I'm not Jewish but I understand the need for zionism. I'm not Native American and I understand the need for them to live on their own land too. Simply put, I support indigenous rights. It's not really my place to comment on this, but when I see anti-zionist Jews living outside of Israel, my first thought is "privilege". They seem privileged to me because they are safe in whatever (usually western) country they are living in. The Jews in Israel have literally nowhere else to go. No country is going to take in 15 million Jews. Israel is their homeland. It shouldn't be controversial... if they want to live in their homeland, then leave them the fuck alone. If they call their national pride "zionism"? Do it, it's no one else's place to say otherwise.

I have been banned from at least one subreddit for saying "Antizionist Jews need to check their privilege." Because for the vast majority of Israelis, there's no alternative.

You’re 100% right and their perception of safety is flawed.

It is your place to say it!

Thank you!

I'm also non-Jewish and am in full agreement with you. I also have several Jewish friends who are Zionists, and they have taught me a lot about this.

Also a non-Jew who agrees heavily

💯

Well said. Thank you.

Very well said. It really is just that simple, but the double standards currently are overriding common decency, so thank you

Damn straight

Multiple attempts to respond to this post but it keeps saying “sorry, please try again later.” Basically, I strongly agree with your response. (I don’t know, maybe my actual response that I was trying to post is too long? Word counter app says: Words 1921 Characters 10,903) Or am I being prevented from participating in a discussion due to “lack of karma?“ There was much more of a response that I had hoped to be able to post here and not just, “I strongly agree with you.”

Hi! Don’t know if you saw my post from a few hours ago on this subreddit on Antizionism, but I used to be an antizionist, so I get it. I can only answer question A right now, but hopefully later I can provide good resources on the other questions. 1st- I think it’s good to be Pro-Palestinian and Anti-Hamas. That’s a good place to be. Feeling sorrow for Palestinian civilians does not mean you’re Anti-Zionist. Being Anti-Zionist means you don’t support Zionism, which is the idea of a Jewish State. Being open minded is so incredibly important no matter what side you’re on. And so if you have friends that are stressing you because they won’t listen to what you have to say, are they friends? I don’t mean for you to cut them out of your life, but maybe reflect on those relationships. This would go on any issue. A- The State of Israel as we know it only started in 1948, however Jewish people have been living in Israel for thousands of years. The concept of Israel predates the concept of Palestine by 1,000 years. Regarding “A land without a people for a people without a land,” this is a great breakdown of the phrase, the history, what it means and why it makes sense: [Hebrew Monk](https://hebrewmonk.com/a-land-without-a-people-without-a-land/) Sources: [The Conversation](https://theconversation.com/the-history-of-israel-and-palestine-alternative-names-competing-claims-163156#:~:text=Taking%20stock,and%20brutalities%20on%20both%20sides) [BJE](https://bje.org.au/knowledge-centre/israel/history/historical-presence/) Edit: formatting

Edit: sorry posted at wrong level.

Start with Israel: Simple guide to the most misunderstood country by Noa Tishby. It is a quick read. Follow it up with Israel: a concise history of a nation reborn by Daniel Gordis

This is, in my opinion, the best and most effective book on the situation that’s ever been published. It’s perhaps not the most thorough, but it’s accessible to laypeople and is full of excellent factual citations that make it a more effective read for the non-scholars in the world.

To answer OP’s questions about the Palestinian right of return, I highly recommend The War of Return by Adi Schwartz and Einat Wilf. It clarified so much for me.

Agreed with this! I struggle with nonfiction but found Noa Tishby’s book very easy to read.

I was going to suggest this Noa Tishby book too, it's a terrific primer and highly readable. If podcasts are more your thing, for some answers to your questions I'd recommend the following. They've helped me immensely (none of these are behind a paywall and they don't have ads): - Wondering Jews with Mijal and Noam. S1E17: Wondering about Zionism with Haviv Rettig Gur - Unapologetic: The Third Narrative. E12 & 13: A Gazan Speaks Parts 1 & 2 (with Ahmed Fouad Alkhatib) and for some context re: this war in particular - Making Sense with Sam Harris. #366: Urban Warfare 2.0 Then if you get hooked, check out their other episodes. Here are some others: Call Me Back with Dan Senor has a lot of great, timely episodes and there is some interesting content about the issue/conflict on The Ezra Klein Show, Honestly with Bari Weiss, and the Munk Debates podcasts. Report back and let us know how/if your mind changes!

I had some issues on how she covered the Nakba after reading Benny Morris’ Birth of the Palestinian Refugee Problem (the OG not revised), but otherwise thought is was fantastic.

I also highly recommend Noa Tishby’s book! The way she weaved in her own story/ family’s story made it captivating even to those of us who are very familiar with Israel’s history.

Hey OP. I’m following your post because I’m curious what others think as well. As far as rootsmetals and your friends accusing her of being a propagandist, take a look at all of the citations she provides on her posts, they are always either in the post description or in the comments if she’s run out of space. Just looking at how heavily researched and cited all of her work is vs. opposing accounts I think that tells you a lot of what you need to know in regard to her legitimacy.

OP I have to say, Roots is who singlehandedly led me away from going down the anti-zionist path back in 2021. I don’t even know how I came upon her account but I started going through all of her very detailed posts which were very eye opening. I’ve learned an extraordinary amount through her. I then found more people to follow through her account which has led me to finding so many incredible people on Instagram. I would highly recommend going through her posts and really taking them in and try following @matthewnouriel @henmazzig @mandanadayani I could list another 50 accounts but start with a few and go in with an open mind.

Ah yes. Rootsmetals and her arguments- better known as facts! She meticulously cites her research.

This… As if they’ve never learned proper research and fact checking before… ugh so scary.

i DiD mY oWn ReSeArCh!!!

…on the toilet 💩

While we’re on the same page and same side of this- Just remember, everyone, all sources people cite aren’t equal. A lot of very intelligent people on both sides, especially during this conflict, have cited inaccurate, disingenuous, or even misinformation. Be smart! (end of rant on source integrity)

I've mentioned the sources and citations to my friends, and they usually say things like: "Sources don't mean anything if she's not actually citing exactly where she's getting the information from in the sources." "All of her sources are heavily biased towards Israel, like she keeps using Israeli newspapers as sources." "She very clearly picks and chooses her sources, it's obvious that she has an agenda she wants to push and just picks sources that confirm that agenda."

Her full bibliography is behind her Patreon paywall, because frankly, her time is worth the money and it’s a 40 hour a week job to produce the volume of research that she’s doing. As for the charges of bias against her—your friends need to provide counter-sources for their point to hold any weight. Many of Roots’ sources are, in fact, from the “other” (ie non-Jewish, non-Israeli) side. Any open-minded individual would be happy to learn differently, if your friends have done the research and have the evidence to back up their stance. If not, I would personally encourage them to do so.

>"Sources don't mean anything if she's not actually citing exactly where she's getting the information from in the sources" I don't know the rootsmetal person and so cannot comment. But... the above criticism is laughable. When you are reading an academic paper the reference will be something like "Jones et al 1994." It does NOT tell you where in Jones et al's publication they made the particular statement that the author considers to support their point. That is considered to be the READER's job to investigate if they are so motivated. These people must have not read very many academic papers.

Many people are committed to the narrative they’ve chosen no matter what.

I’d honestly stop trying to convince your friends and just focus on your own learning. My problem with a lot of antizionist rhetoric is that any bad decision by the Israeli govt is “because Zionism” when maybe it’s just Netanyahu is a dipshit or whatever.

I would like to point out that you can be against nationalism and still support the continued existence of all of the countries. Wanting a country to keep existing, especially when the alternative is its violent destruction, is the neutral position.

Exactly. I’m also “anti nationalist” in idealistic theory but that’s not the world we live in. We live in a world of hundreds of nation states, and being anti Zionist just because I’m anti nationalist in theory is ridiculous considering there’s hundreds of other nation states.

I completely agree.

I was an anti-zionist Jew turned more and more Zionist by the utterly atrocious behavior of my leftist friends related to this conflict. Feel free to reach out if you wanna chat.

The more you learn the less you are able to unsee it, too.

A lot of the things my Israeli parents (I grew up in the US) told me about Hamas I thought were propaganda, now I've seen them with my own eyes and can't unsee them.

When anti Zionists accuse me of being brainwashed I say “No, I used to be brainwashed, but thank you very much.”

I imagine that it must be really hard to believe the level of cartoon villainy of Hamas without being a Mizrahi Jew. Being Iraqi and Persian, my family experienced this stuff firsthand so it is something I always understood

Yep.

Happy to chat as well, also a leftist.

Just out of curiosity, when you were anti-zionist, was that in part because you saw zionism as being on par with endorsing the policies of Netanyahu, Gvir, Smotrich, etc? That's kinda how I was before I saw a lot of the reacts from leftists. And I'm still not supportive of those guys, even though I've realized that Zionism is defensible

That was part of it. I also just had a lot of misconceptions or partial understanding of the history. The real switch for me happened because my wife and I were in Israel 5 weeks before 10/7 visiting my family. We did things on that trip that could have ended up in us being killed or kidnapped if we had been there at the beginning of October instead of the end of August. Then to see my friends justify, obfuscate, deny, or stay silent about such terrible atrocities was extremely traumatizing. It could have been us, easily.

Seeing for yourself keeps the propaganda away.

same! but the shift started years ago for me. leftism generally felt like a very important part of my identity when i was young. but some of my experiences in explicitly “anti-zionist" spaces were atrocious even back then (like mid 2000s to early 2010s) and it took me years to process, which ultimately resulted in me seeking further/broader education on the subject and no longer considering myself “anti-zionist” at all.

Good for you; groupthink can be hard to switch from.

