Christians were also extremely antisemitic. Since the holocaust because of their long history of antisemitism most of them have felt scared to say boo to Israel even concerning the well being of Palestinian Christians. The Church of Scotland came out with a paper trying to get them to understand that their interpretation of the bible which says that Jews have an inherent right to live in Palestine/Israel is a wrong interpretation. Of course all hell was let loose. It was called 'The inheritance of Abraham? A report on the ‘promised land’'. It was available to download on pdf but after the uproar it is no longer available.

The Christian Zionists and the Nat religious or neo zionists in Israel are together the problem and the end result is death for most Jews and I think most of us....so at base I would say the problem is fanatical religion again.

I really tried to avoid bringing up WW2 events as much as possible because once we fall down that rabbit hole, the whole thread goes to hell because WW2 discussions are like an internet virus.

The holocaust has nothing to do with Christianity.

People have been trying to promote the existence or illegality of Israel ever since it was founded using all manner of reasons. The dumbest reason is that the OT in the Bible is a sort of a real-estate document. Which it isn't.

As for anti-semitism. Anti-semitism doesn't start just like that. Anti-semitism started because of a chain of events, and endless cycle. Here's a scenario.
The rabbinic order encourages jews to remain segregated. People distrust other people who are not like them. Tensions start to form. The rabbinic order, because of the rising tensions, promotes more segregation in ghettos. Jews should marry jews and keep it all in the "family" as it were. tensions keep rising. Do you see where I'm going with it?

Eventually people start justifying hatred against the jews and pogroms ensue, hailed and encouraged by people, members of the clergy most likely, who wish to gain political power at that time. It's easy to promote violence against an group that self-segregates and gives reasons for doubt... and with the right quotes and manipulation of the rhetoric from a very old holy book, even easier.

This is of course, a scenario. One I think it's very common in history.

 

[Dr. Chuckles]

Not all Israelis and Israeli groups are zionists.

This is what I wrote "Yet there are all manner of Israeli groups, individuals, and organizations that support the existence of the Jewish state, yet are extremely critical of said policy ..."

Note that I do not claim all israeli individuals or groups are zionists. I make clear there are individuals and groups who are zionists "yet are extremely critical of said policy". . In fact, some of the most effective and vocal groups opposing everything from the west bank occupation, the settlement enterprise, and even the embargo on Gaza are unapologetic zionists.

As someone previously mentioned, such statements betray an extreme ignorance of what Zionism is and what the political dynamics are in Israel.

In fact, I am at a loss on how anyone can even follow the topic and not grasp these points.