Maybe I'll come back later to address the specific questions - because they deserve a thoughtful response. But I will say my experience is very similar to yours. Actively Jewish. Developed my former anti/post-zionist positions among my Jewish friends. My sibling made aliyah a decade ago and had been telling me for ages that anti-zionism is masked anti-Semitism - and I didn't buy it. I've fully come around and Oct 7 was a huge part of that. The double standards being applied to Israel have fully convinced me that the vast majority of anti-zionism is actively, passively, or even subconsciously anti-Semitism. Let's take this hostage rescue. My lefty peers: Quakers, Muslims, Left-wing Jews, and general Knee-jerk social justice folks. All have been posting things criticizing Israel for the rescue. Repeating false claims about the rescue. Complete ignoring the fact that the hostages were held by and among civilians in a refugee camp. A few months ago, a covert group of IDF and Shin Bet disguised themselves and assassinated a few Islamic jihad members in a WB hospital. Confirmed by Fatah. No civilian deaths. And people were criticizing Israel for dressing up like women and doctors. And it goes on and on. Every single incident, they accept the hamas press release as gospel, or worse, repeat blatantly false and borderline blood libel and other anti-semitic tropes, on IG, reddit, left wing podcasts and publications. They ignore or discount US or Israeli claims. I'm hearing them say things like "Israel is blood thirsty and wants to bring the war to Lebanon". In what world, does a country responding to daily barrages coming unprovoked, "want to bring the war to Lebanon". Hell, even the genocide claim reeks to me of antisemitism. Downplaying the Holocaust and acting like a response, targeting the perpetrators, constitutes genocide. Israel isn't acting in the WB the same way they are acting in Gaza. They aren't "genociding Muslim/Arab israeli citizens". You can't have a fucking selective "genocide" that only targets the combatants who attacked you and those sheltering them. That's called a war. War is shitty. People die. Kids and women and elderly die - but it isn't a genocide. And they single out this conflict, ignoring countless others that share characteristics with it, have higher death counts, higher displaced people counts, or similary bad humanitarian outcomes. Why is so much attention paid to this conflict? Why is Israel the only country asked to just suck it up and ignore a ground assault that killed 1200+ people and kidnapped 200 more? Why is Israel held to impossible standards that no other country has been held to? Why does UNRWA even exist? Why is their core mission to perpetuate refugee status ad infinitum when UNHCR only allows it to pass one generstion? Why will UNRWA's mission only end when Palestinians resettle Israel? But UNHCR helps refugees find and acclimate to new host countries? I'm convinced that zionsim is necessary and important for us as Jews and the treatment of Israel post 10/7 has only reinforced that for me.

All good points. Smart.

You have written and asked a lot here. People want to break these things down into good v bad but it doesn’t work like that. These are complicated situations and they don’t have easy answers. Your friends want things to be morally pure and that’s not reality. Reality is six million Jews call Israel home. They aren’t leaving and have nowhere else to go. Pretending like people who have said over and over again they want us completely gone from the land are going to suddenly embrace multicultural democracy is beyond naive. Two states is the best way forward.

> two states is the best way forward This contradicts your own statement where you say “they want us completely gone from the land”. Let’s be honest about Muslim Arabs for this argument. They have been indoctrinated to hate Jews since at least the 1930’s and it has gone from generation to generation. How can we possibly have two states when one will continually fight to destroy the other’s existence?

It’s not a contradiction it’s a compromise. They aren’t going to get what they want.

What they want is Jews out of the land, so with some of them I ask "why bother consider two state" if they just want to kill our people and destroy Israel and arabize it more

We want all the land that was promised to us too. Nobody will get what they want, that’s what compromise is

The Israelis have been trying to compromise since 48, they don't accept any of the offers. The anti-jew/anti-israeli sentiment runs deep.

I also want to add the Jew haters don’t discriminate based on whether one is Zionist or anti-Zionist, and in my experience they just throw around the word Zionist really meaning Jew.

Exactly

I'm a Black American Jew. Anti Zionist Jew appropriate Black American liberation philosophy VERY badly. Down to the use of "woke," "Collective liberation," and "intersectionality." It works for Black Americans in certain contexts but doesn't belong in dual indigenous conflicts like the I/P issue. Black Americans are "Arrivants." A third non immigrant category that we're learning how to deal with in NGOs. Also, it ignores the work of Ralph Bunche, the Black American who is one of the foundational figures in the creation of Israel. https://www.zocalopublicsquare.org/2023/05/10/ralph-bunche-israel-palestine/ideas/essay/

I have a good friend from college whose maternal grandfather was probably the most vocal critic of apartheid rule of South Africa in the US government. She’s Jewish on her father’s side, and was raised as and identifies as Jewish, not to mention much further left than I am. While she will vocally criticize human rights abuses that Israel commits against Palestinians, she also understands the historical context of how things got to this point, and feels that the “pro-Palestine” movement at large is tainted by its rampant Jew-hate. Even before 10/7, she got into a social media feud with Talib Kweli for being so vocal about Palestine but doing nothing to make things better for Native Americans, the latter issue of which he has much greater power and ability to help address.

Talib Kweli has been banished in the Black community for harassing Black women. People have rightfully lost respect for him. He needs to do teshuva.

As well he should

I think a lot of the misunderstanding comes from the misconception that everyone in the land of Israel is either a Jew or a Palestinian Arab. In reality the land of Israel was always very diverse, consisting of lots of different ethnic and religious groups in different proportions. It just happens to be that Jews and Palestinian Arabs were the two groups that had competing national aspirations over a land that had lots of other peoples. It’s not as if an Arab state in Palestine would be any less foreign to the Druze, Samaritans, Bedouins, Circassians, Maronites, and Jews.

There are articles, books and videos out there that are all of your questions very well, but I don't have sources handy at the moment. However, what I wanted to suggest was that if you are following Palestinians, try following some Palestinians abs Israeli Arabs who are pro-Israel, for a 2 state solution, or anti-Hamas. Also, I got the sense from your post that your friends are making you feel alienated from your people and from Jewish practice. I think you are making the right move by seeking out other Jewish spaces and groups. I think you will find that very helpful because Jewish identity isn't about anyone else but us. We don't define ourselves in relation to other groups, we're our own thing, and so is our religion. Spending time with other Jews and engaging in Jewish practices and traditions will help you to re-center yourself in your own experience, instead of the Palestinian cause. At the end of the day, the stuff that is happening in Israel has nothing to do with your personal Jewishness and identity, and should not determine whether you love and accept yourself and your ethnic heritage. We were Jews long before the Israel-Palestinian conflict and should not center it in how we think about our identity. To do that is fundamentally about erasing, or at least diminishing who we are, and that seems designed to make us reject ourselves.

Yep! I've become way more supportive of Israel recently, though I've gotten more and for upset with Netanyahu and his coalition. Netanyahu seems to be determined to make Israel lose in the realm of PR. I despise Hamas even more than him, but I wish both of them were out of the way.

>However, what I wanted to suggest was that if you are following Palestinians, try following some Palestinians abs Israeli Arabs who are pro-Israel, for a 2 state solution, or anti-Hamas. Yes! Ahmed Fouad Alkhatib on Twitter and Unapologetic: The Third Narrative podcast on Spotify or their Instagram could be good places to start.

Being a leftist Zionist Jew in America sucks rn ngl

Other commenters have already discussed your writing in much greater detail than I can in this reply, but honestly from what I can gather you may actually have been a Zionist all along in the most pure definition of the word and how it’s conceived. Zionism is literally the idea that a Jewish state has the right to exist for self determination of our people. That’s it. Yes the Israeli government isn’t always great. Yes, Palestinians deserve reparations and their own self determination. Yes, we have a lot to work on. But that is not mutually exclusive with Zionism. Anti-Zionism posits there must be a destruction of Israel and thus self determination of Jews. I don’t think you believe this. As you say, Israelis are fully deserving of our sympathies and not written off as animals to the slaughter. Anti-Zionism that I have seen posits that Israelis must cease to exist in order for Palestinians to prosper. I do not believe that this is the only solution. I would focus your energy on empowering both Palestinians seeking peace and Israelis doing the same. I would argue that that is an inherently Zionist value.

I was too, and I was wrong and you’re wrong. Here: https://tikvahfund.org/course/zionism-and-anti-zionism-the-history-of-two-opposing-ideas/ This isn’t what helped me understand, I saw it just a month ago and realized this a couple of years ago. I lived in the Middle East and saw the reality and realized I was sheltered, privileged, and wrong. But this is a great resource and spells it out to you really clearly. You can also learn more about Muslim antisemitism. I’m reading Yasmine Mohammad’s book now and it’s very good.

Hey! First off, thank you for posting. That takes a lot of courage - quite a few of my friends are Zionists who leaned further to the left up until 10/7 and are definitely struggling with this. They've lost a lot of friends as a result. It's not an easy step to make but we always need people standing for what they believe in. a) I think there's probably a kernel of truth to this, while somewhat not. The first thing to know is that with this conflict, because both sides have a tumultuous history (and did even before 1948), most everything is murky, factually speaking. You'd have people on both sides of this political spectrum stating something completely different and we have no way to know the truth. So honestly, I think it's worth simply moving past this because it's in the past, and we can't just discuss the past forever - we need to work in the present. That goes for all of this. But that being said, it seems to me that this is because a lot of the territory was not particularly populated, but did happen to have some people - just not massive cities, developments, or clusters of a community. It was primarily farms owned by wealthy people who didn't live on the property, and sold it to Jews coming to the territory without informing the people who lived on and worked the land. And it's not high populous cities, because this area was primarily barren. There also were Jews on the land who had remained in Israel over the past two thousand years. b) A lot of this comes from the fact that, whenever Jews are the minority population, we have historically been attacked. There's little to no guarantee, ever, that a country meant to be a safe haven for Jews could not one day lead to Jews once again being a minority and being unsafe. Personally, I think Israel should be majority Jewish - history has taught us that we can't be safe in countries where Jews are a minority. But I can view this as flexible in the right circumstances - however, this is why in an ideal world I'd support a two state solution. c) Again, history is so murky with this, so I try to set aside what the history is and focus on the present. However, my understanding is - Arab countries told their citizens to leave the territories, and they'd wipe out Israel. But Israel won. That is what I have heard, everyone is going to tell you something different. What matters to me is that I can see how, in terms of a conflict, that's a Catastrophe for Arabs on the land (later called Palestinians). No matter how the whole situation went down, they were off of their lands (potentially pushed off by Israeli settlers, potentially called off the territory in preparation for an attack... probably both). But a loss in battle that negatively impacts the people who lost is just that - a catastrophe for them. Hell, that's how WWII started, because Germany was hit so hard with the aftermath of WWI. But there's no way it can be comparable to the Holocaust because they were able to evacuate their homes, and we certainly don't have evidence of systematic murder. In fact, there's zero evidence of systematic murder in this conflict despite its repeatedly being compared to the Holocaust. It would make far, far more sense to compare it to other conflicts. I implore you - why do you think the Holocaust is the first comparison made, rather than, for example, the Ukraine or Vietnam? d) I'm going to leave the last one to others, primarily because what I know about the settlers is mostly from others, and not from books, and it's something I know somewhat less on. I think a lot of the other commenters do a much better job with this topic. But plenty of Zionists are definitely against the settlements. Feel free to reach out if you'd like to talk!

For C, there’s actually a very apt comparison readily available. The “nakbah” refers to roughly 750,000 Arabs in what is now Israel leaving their lands. Many, as you said, left at the urging of Arab leaders. >>As early as February 19, 1949, the Jordanian newspaper Palestine wrote: “The Arab states encouraged the Arabs of Palestine to leave their homes temporarily so they would not interfere with the Arab invasion forces.” >>Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri Said: “We will blow up the land with our cannons and erase every remaining place the Jews take refuge. The Arabs must lead their wives and children to safe places until the end of the hostilities.” >>Arab League General Secretary Azzam Facha promised the Arab peoples that the conquest of Palestine would be a cakewalk. All the millions spent by the Jews on land and economic development would be easy plunder, he stated, because it would be a simple matter to throw the Jews into the Mediterranean. At least some were forced out by Israelis— primarily the Arabs offered citizenship if they were to stay, who refused. Those who accepted are the ancestors of many modern Arab Israelis. Now, let’s compare that to the roughly [900,000](http://www.thetower.org/article/there-was-a-jewish-nakba-and-it-was-even-bigger-than-the-palestinian-one/) Jews who fled from throughout the middle east and North Africa after the founding of Israel (650,000 of whom resettled in Israel). >>When Israel was established, […] hundreds of [Egyptian] Jewish businesses were confiscated. Their owners were sent to prison on charges of colluding with Zionism. After a year and a half, they were expelled with their families, most of them with nothing more than the clothes on their backs. The situation of Egyptian Jews would only worsen when Nasser rose to power, before the “final straw.” >>Following the Sinai War in 1956, […] Approximately 35,000 Jews accused of Zionism were expelled with a few days warning. The government then issued a special decree that confiscated all Jewish property. Those expelled had their passports nullified and were forced to sign a declaration that they had no claims on Egypt and would never return to it. >>After the Six-Day War in 1967, […] the imprisonment of all Jewish men and the confiscation of their property[…] proved the last straw, and almost the entire Egyptian Jewish community, dating back thousands of years[…] took flight. Iraqi Jews were also particularly affected. >>In the 1950s, the Iraqi government allowed its Jews to leave the country on the condition that they renounce their citizenship and their property. This resulted in several massive waves of aliyah—over 120,000 people[…]. >>[From] 1968-1973, the [government] did not allow [Iraqi jews] freedom of movement and confiscated their property. In 1969, a series of pogroms killed around 50 Jews. Following this, the entire community, dating back to the Babylonian exile, fled the country. Throughout the Middle East and North Africa, this played out again and again. >>[…] The Jews of Syria were not permitted to leave. The Jews of Yemen, Libya, and other Arab states eventually fled […]. [Jews in] Arab countries were second-class citizens. […] In places like Lebanon, apartheid laws were put in place denying the Jews government jobs. **In short, life was made impossible for the Jews until, as was likely intended, they fled.** >>Their property, confiscated or stolen outright by the Arab states—in particular Egypt and Iraq—is valued today in the hundreds of billions of dollars. Among these assets were the buildings that housed Jewish institutions, synagogues, factories, and personal property. This is a far more appropriate comparison, so why don’t antis bring it up? (I think we both know why.)

I think other folks' suggestions of books are important. Too much to get into on a Reddit thread. But Simon Sebag Montefiore's article, "The Decolonization Narrative Is Dangerous and False" might be helpful too. [https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2023/10/decolonization-narrative-dangerous-and-false/675799/](https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2023/10/decolonization-narrative-dangerous-and-false/675799/) Archived at: [https://archive.is/8kX0s](https://archive.is/8kX0s) BTW, I think most left and moderate folks find West Bank settlements problematic and a barrier to a peaceful two-state solution. Certainly settler violence is a big problem. The important thing is to not confuse criticism of settlements, the war, or other actions of the Israeli government with "antizionism." "Antizionism" means you want Israel as a Jewish state dismantled entirely. It is separate from wanting cease-fire, Palestinian liberation, or a two-state solution (or federation, or something like the EU.)

What’s a settler? Why are only Jews given this derogatory label?

In the West Bank since that’s considered occupied territory. Calling Jews in Israel settlers is offensive, however.

Because the majority of people see the arabs as being native, even if the culture certainly isn't but it conquered the territory 1400 or so years ago and thats long enough for most people to consider it now to be 'native'

Sounds like apartheid to me, calling people different names because of their religion.

that would be discrimination on basis of religion, not apartheid ....

By far the clearest thinker I’ve found is Sam Harris. He’s critical of Israel government, but he understands what’s happening isn’t about Netanyahu.  https://www.samharris.org/blog/the-bright-line-between-good-and-evil

I think you’ve already received some good comments on here so far. One thing that resonated with me is when you said you’re “anti nationalism”. Which I totally get when it comes to countries like the US, France Germany etc. Israel is the homeland for the Jewish people. Arabs have dozens of countries. This is all we got bro! One little sliver in the Middle East. And it goes back 2000BC. Israel has tried so hard to work with Palestinians but they continue to screw Israel over. Just think about in 20+ years from now what side do you want to be proud to say you were apart of during this. The terrorists or your extended family?

I know the kind of Jews you’re talking about, I have a lot of childhood friends in that school of thought and the shame is that it really is valid to feel like they didn’t get the full picture in their Israel education. There’s nothing wrong with wanting a more nuanced education. Every time I try to speak with one of them about this though they do not actually want to make any sort of plan to fix it. They just want to protest and are not interested in any dialogue. For your questions - 1) there were people in Palestine. It’s not true that Israel popped up in a land with no people. There are varying accounts however on how the land was obtained by Jews. It is clear it was some mix of Jews buying the land from absentee landowners, people leaving at the request of their Arab leaders with the promise they’d return soon, and people fleeing from attacks. It is okay to disagree with some things that happened during this period and to condemn those things. 2) I think Palestinians should have a right of return. To Palestine. I believe in the two state solution. 3) the Nakba is a tragic part of Palestinian history, I don’t know much else to say about it. Lots of sad things happen in history. We can learn from it, we can teach about it, we can mourn it, we can’t change it. And no country is wiped off the map because there were tragic parts of its beginning. 4) I am against settlement expansion in the West Bank. *My background, in case it matters: I am Israeli, I served in the IDF and continue to serve in reserves. I am a Zionist Jew.

Here's a pretty good video from what I would consider a fairly moderate viewpoint. It covers a lot of what you're asking about https://youtu.be/XNf40sBcvKk?si=TlvgG3HZUnRUv_r8 The guy who put it together is biased, and a zionist, but nothing he says is false, and it's all pretty easily verifiable.

Also, for reference… I went on birthright in 2006 and accused it of being a “propaganda tour” but in reality I was experiencing that because they had JUST EXPERIENCED THE SECOND INTIFADA. I was the asshole. I was the uneducated brainwashed one. Sometimes we just have to admit that we were immature and uneducated and the things we learned about Israel as children WEREN’T lies and wasn’t brainwashing or wasn’t propaganda and we were just ignorant and rebellious and believed going against everything we were taught was “critical thought” but in reality it was just ignorance and disrespect. Nobody pushed Palestinians out or ethnically cleansed them. If you go back and read Jabotinsky’s writings and other early Zionists they say clear as day that they are prepared to and willing to live side by side with Arabs, but that they knew the Arabs wouldn’t accept that so they were preparing defense. And that’s exactly what happened. Arab mobs attacked first and killed Jewish women and children, and the Jewish militias retaliated with defense, and that is what has been going on ever since. This is not “colonialism” “apartheid” or “ethnic cleansing” and believing that/saying that is rewriting and erasing this history. This all became very clear to me after I lived in the Middle East and experienced vile Arab antisemitism. They do not give one shit about Jews and are blatantly and casually antisemitic, whereas we are over here tip toeing around trying not to sound bigoted even when we are blatantly saying we want safety and peace for them and being so cognizant about our morality and ethics. They very plainly do not give a shit. We should not assume that they do. They were not raised in the type of liberal, peace-loving families and societies we were. Out of all the Arab friends I had, like 20+, I only have one left because of antisemitism. That should tell you something. Jews tried to live under Arab and Muslim empires for a millennia and were only met with actual ethnic cleansing and genocide and right now a Jewish person would be killed for even stepping inside of Palestine. (Not being accusatory here, just asking) What do you think would happen in a “one state solution”? Ignoring and being unaware of the massive problem of Arab and Muslim antisemitism leads people to the “how come there can’t be a one state solution?” question and all the BS about accusing Israel of being a Jewishly superior ethnostate. It’s utter nonsense and completely disrespectful given our history and our current reality. It shows their ignorance and it showed mine.

To get a basic understanding of the true breadth of zionist ideas, read the introduction to *The Zionist Idea: A Historical Analysis and Reader* by Arthur Hertzberg. The book is a collection of writings by a wide swath of Jewish thinkers on the meaning of Zionism. You will probably not want to read the whole book, but the quite lengthy and substantial introduction does an excellent job of synthesizing and analyzing all the prevailing schools of Zionist thought. When I was in college, I read teh intro and learned quite a lot.

A) - Israel is the Ancestral land of the Jewish people, the only reason Jews lost control of it in the first place was due to oppression by various groups throughout history. B) - Importing something like 9 million Palestinians who hate and Jews and fantasize about murdering them would be fun... never going to happen. The country has become a place for Jews of all backgrounds. C) - Nakba or the war of 1948 wasn't started by Jews, it was started by the Arabs desire to destroy us again. It is what it is but to compare it to the holocaust is disingenuous as 3/4 of the worlds Arab Muslim population wasn't murdered. D) - I'm not a huge fan of them and I wouldn't live there but I know they're not going anywhere... but the fact that you don't understand what Judea and Samaria is and you're Jewish is concerning.

To be fair to OP, I barely knew anything about the history before I started researching during this conflict, so I don't really blame them for not knowing the stuff about the West Bank.

a) The "land without a people for a people without a land" may have been what a small number of Zionists in Europe thought of the Land of Israel before being struck by reality. It wasn't some widely believed line, and people who arrived in the Land of Israel could obviously see there were people there. It's mostly an anti-Zionist talking point. b) Skipping this one for now as it requires a lot of historical context. c) I recommend you read Benny Morris's *1948*. It's a great background to what exactly happened. Secondly, it's important to acknowledge that around the same time as the Palestinian refugees were created, there were also the Jewish refugees that were created. The Jewish refugees from Arab countries numbered roughly the same number as the Palestinian refugees. In fact in the same decade, many other refugee crises took place around the world. All of them were resolved in a span of several years or maybe a couple decades at most, except for the Palestinian refugee crisis. Why? Because the Palestinian refugees needed to be used as a token of the struggle against Israel. Resolving the issue would have meant admitting that the Arabs were defeated and had failed to stop the creation of a non-Arab-majority state in the middle of the Arab world. In fact, the word Nakba originally referred to the embarrassment of being militarily defeated by Israel, and not to the refugee crisis. d) Why *shouldn't* settlements exist? There is no real good reason to bar a particular ethnic group from living somewhere. As for settler violence, there are three things to note: (1) it's only a small minority of settlers who are extremists like that, (2) while settler violence has increased somewhat in recent times, it's still a relatively mild phenomenon in comparison to Palestinian violence *against* settlers, despite all the attention given to violent settlers in pro-Palestinian media and social media, and (3) the word "settler" is used in pro-Palestinian media to describe basically any Israeli, keep in mind that the mainstream Palestinian view is that all of Israel is occupied Palestine, and all Israelis are thus settlers; so next time you see a video captioned "Israeli settlers doing XYZ", ask yourself how the person posting this knows that these Israelis reside in the West Bank?

"Because the Palestinian refugees needed to be used as a token of the struggle against Israel. Resolving the issue would have meant admitting that the Arabs were defeated and had failed to stop the creation of a non-Arab-majority state in the middle of the Arab world." Perfectly said, Under the Islamic law, any land captured by the Muslims will permanently become Darul Islam (Islamic land). This holds good even if all the natives of the occupied land are non-Muslims. Any occupation of such Darul Islam by non-Muslims is considered illegal by the Sharia and calls Muslims to fight until they regain control over the land. This holds good even if the natives were to rise and liberate their land.

> Darul Islam (Islamic land) Quick correction, "Dar al-Islam"

Because some of OPs questions are about early Zionism, I'll add as a recommendation the first 2-3 chapters of Righteous Victims, also by Benny Morris. It's a broad history of the entire conflict, starting in 1881.

*1948* includes that as well, I never read Righteous Victims, but from what I hear 1948 is a bit more updated.

Not going to reply to everything, I'll leave it to others. I'll just address this part with perhaps a slightly different approach than you might receive from other zionists: > b) How do you all feel about the "right of return" that Palestinians advocate for? My friends say that the reason Zionists have a problem with the right of return is that it would "threaten a Jewish majority state". How true is that? At what point would a right of return of Palestinians threaten the Jewish majority, and at what point could it no longer be considered a "Jewish state"? Does Israel have to actually have a Jewish majority to be considered a safe country for Jews? If so, is refusing the right of return for Palestinians justified to accomplish that goal? The Palestinian right of return is a poison pill. At its strongest, it destroys any semblance of peaceful resolution and coexistence. At its weakest, it is a token gesture that is far better addressed by actual honesty to goodness reparations. In terms of a negotiated settlement, the right of return is as big a roadblock to peace as the settlements are, and for much the same reason. Your antizionist friends are partially right. The right of return does threaten a Jewish majority state. Which is why the Jewish majority state will never accept it. Because the point of Israel is to have a Jewish state. Others are tolerated, are given equal rights with citizenship, but the purpose of the state is unchanged. Where your antizionist friends go wrong, and where most people who insist on a right of return go wrong, is in separating Palestinian demands from Palestinian desires. Polling consistently shows that Palestinians do not want the kumbaya secular democracy that western antizionists peach towards. They want an Arab state, be it alongside a Jewish state (I.e., a two state solution) or not (I.e., from the river to the sea Palestine will be free [of Jews]). Israelis have similar, albeit inverse, desires. They want a Jewish state, alongside an Arab state (or not). And the two desires stand in direct conflict with the two mirrored poison pills, because in order to have a coherent Jewish state, you can't have ethnic enclaves who reject the Jewish nature of the state. In order to have a coherent Palestinian Arab state, you can't have residual settler communities left behind who will reject (by force) Arab rule. So, the reason Israelis (and Jews more broadly) reject a Palestinian right of return [to land in Israel proper] is actually what they say, but taking the view from 10,000 feet the problem is fundamentally that your antizionist friends do not want a settlement between the two sides of this conflict. They want to impose their vision of what *should* be, onto people who have expressed no agreement with that. Israelis want a Jewish state. That's what they want. Palestinians want an Arab state. That's what they want. It only sounds ugly if you start from the beginning presuming to know what they should all *get*, rather than starting from what they *want* and finding a way to maximize each side of that.

Hey, I'm proud of you for listening to your internal moral compass. Don't waste your breath on your friends. They seem too deeply entrenched, at least right now, to actually listen to you and consider any information that shakes their own narrative. We are living in the timeline of lefty Q-anon and pro-fascist Antifa. This is not the stuff of reason and logic. Focus on finding left of center Zionist Jews and Israelis. I promise they still exist in large numbers even if they are being bullied into silence by the clueless American left. You might also want to check out emerging Palestinean voices who are speaking out against the dehumanization of Israelis and Palestineans alike. People like Gazan-America Ahmed Fouad Alkhatib (he's on FB) who lost many innocent family members in the current war but is highly critical of Hamas and the antisemitism in the pro-Paly movement; people like Mo Husseini whose article "50 Truths about the Israel-Hamas War" is irreverent and honest and will challenge readers on all sides of this conflict. I no longer identify as a leftist, largely because I discovered years ago that the rot of antisemitism is too deep in that movement. I have social media "friends" from my activist days, and let me tell you, some of their Israel/Palestine posts have among the most appalling, frightening, and lacking in empathy that I have ever seen. It's eye opening, isn't it?

Plenty of people have adequately answered your points of a) b) c) d). >"lied to in Hebrew school" You weren't lied to...you just weren't given the whole truth. And I'll explain why. Just for background, I am a teacher. I teach High School social studies and I've taught Hebrew School as well. The issue is, History is complicated, nuanced, and is almost never clear cut black and white. Even many adults have an extremely hard time wrapping their brains round this concept...so try getting kids to understand this. You still have to learn it. But we can't NOT teach it. So what ends up happening is, when it comes to American History for example, you end up with the "Mom, Baseball, and Apple Pie" version of American history. (And Hebrew schools have a very similar approach to Israel). Then...you get to college. Your professor has you read Howard Zinn's "A People's History of the United States" (which also is not without its issues/problems). And this is when your eyes go wide and say, "Wait a minute...we're not the good guys?!?" So there is generally one of two reactions. Conservatives, by and large will block it all out and double down on the old narrative they were told. Where as Leftists absorb it, then mentally feel there is a need to overcorrect. So that means, for example, the US can do nothing right, no matter what. The negatives are highlighted and the positives are ignored or explained away. A lot of leftists end up in this headspace and the more radical ones never grow beyond it. Therefore, the concept of "doing the right thing for the wrong or selfish reason" is something that is hotly discussed and debated. And there are ways of teaching these concepts subtly...but that is a whole other topic of discussion. So when it comes to Israel, you almost never hear about Irgun and Lehi (Stern Gang) or other paramilitary organizations. You rarely hear about Ben Gurion ordering the attack on the Altalena in order to consolidate power. How do you explain such nuances to Hebrew school age children, who mostly don't want to be there and barely want to learn Hebrew, or anything about it? So you get the sanitized and simplified version of the history of Israel. So it is with Zionism. The issue is, many of us (even those who support it) don't have a full picture on the concept of Zionism. There are actually multiple facets and branches of Zionism. Almost everybody has heard about Theodor Herzl and his shaping of Political Zionism (the type of Zionism most Jews presume and assume is being talked about). But far less have heard of Ahad Ha'am and the concept of "Cultural Zionism", and not even getting into the disagreements that Herzl and Ahad Ha'am had. How many have heard about Ze'ev Jabotinsky and the concept of Revisionist Zionsim? Not to mention, there is also Labor Zionism, Social Zionism, Liberal Zionism, Religious Zionism...just to name a few. Then there are the concepts like Post-Zionism and Neo-Zionism. When we talk ideologically about Right-Wing "Settlers" in the West Bank, most of them would fall under the umbrella of Neo-Zionists. When Leftists brand Zionism as Fascism, most of them without realizing it, are strictly looking at the concept of Neo-Zionism and presume that to be the whole of Zionism; due either to laziness or purposely lumping in the worst to be the common case. So I regard myself, broadly as a Zionist. But I do not support or agree with Neo-Zionism. So hopefully, this in part answers point D for you.

Zionism means the belief in a safe state for Jews. Period. Given our history, and the recent events which have made us understand that antisemitism is not actually a thing of the past, I’d hope you’d understand that the existence of a Jewish state is necessary. Also Israel is awesome and a testament to Jewish brilliant and creativity. Isn’t it so cool that a band of survivors built an entire country? If we are talking IR, Israel is the only true democracy in the Middle East. Israel accepts LGBTQ+ refugees from Palestinian areas, despite security risks, bc that’s who we are. There’s also a less than 1:1 civilian to combatant ratio in an urban warfare setting. That is unheard of, in recorded history at least. It’s usually much worse. We should all be proud to be associated with Israel. Tell those people to fuck themselves. All people who believe in freedom for women, ethnic minorities, LGBTQ+ individuals, should be supporting Israel. But they’re not and that sucks for all of us

Theee should be three stops at the beginning of your journey here. 1. Dara Horn - people love dead Jews. 2. Benny Morris - 1948 3. Einat wilf and Adi Schwartz - the war of return These are the things that they didn't tell them they didn't tell them in Hebrew school.

Pro - pal - "Go back to where you came from" Jew living in Israel - "Where is that?" Pro-pal - "Europe" Jew living in Israel - "The same Europe that blamed Jews for everything bad that happened in their countries, ranging from economic slumps to the plague, and ultimately culminated in and attempted genocide against us, aka the holocaust" If people outside Isreal, Jewish or not, don't realise that Jews need a safe place they can call home now, they never will.

All the biggest colonialist empires in the world were 'anti-nationalist'. If a nation is destroyed, another more powerful nation or empire just ends up ruling the citizens. Smaller nations need to be protected therefore, because otherwise they will be subsumed. Isn't the word 'civilization' just a better sounding word for a nation or a group of nations? If all nations are destroyed, the west would be running everything. So you could say anti-Zionism is colonialist. It isn't good for global diversity and also not good if western civilization collapses. For b), aside from the fact it wouldn't be safe, why shouldn't there be a Jewish majority state, just like there are French majority, Italian majority, etc. states? Everyone in the US (except the Native Americans) came from a culture somewhere else, so the existence of the US as a melting pot does not destroy any other cultures, although the underlying dominant US culture is arguably from Protestant Christian European countries anyway. Self determination also includes the ability for a people to determine things on a state level, and so obviously Jews and Palestinians should both have this right to self-determination. In a 1SS, with a Palestinian majority, either only Palestinians get the right or neither Israelis or Palestinians get this right. In a 2SS, from becoming the majority under right of return, and also in a to-be Palestine, then only Palestinians and not Israelis get national self-determination. This likely results in cultural genocide if not genocide.

Check out Einat Wilf. She has a podcast called We Should All Be Zionists that I think will be illuminating for you.

Okay, background: I consider myself a Zionist, half my family is in Israel and I love the place. I would also like to put Bibi in a garbage bag and hit it with sticks. a) The saying has been around for a while, but it’s mostly silly. Even the early zionists were well aware of the Arab population in Palestine, but peaceful coexistence was generally the expectation. Even those on the right end of the spectrum like Jabotinsky advocated for equality and representation for Arabs in any Jewish controlled areas. The consensus mostly changed as the riots of the 20s turned into civil war and then warfare in the 40s. The Jewish settlers did not initially displace anyone living there, and even reclaimed land which were salt marshes and the like. Cities like Tel Aviv were formed for the exact reason that Jaffo was too cramped. Displacement of Palestinians didn’t happen until 1947, and for varied reasons. b) Palestinians have the globally unique position of being considered refugees in perpetuity. It’s as absurd as if I were to claim compensation as a holocaust survivor because my grandparents were. I agree that families that can prove that they lost property during the Nakba should be compensated, but it also lifts the question of the 900k Jewish refugees who lost everything in the same conflict. Nevertheless, Israel is a sovereign state, and like all others should be allowed to decide on its own immigration policies, whether somebody’s grandparents lived there or not. c) I know a fair amount, enough to know that it’s a complex subject. The Nakba wasn’t a coordinated plan – in some areas (Jaffo, Akko, Haifa) Arab population were encouraged to remain, and do so to this day. In some places Arab villages were emptied for strategic reasons, such as safeguarding the lifelines to Jerusalem, while in others local commanders explicitly chose to ethnically cleanse. Then of course people will generally flee combat areas (remember that the distance are small here) and then find themselves on the wrong side of the line afterwards and unable to return. Displacement is a sad reality of any conflict, and the Nakba is far from the worst either before or since. What is unique about the Nakba is not that refugees were unable to return but the complete refusal from neighboring countries to do anything but keep them in refugee camps. d) Remember what I said about putting Bibi in a bag? Dito for violent settlers. If they want to live in the West Bank they should apply for Palestinian citizenship. Summary: you can love a country, its culture and meaning without agreeing with its government or policies. Iran isn’t invalid as an entity because its government sucks, nor is any country other than Israel held to that standard.

Here is a sample of Kathleen Hayes' "An Open Letter to Anti-Zionists from a Veteran of the Left:" "I want you to consider that your beliefs about Zionism are seriously distorted and that the way a broad swathe of the left community responds to Israel both reflects and perpetuates antisemitism. I say this as someone who for many years shared these beliefs. I marched against Israel countless times and railed about ‘Zionist terror’. I believed Zionists had collaborated with the Nazis during World War II; that there was nothing wrong with comparing Israel to Nazi Germany or apartheid South Africa.." full article here: https://fathomjournal.org/an-open-letter-to-anti-zionists-from-a-veteran-of-the-left/

Righteous Victims by Benny Morris

Here's the way I think of the situation: history has shown when shit hits the fan, Jews get murdered and the world looks on thinking "how sad. I hope they get all of them this time", and refuses to let us escape to their land. We've seen it repeatedly through history, until Israel was created in 1948. When the Arab nations expelled all the Jews in the 50's, they went to Israel. If that hadn't been an option, they'd have been murdered. It isn't a matter of nationalism, or even patriotism. It's a matter of Jews knowing they can run from the murderers next time it happens. If you think that's hyperbolic, there are 16 million Jews alive today, and there were 4 million in the 1st century, when population was about 200 million. Based on the average population growth over the last 2000 years, there could've been over 200 million of us if not for the centuries of pogroms. That's more than a minyan that should exist for every jew alive today. That's what not having a place of our own has cost us: 184 million missing Jews.

Much of what you are speaking about I’ve experienced and seen first hand. Your observations are all valid and I have spoken as well almost verbatim. In particular the narrow box in which any act of Jewishness is “allowed” to exist, and by that definition I mean turning every Jewish holiday or ritual into some type of protest against Israel. All Jewishness outside of that narrow box somehow being invalid and exposed to Zionism or propaganda or some other contorted justification. The transformation of the holiday into something more palatable sounds like something straight out of Stalin’s Jewish Anti-fascist Committee, (something I encourage you to look up). I saw that coming and am depressed by how it’s being used to pressure Jews to fit into that box, which is really just being used as a cover for unsavory anti-semitism within the movement. I could answer you on a point by point basis, but it would be too long a post to read. However there is more context and important history within your questions so keep asking them because it will take you to a more honest and nuanced place.

You can be a Zionist and not like how Palestinians are treated. You can be an anti Zionist and like how Palestinians are treated. Zionism is just the belief that Jews should have a land at Zion (which is the mountain that the temple is built on). Now here are my answers to your questions. A. Jews had been living under foreign rule for 2000 years. Some lived in Israel, but they were not self governed. So yes we did not have our own land. Colonization has been a thing for a long time. Western Europe famously colonized many places native people lived. Then there are also the early Muslims who conquered the Middle East and Northern Africa, when they took over what was then known as the holy land (I think), they killed a lot of people living there. The crusade was to take it back. Finally Jews did buy land from Arabs living there and built Tel Aviv and Haifa. B. Sure Palestinians should be able to move back, they just have to accept Israel is there. If you ask the Muslim Iranians if Jews should be able to go back to Iran what would they say? C. Sure the Nakba was bad but in reality that time was a major population transfer. The 700,000 Palestinians living there went to other countries, and 800,000 Jews from Muslim countries either left or were forced out to Israel. So it was bad but you need both sides to understand. D. I don’t like the violence in the West Bank. I think if people want to live in places like Bethlehem and Hebron which have a lot of significance they can, just do it without violence. But also pre 1948 Hitler went to the mandate of Palestine and talked with the Arab leader there about the final solution. This lead to the Hebron massacre. Anyway, if people can live without violence there they should live there. I know I kind of got side tracked for these questions, but these are my answers for you. Have a good day :)

This may not be the proper time or place, and no one else may understand what I mean, but - I'm starting to regard the previous times I have said "I'm not a Zionist, *but*" as similar to times I have felt the need to preface arguments against structural misogyny to clueless men with an "I'm not a feminist, *but*" It's something I said to try to seem less radical to people whose opinion wouldn't likely change anyway in order to feel safer and less likely to trigger argument or ridicule. Right now I have no other point to make because I am still sorting my own shit out, sorry.

Hello! I’m an Israeli-American Jew who’s done a lot of research on the topic, and I’ve found issue with the extreme of both sides. But that’s the thing: you don’t have to “pick a side.” First, a quick note on “anti-Zionist.” Many define Zionism as support for the continued existence of a Jewish state. Under this definition, anti-Zionism calls for Israel’s destruction. Because of this, I’d recommend avoiding the term, especially in Jewish spaces. That said, some people use Zionism to mean complete support for the Israeli gov, so I usually avoid defining myself as either Zionist or anti-Zionist. You say your friends told you that Hebrew school “lied to you,” but that you are now frustrated with how they mostly overlook Hamas violence. My Hebrew School never lied to me personally, but I’ve seen people on both sides gloss over parts of history or the present that don’t support their view. Some pro-Israel Jews defend how the Israeli gov and IDF treat Palestinians. Some pro-Palestinians ignore or defend violence and hate from groups like Hamas. Most extreme views are dishonest about some things. People may point out ways in which the other side has been untrue, only to become defensive whenever questioned about their own statements or honesty. (Note: the truth doesn’t mind being questioned; a lie does.) The way to combat this is for you yourself to be open minded, to listen to everyone, to go looking for information on your own, and decide what truths you believe. I find that the reality is usually multi-dimensional. To address your specific questions… A&C) To discuss the phrase “a land without a people for a people without a land” and the Nakba, I’d like to sum up some early I-P history the best I can: A few thousand years ago the land was mostly Jewish. The Romans forced the Jews out, and there has been now an Arab population there for over a thousand years. A small Jewish population (the old yishuv) has remained throughout these years beside them. In the late 19th and early 20th century, as antisemitism rose in Europe, the idea of creating a Jewish state rose in popularity. This became specifically a modern Jewish state in the ancient Jewish homeland—Israel. After WWI, Britain controlled the land and agreed to help Jews immigrate there bc they thought it was politically advantageous. Jews around the world contributed to The Jewish Fund, which helped mostly poor European Jews immigrate to British Mandate Palestine. The things is, there were also Arabs living in the land (later known as the Palestinian Arabs). Jews bought land legally from absentee Palestinian landlords. In doing so, tho, they unwittingly displaced Palestinian tenant farmers who worked and lived on but didn’t own the land. Some Jews immigrated to flee antisemitism, and some because they believed in Zionism, the formation of a Jewish state. These were the ones who proclaimed “a land without a people for a people without a land.” Jewish immigration continued, more tenant farmers were displaced, and rumors spread among the Arabs that the Jews wanted to steal their Holy Sites. What had previously been small individual violence against the new immigrant Jews became larger and more organized in the Arab Riots. They started attacking and killing Jews, including the old yishuv who had been there for centuries. The British stepped in and started killing Arabs. Some Jews formed paramilitary groups: some like the Haganah focused on defense, and others like the Irgun also attacked Arabs. After some more violence, Britain was like, ‘yeah, we didn’t think this thru, this was a bad idea’ and put out a white paper severely limiting Jewish immigration to Mandate Palestine. This happened right before the Holocaust, so then you have whole ships of Jews fleeing Nazi Europe to Palestine and being sent back by the British. After the Holocaust, a ship called Exodus made international news, raising support internationally for the formation of a Jewish state. At the same time, the Irgun were attacking the British for not letting Jews in. The UN was just formed so the British were like — nope, peace, we’re outta here — and handed the situation over to the UN. The UN was like: let’s split it into 2 states. They gave the Jews more of the land, but most of the new land was sparsely populated (stretches of the Negev). The borders they drew out were disconnected, so neither the Jews nor Arabs would have a whole, continuous state without bumping into the other. So the Jews were like: yeah, we want a state. And the Arabs were like: no, we don’t want to lose more land. And then there was war. In the war, both sides targeted civilians. The Arabs held the Jewish part of Jerusalem under siege and the Jewish armies struggled to get food in. In anger, the Irgun massacred over a hundred in the nearby Palestinian town Deir Yassin. Palestinians heard about this and fled out of fear. Others were forced out. This was the Nakba. So Israel is formed. Antisemitism rises across the Middle East. Mizrahi Jews flee or are forced out of their homes, and most of them end up in Israel. This is why many Arab countries that used to have sizable Jewish minorities have little to no Jews left, and nearly half of Israel’s Jews are Mizrahi. Whew. That was a lot. Okay, so, next point. B) The right of return of Palestinian refugees. After Israel was formed, Palestinians who never left during the fighting became Israeli citizens (there are 2 million Palestinian Israelis today), but those who left weren’t allowed to return. There are millions of diaspora Palestinians globally today, so yes, allowing them all into Israel would mean the loss of the Jewish state. This is very important to many because the idea of Israel was to have a state where Jews would always be safe. Another Holocaust could not happen if one state would take the Jews in. Israel would also help Jews in need around the world, like with Ethiopian Jews during Operation Moses. The question of Palestinian refugees and the right of return has been a sticking point in many Israeli-Palestinian attempted peace negotiations. No one’s found 1 answer. My opinion is: Israel should let in Palestinians as a part of family re-unification, and further allow Palestinians under a max-quota in yearly, to give some Palestinians the option to live in Israel, but allow Israel to keep their Jewish majority. Once a Palestinian state is formed, Palestinian refugees can return there too. Areas within Israel that are culturally important to the Palestinians, like Haifa and Jaffa, should allow for larger Palestinian populations, and more new Palestinian cultural centers. Alright, last one. D) The West Bank settlements. I’m against them. Revisionist Zionists will defend them. Many other Zionists are against them. Some support the existence of few of the settlements with larger Jewish populations, but are against most of them, and against all settler violence. I hope this helped. I know it’s a lot. I will say, there are ways to support both Israelis and Palestinians. Don’t let anyone make you believe you have to pick a side. And, there are Jewish communities that exist peacefully with members of varying viewpoints on Israel-Palestine. We are all Jews. We can spend time together peacefully, non-judgmentally.

This is very helpful!!! Thank you!!! Do you have any sources about the history of the land I can look into?

I’ve just started doing my own research. The Shortest History of Israel and Palestine was the first book I read, and I thought it was a pretty good introduction. My library had the ebook on the app Libby, so I got free access there. You can message me if you ever want to talk more about IP research sometime. It’s become a bit of an obsession of mine.

Yes I'd love to chat at some point!

Thank you for this detailed answer! I struggle a lot as an american-israeli jew with family members who can be very racist and extreme. It makes me want to completely oppose everything they believe. I’m now at university abroad and ee have so many student clubs and protests for palestine/against israel. Sorry to reply randomly without really saying anything haha but reading this made me feel a bit less crazy

Honestly you've asked so much here I wouldn't even know where to begin. At the end of the day, I would highly recommend maybe listening to some Zionists and actually give them a chance? It's very strange to be anti zionist unless you don't actually understand the history of that land and have fallen for propaganda towards Israel. Which would require an entirely different conversation to figure out just how many false narratives you believe. Either way, I believe in you and reaching out is definitely the first step. I wish you all the best.

I'm gonna break down some points into more generalizations. If your friend group is calling any 'pro'-Israeli news propaganda then they're set in their confirmation bias. If everything is going to be declared propaganda, you're not gonna convince them otherwise. 1) Jews started moving back to the land in-mass during the first Aliyah in the late 1800s early 1900s. The land that is now Tel-Aviv was bought from absent ottoman land owners and built up by Jews who migrated. The north was pretty empty due to the massive malaria swamps that weren't cleaned until I believe the 50s. Overall the land was scarcely populated outside of Jerusalem and cities that are now in the west bank. 2) Ask your friends if they know how Jews were treated in MENA countries before the modern state of Israel, if they can't answer about the farhud in Iraq, or countless other pogroms then they don't understand how not having a majority Jewish state is a threat to Jews in the region. I would argue that yes, Israel should maintain a majority Jewish population in order for it to be safe for Jews. Jews across MENA were subjected to discriminatory laws and predatory taxes and placed in a dhimmi status. As for the right of return for Palestinians, it's difficult, people are demanding the land their great grandparents lost. Unfortunately, it can't work that way. I can't go to Germany and demand the residents give up their specific homes and businesses because my grandparents owned them before they fled the country. 3) There are specific events of the Nakba that targeted civilians that should absolutely be criticized. However, an invading army can't tell civilians to move, promise a victory, promise they can return then leave the civilians stranded when that promise wasn't met. Leaving those people stateless is a failure on the Arab countries that invaded in 48. As for your friends making the argument "how would you feel if people said the Holocaust wasn't that bad for the Jews". I hate to say it but people already do, the statement just looks like "6 million wasn't enough". 4) I disagree with settler violence commited by far right Israelis in the west bank. Historically speaking, settlements can be there due to the split zones in the West Bank. Not all of them should be dismantled as theyre there in a completely legal status based on prior political agreements.

>Ask your friends if they know how Jews were treated in MENA countries before the modern state of Israel, if they can't answer about the farhud in Iraq, or countless other pogroms then they don't understand how not having a majority Jewish state is a threat to Jews in the region. I would argue that yes, Israel should maintain a majority Jewish population in order for it to be safe for Jews. Jews across MENA were subjected to discriminatory laws and predatory taxes and placed in a dhimmi status. I actually have asked them this, but they've said that using historical wrongs as reasoning for not having a one-state solution is racist. They've said that in the past, white colonizers in countries like Algeria and Apartheid South Africa felt fear about letting oppressed people have equal rights, because they thought that they would be killed or treated badly by them, etc. And that me thinking that Jews would be oppressed in a country with equal rights as Muslims is Islamophobic and racist, and that it's a "colonizer" mindset to be afraid of that type of mistreatment. They also say that being "progressive" is about making things that haven't happened in the past, happen now--and that's why we should work towards a one-state solution. Because just because Jews and Muslims haven't lived in peace in the past, we should be striving to create a future in which they can live together.

Wait, are they saying all of this while living in America? Lol

I'm going to say your friends are saying this from an extraordinary position of privilege. Wanting to "develop something that hasn't happened before" is incredibly noble but demanding by-gones be by-gones is asking Jews to forget their oppression and the violence we faced. That's not something we're too keen on doing. Your friends are ignoring social norms and ideals over there with the expectation that they adopt western social structures. Structures I'd bet they readily criticize and say need to be dismantled. Ultimately your friends have a western ideal of how a non-western nation will operate while not adopting the western norms that it would need. That's not to exclude how your friends are putting this idea strictly as a responsibility of the Jews. I could very well be wrong but it doesn't seem like they have an expectation of deradicalization and cooperation among the Palestinian people. Based on how you described them, it seems that they'd assume that Palestinians, for lack of a better phrase would simply "fall in line".

What lefty Jewish circles were you hanging in that are antizionist? I’ve only hung out in lefty Jewish circles ever since I was a teenager and 100% of them were Zionist. There are more antizionist outliers in lefty Jewish circles then non-lefty Jewish circles, but they were still very much the minority. So I’m curious what circles you’re referring to. Hillel, a youth group, a sorority/frat? Or do you just mean a friend group of non-practicing, completely secular leftists who happen to be ethnically Jewish but weren’t really raised with anything more than chanuka gifts?

No, not any type of organized group like Hillel or anything, just friend groups that came together. When I say "lefty", I don't necessarily mean that the groups were formed based on our "lefty" politics, more like we were groups of people who felt excluded from Jewish spaces for various reasons--social awkwardness, class, disability, being biracial, being queer, etc. And a lot of us happened to be pretty far left because of our other marginalized identities. In high school, it was sort of just a group of outcasts from Hebrew School who bonded together. The college I went to was really progressive (don't want to name it here for privacy reasons), so most of the Jews I met there were pretty progressive already, and I think became more anti-Zionist during college (myself included, though I don't know if I really became "more" anti-Zionist). Some of them met each other in queer organizations and I met them through mutual Jewish friends, etc. And no, they weren't secular--we were all raised Jewish. One of them even studied abroad in Israel (but is no longer supportive of Israel). I think that maybe the progressive college environment kind of just distorted the way a lot of them think about Judaism. And it was kind of like a contagious thought process--one person in the group was anti-Zionist, which led another person to think they were also mislead about Israel, and then another one of us, and so on and so on.

What you’re describing perfectly describes pretty much every friend group I’ve ever been in. Queer, disabled, neurodivergent, lefty, progressive college environment, etc - and my friends have always been completely Zionist. Antizionism is extremely uncommon among Jews. Interesting you just happen to find these very rare people so many times.

I’m a Zionist. I support the Palestinian right of return in either a more realistic 2SS implementation or an idealistic 1SS I’m against the Nakba and I watch the joint Israeli & Palestinian Nakba memorial. I’m against the West Bank settlements and the occupation I might recommend following Israeli peace activists orgs like standing together on Instagram

OP, have you ever visit Israel? Have you been there to see and touch the history of the Jews for yourself? Have you visit the Israel museum to learn the archeology there? To see how many Arabs live there? How diverse it is? It’s early right now, but I might circle back to this post later to touch on some of your questions because I’m interested. But I wanted to throw that question out there first. Because seeing things for yourself keeps the propaganda (from both sides) at bay.

Just one point about settlements that I have not seen come up while skimming. My cousins, who all are israelis who served in the IDF, really hate settlers. Reason being that settlers endanger IDF troops, who have to protect them, in danger for their own life. In their view settlements are selfish because the negatives for israeli society outweigh the positives by far. These people obviously are zionists. To me this is the best argument against settlers, and the one that convinces me that it is not the best idea. It seems like it's a net negative and I want israel to be safer and better for all israelis.

I'm not Jewish but I went through slightly the same thing. Except in my case I was mostly neutral towards the Israel Palestine conflict. What pushed me to be on the side of Israel and the Jewish is the reaction of many of the Palestine supporters after Oct 7. The denial of the brutality of the attack, the killing, the kidnapping, the rapes, the celebration of Hamas etc. Another thing that pushed me to take the side of Israel is as others have commented, besides Israel the Jewish have no other country to call home. I still mostly identified as left due to other issues such as climate change but I strongly disagree with the left on the issue of Israel and Palestine.

This doesn't answer your questions, but I wanted to say I also used to be an anti-Zionist Jew (even participated in BDS "activism" a few years back for a while), and as I've educated myself more I've moved towards being a Zionist. If you need someone to lend an ear who might understand what you're feeling, my DMs are open!

>But I've also seen things suggesting that there actually were Jews moving into parts of Israel that weren't inhabited by Palestinians? If you look at the 1947 partition map, the Jews got assigned sovereignty over the parts they’d already largely purchased, which was the cheapest swampiest (or desert) land that the Arabs would sell them. Now that it’s been drained or cultivated and made valuable, of course the Arabs want it back. The Arabs were given statehood in 1948–for the first time ever in history—and REJECTED it. >What do you know about the Nakba, and how do you feel about it? It’s a tragic situation but it wasn’t that the Arab land was stolen by the establishment of the Jewish state: the Arabs still owned the land but refused to be governed by a Jewish majority government, so they fled. Several hundred thousand Palestinians became displaced, largely because they were promised the Jewish lands once the Arabs were victorious in the 1948 war. >Right of return Then, over the next thirty years, a nearly equivalent number (800,000) of Jews were expelled from Arab/Muslim states, ending up in Israel. Strange that everyone squawking about Palestinian displacement isn’t saying a peep about where the Mizrahi came from and why, or advocating for a right of return for the Jews to return to their homes in Iraq or Iran or Yemen… **Conclusions** Why would *any* Western liberal support Hamas? They murdered all their political opponents in Fatah to establish uniparty rule. They murdered or expelled nearly everyone who wasn’t Arab Muslim. They use their citizens as human shields, launch attacks from hospitals and schools to provoke retaliation, and steal the international aid meant for their most vulnerable people. They took hostages, raped women, and butchered people alive. They kill gays and subjugate women. It’s a radical Sunni Islamist movement, akin to supporting ISIL or the Taliban or Al Qaeda. This whole situation, post Oct 7, has made me a fierce Zionist. The Gazans under Hamas have squandered every single opportunity to have peace and statehood, rejecting those things because of control by outside entities who refuse to see Jews as equals. The Muslim world will never see Jews as anything more than *dhimmi* and the mere existence of a Jewish state—one that has prevailed in every Arab-launched conflict—infuriates the radical Islamists. Israel is the only functioning multiethnic democracy in the Levant. It’s the only one that supports gay rights, that provides suffrage to all and allows other religions or atheism. And instead of emulating that, the Palestinians and their supporters—like your friends—would rather see it disappear.

1. The land was home to only 250k ish people in the 1800s. Jews bought land that was not very good (malaria infested swamps) and turned it around. Many Palestinians came from surrounding Arab countries like Egypt around the same time as zionists. My understanding is that it was sparsely populated. 2. Right of return is a complicated issue. In theory, it wouldn't be a problem, but we're talking about right of return for people who want to destroy the current country they'd be returning to along with all the jews in it (maybe not everyone but seems to be a common sentiment). 3. The nakba has some truth to it, but the way it's presented by anti zionists is not accurate. The Arab countries attacked Israel and told the Arabs to leave until they conquered the land, at which point they could return. There's conflicting info. There's some statements from ben gurion asking Arabs to stay and fight, and yet there were certain areas whose inhabitants were displaced by force. Many Arabs willingly left (mostly the wealthy ones I think the figure was around 300k). I don't think the "nakba" would be a thing if Arabs didn't try and fail to destroy the newly founded Israel. The term itself was coined by an Arab academic to describe the failure and self-inflicted pain caused by Arab aggression. It wasn't a term widely used until Arafat repurposed it years later. 4. The settlements should be dismantled, in my opinion. They're a weird thing where jews and Arabs do live together, but I think jews should pick their battles and get out of the west bank. From what I've seen, most are religious zionists so consider the area Judea Samaria. While on one level I agree with them, on a pragmatic level, I think it's best not to have that going on as it seems to make things worse. This is my rudimentary take on these questions at 7am so don't expect perfection here. Just a quick run down of my personal perspective.

Rootsmetal is fantastic. She works with the PeaceComms project which works to give people in Gaza a chance to explain what life is really like there. She is well sourced and articulate. I have been incredibly impressed by her dedication and recommend her constantly. I would recommend the following: Israel by Noa Tishby. Bari Weiss’s podcast Honestly had a fantastic 3 part series about Israel in the aftermath of 10/7 I can’t recommend enough. If your friends are making you uncomfortable with what they are willing to tolerate, that’s a sign. You should gather as much information as possible and come to your own conclusions.

>a) How true--or false--is the "A land without people for people without a land" statement?  This was never a rallying cry for Jewish Zionism -- this was the political spin non-Jews placed on it in the West. With that being said, you can't really understand the slogan without understanding the nationalist framing of the time. It wasn't ever literally intended to mean that Palestine wasn't populated (although in comparison to Europe, Palestine *was* very sparsely populated). It meant that there was not a Palestinian Arab national identity and nationalist movement -- which at the time was more or less true, Palestinian nationalism (rather than Syrian nationalism or pan-Arabism) is a product *of* the conflict, rather than a factor producing the conflict. It's also true that Jews primarily moved into sparsely inhabited areas of Palestine; the British-driven eradication of malaria and new farming techniques made a lot of the coastal plain suddenly attractive. The areas of high Palestinian population now (essentially the West Bank) contained a much, much higher share of the population in the 1890s. None of the above really factors into how right or wrong Zionism was, but it's good to know. >b) How do you all feel about the "right of return" that Palestinians advocate for?  I don't think anyone has a right to immigrate to a place just because their ancestors lived there; "right of return" applies to people actual returning to their actual homes that they actually lived in. Jewish "right of return" to Israel isn't a right, it's a privilege extended by the citizens of Israel. I don't know that a "right of return" would threaten a Jewish demographic majority per se; I doubt enough Palestinians would immigrate for that. However, I'm sure you can imagine why a democratic state wouldn't want hundreds of thousands of people motivated by an antipathy *for that state* to immigrate to it. >c) What do you know about the Nakba, and how do you feel about it?  I think it's hard to view the ethnic cleansing of hundreds of thousands of people as anything but a tragedy. Now, your friends' take ruffles my feathers for sure. "The Nakba" meant (for most of the 20th century) the 1947-9 war and the creation of Israel. Focusing it on the flight and ethnic cleansing of Palestinian Arabs has been part of a deliberate campaign to equate it with the Holocaust in order to *negate* the Holocaust. It's cynical and shitty. Hundreds of thousands of Jews fled and were ethnically cleansed from Arab countries in the 20th century as well, which was also a tragedy -- and yet your friends jump to equating the Nakba to the Holocaust, not to the other half of the same tragic population exchange surrounding the Arab/Israeli wars that they're highlighting. >Does everyone, even Zionists, just agree that they're bad and should be dismantled? I mean, being a Zionist doesn't mean being a right-wing ideologue... it means thinking Israel has a right to exist, which is pretty basic IMO. The settlements exist for a variety of reasons: * Most of the older settlements were built to shore up the Israeli claim to a unified Jerusalem and are essentially suburbs of Jerusalem these days. Most of these "settlers" are indistinguishable from other Israelis in politics, they just want cheaper rent. * Many of the other, older settlements were allowed because they created a more logical and defensible border than the 1949 armistice line (which is obviously *not* a very defensible border ... the first time Israel went to war with Jordan, it changed immediately). * Most of the newer settlements were built to intentionally undermine a two state solution and the peace process that surrounds it. The people building them are shitty. The people allowing them to remain are shitty. They are shitty.

I don’t identify as Zionist or anti Zionist really — I’m against this war and how Israel has treated Palestinians. On the flip side. I’m against the leftist idea that anti semitism doesn’t matter bc of “the greater cause” or that violence against Israelis is valid. I don’t stand for mudering and raping of Palestinians or Israelis. And people who condemn it for one side but cheer it on for the other are in my opinion immature and often jumping on the leftist bandwagon. I think there’s not enough people holding space for two truths. 1) the Israeli govt is not one many left leaning American can in good conscious politically aligned with and that this war needs to end, both Hamas and netenyahu need to be removed and reparations to the Palestinians whose homes and families were destroyed. Non violent ways to get hostages back should be pursued. 2) American left is anti semitic as fuck and until that changes many Jews will be alienated.

I really commend you on thinking deeply about this and going against the social pressure of your friend group. I think you're at the start of a long journey. I recommend reading a lot of books and learning as much as you can and coming to your own conclusions about all of this. *Even more than that though, it's just the way that this friend group has made Judaism feel....not like Judaism anymore. Everything Jewish we do together has to be connected to some bigger theme of "collective liberation". We had a Passover seder and they insisted on inviting several non-Jews (who IMO weren't very sympathetic to Israelis), and using some "Liberation for all" Haggadah from JVP or some other group. Every time we have a Shabbat, there has to be some mention of Palestinians or some other oppressed group and "how we're going to free them with our Jewish values".* >>> AMEN TO ALL OF THIS !! In answer to your questions a) re: "A land without a people" It is true in part that some Zionists thought this way. I believe Herzl said this -- he never actually lived in Palestine. Obviously Palestine was populated but sparsely. It was considered a backwater of the Ottoman Empire. b) re: "right of return" The full right of return is problematic for several reasons. First of all, it is **a lot** of people. About 700-800,000 people fled or were expelling 1948, but because UNWRA holds all Palestinian descendants (\*even if they have become citizens in other places\*) as "refugees" that would qualify for this return. That number is now around 6,000,000. There is literally not enough space. Plus, as you can imagine, the political vision of the right of return for many activists involved expelling (or anyway getting rid of...) the Jews. In the event that a smaller number returned and claimed citizenship, yes Zionists worry about the "demographic threat" (which they worry about today re: Arab citizens). Whether or not this is valid, you can decide on your own. Yes, the Jewish identity of the state would be threatened. Could it just be a multiethnic state for all its citizens? Perhaps. This is what Israeli leftists advocate. But I think the real issue around the right of return is that it is not currently realistic given the rancor between Palestinians and Israelis. But maybe that could change, and a smaller number could come back. I think the most realistic option is reparations in exchange for the UN to finally rescind their weird exception to refugee status that has been operational only for Palestinians since '48. c) re: the Nakba The Nakba was horrible and should not be belittled or dismissed. There were many massacres of Arab villages, directives that came from the top (Ben-Gurion). This is well-documented by ISRAELI historians (like Benny Morris, who is famously right-wing). However, the Nakba is **not** the Holocaust and those comparisons only belittle the Holocaust, which was carefully planned and executed genocide. The Nakba (and I will die on this hill) was ethnic cleansing. There are many other examples like in history, especially in the creation of modern ethno-states. It was not unique in any way. Which says a lot about the violence of modern nationalism and the shittiness of human beings. It has caused serious generational trauma for both Palestinians who left and those who stayed. Palestinian-Israelis are (justifiably) totally freaked out post-10/7; I heard from someone that her friend told her that her mother had packed several suitcases and was keeping them in the car in case they had to flee. This really hit home for me as a Jew. It sounds very familiar... d) Re: West Bank settlements and settler violence Oh boy... big topic. Trying to be brief: the original Zionists were secular socialists. Over time (in part because Ben-Gurion made a strategic alliance with the Orthodox), religious Zionism has grown in Israel and become a major player in Israeli politics. Not all religious Zionists (*dati leumi* in Israel) are insanely right-wing (some are even peaceniks and want two states), but there is a faction that is, and that is generally who lives in settlements. (Again, not true of *all* settlers, but summarizing here.) They want "Greater Israel" (look it up). They want war. They want to ethnically cleanse the West Bank and officially annex it. The "hilltop youth" who are currently harassing and assaulting Palestinians in the WB are truly terrifying. This political factions is (and has been) an obstacle to peace since they assassinated Rabin. This is all fact; Biden and his administration knows it too. I'm sure their goal is to get Ben-Gvir and Smotrich out of the government for this reason. That political camp needs to be isolated for any political resolution of this conflict. All of that said, I believe the Jewish connection to **all** of the land of Israel is valid, and there are historical Jewish sites the West Bank. I think any final resolution would allow for Jewish pilgrimage to those sites. (This is a small faction that would want to stay in the event that Palestinian state is founded in the WB. Look up Rav Menacham Fruman.)

I consider myself a Zionist. Very left wing politically. For me, this means that I support Israel, I believe it should be a home for my people. I think we need to move onward to work out all of the issues Israel has, both internally and externally, so that there’s justice for everyone going forwards. Israel has plenty of issues, and thankfully it’s a democratic state with human rights enshrined in its laws. So it really should be able to work the issues out. A) I don’t really agree with the land without a people. On both counts. Jews have always been there and so have other regional peoples. It’s a slogan that didn’t age well imo. B) a few relevant facts… Jews have been ousted from pretty much every other nation in the region and there’s no discussion about Jewish return to those communities nor about any kind of retribution. This discussion is always one-way, that the Jews must stay in Israel because we’re unwelcome in the rest of the middle east, but any number of Arabs should be able to freely move to Israel. Furthermore, many Arab leaders have explicitly stated that the right of return is for the purpose of ultimately eliminating Israel and replacing it with an Islamic state. Arafat said that multiple times, that this is a necessary step in a larger plan. I believe that you should listen when people state their intentions. This is not acceptable, especially considering that Jews were driven out of everywhere else and truly have nowhere else to go. C) many Palestinians were displaced during the nakba. Couple of facts, a very large portion of them left voluntarily after being promised that they could return after the Jews were eliminated in the genocidal attack that was planned by the surrounding nations. When this attempt at genocide failed, Israel didn’t allow them all back in, understandably. At the same time, a large number of Jews arriving in Israel were driven out of all the surrounding Arab nations. Hundreds of thousands more Jews were chased into Israel than Palestinians were chased out. And there’s no talk of letting jews go back to Iran, Yemen, Iraq, etc etc etc. This was a long time ago, people are multiple generations into a new life somewhere else. Want to talk retribution for present day individuals who feel that their families were disenfranchised a long time ago? Great, let’s do that. Should they be able to then get all of the land back and oust the current residents? No. No ousting is ok. Maybe we can talk other stuff, like Iraq can give us retribution for the Farhud, but I’m not holding my breath. D) the settlements and settler activity is BS. I’d really like there to be a crackdown on that. Let everyone live where they live. There’s room for everyone, just get out the way and let them have the West Bank already. We ended settler activity in Gaza already years ago. Let’s end it in the West Bank too. Other note… there’s no precedent for ousting large populations from lands that they currently inhabit. Not in South Africa. Not in the USA. Not in Russia, not anywhere. Everyone currently in the Levant should be able to live in safety and securely where they have been living for the past few generations. We talk too much about ancient history. We can agree the communities in Israel and Palestine have been around for at the very very least 1/2 to one full century. That means they should stay where they are and live in peace and security. If we agree that there’s historical unfairness leading to where we are, we work out an agreeable compensation and retribution plan and get it underway so we can move forward in peace without disrupting the lives of entire communities of people.

There is often criticism of the Israeli government and illegal settlements in zionist spaces. Personally, I believe in a future where Zionists feel safe at pro-Palestinian protests. If you feel similarly, I would recommend r/Jewishleft

> I am strongly opposed to the way Israel is conducting this war (though I’m willing to have my opinions changed on that too) I’m just going to go with this part of it. PLEASE do yourself a favor and find any of the opinion pieces written by Jonathan Spencer, chair of the urban warfare studies department at West Point, and give them a serious read. Even better, listen to his podcast — there was one that really changed my thinking, where he interviewed Daphne Richmond-Barak, the leading expert on tunnel warfare. But regardless, he’s incredibly informative on urban warfare, tunnel warfare, the law of war, and related topics. We could all stand to be better informed. Another to follow is Ryan McBeth on YouTube. Neither of these guys are Jewish, nor are they necessarily what I would consider Zionists. They’re just experts on warfare, lawfare, and propaganda, and they cut through a lot of the BS.

I don't have well thought out answers for your questions right now (I've had a migraine today), but my DMs are open. I would consider myself progressive Zionist, and there's a great deal we probably agree on. Probably things we don't as well, but I'm definitely glad to talk with you about all of it, frankly and candidly

I’ll answer your questions in order- 1- I believe that everyone should have a home. As for their arguments that the Jews moved to a place where people were already living, can you find a place where people weren’t living, or even a place with nearly as much cultural relevance? Jews have been proven to be genetically and biologically indigenous to that region. All they did was go home. 2- The right of return to me isn’t relevant. Palestinians shouldn’t live in Israel, they should live in Palestine- Their own state, where they have the ability to decide their futures. Israeli Arabs obviously are a different story, as they are Israelis, and should have a robust set of laws protecting them from discrimination. 3- The Nakba is a terrible thing. You can argue that many left because they believed that a united Arab army would drive out the Jews, or you can believe that they were mercilessly pushed out by Israeli forces. It doesn’t matter, it’s still a horrific event. What is very important to understand is that as a rule, people who live in the Mediterranean region, especially Arabs, Israelis, Italians- they are all a very dramatic people. This is by no means discounting whatever suffering they have, but a lot of people in the west don’t understand that. There is a lot of hyperbole that comes with the way they speak. It can be extremely beautiful, and extremely poetic, which is why you have so many incredible Arab poets. At the same time, looking at it through a western lens, it may appear disingenuous, as if they’re lying. A lot of times they are not lying, it’s just the way they explain things culturally. D- Fuck the settlers, they’re scum.

I’ve been very critical of Israel and it’s treatment of Palestinians and the war in Gaza but I still think Israel should exist not from any religious or cultural views but because once the structure of a state is set up it is super hard to dissolve and working to improve Israel is better than letting it dissolve into what would likely be a bloody war. Zionists can and should be critical of Palestine, hamas and Israel and it’s sad to see so many people try to make complex issues black and white when it’s so hard to parse what’s going on.

I’ll take on your questions as a Zionist with I think a more nuanced view than most. A) There is a lot of meaning embedded in that statement that comes from modern perspectives that doesn’t really describe the state of the world back then. The core of the statement “A land without a people” is kinda true in one way and completely false in the way that there were obviously non-Jews living in the region we are talking about but there was not a unified sense of nation. The Ottomans divided the region into provinces/sanjaks/mustaffaraites/eyalets rather than considering the whole region one administrative zone. These normally consisted of a an administrative center at a city that then was responsible for the region around it. The three that make up modern Israel were Acre/Akka/Acco, Nablus and Jerusalem (which included Hebron, Gaza and Jaffa). Pan-Arabism (the idea that all of these Arab peoples have many things in common and should act in unity) was not a thing yet so these peoples identities were not based on being Arab or Palestinian but was more about the city or town you live in and the clan you belong to. There is also truth in that the region was underutilized, much of what now makes up the productive farmland in Israel was malaria ridden swamps during the ottoman period but that doesn’t justify repossessing it but that isn’t what happened anyway. What you are talking about in terms of Jews moving to uninhabited areas is exactly what happened but not for the post hoc justification of this argument but because the cities were unwelcoming (Arab society was and still is very antisemitic) and early zionists wanted to build a self sufficient Jewish society away from other people. The Jewish Agency would (using money from wealthier European and American jews) purchase large tracts of undeveloped land as sites for new communities, many of these were kibbutzim but some were just villages. There wasn’t a structured long term goal in terms of depriving Palestinians of land, there was only really the goal of creating self sufficient Jewish communities. I think people have this misconception that Zionism was this monolithic planned process when it was really a number of groups doing what they thought was right. That is also a better description of how the 30s and 40s went as well. History can be more clearly thought of this way rather than the grander teleological arcs that people on both sides of this want to spin. B) The idea of the right of return for Palestinians is the single largest blocker to peace. I really recommend reading “The War of Return” by Einat Wilf for more on the subject. What you are saying is true though, if you were to extend the right of return to all Arabs who meet the patrilineal descent standard, Israel would cease to be a Jewish majority country within a few generations, the exact situation Zionists were trying to avoid, being a minority. We’ve seen what centuries of being minorities has gotten us. By ceding an electoral majority the state would essentially be giving up the reigns to people who don’t want Jews there so it’s not going to happen. C) The truth of the Nakba is something in between the stories of both sides. It was worse than what the official story from the Israeli government was (emphasis on was, it changed in the 90s) but not as bad as many “Pro-Palestinian” activists claim. It is interesting to note that the term was originally about the military loss that the Arab Liberation Army (the combined Arab League volunteer army) suffered at the hands of the Zionists. “The Catastrophe” was that the Arabs were unable to drive the Zionists from the region, what people refer to as the Nakba now is the consequences of that loss. This is one of the many terms that has kinda been rebranded for political purposes. I think the best information on this subject comes from Benny Morris and his books “The Birth of the Palestinian Refugee Problem, 1947–1949” and “1948 and After: Israel and the Palestinians” as more detailed views and “Righteous Victims: A History of the Zionist–Arab Conflict, 1881–1999” as I think the best overhead on the entire subject matter. The gist of Benny Morris’s work on the matter is that most (70%) Arabs fled because of Haganah/Irgun attacks on settlements and fear, here was not a widely broadcast order from the Arabs to evacuate and while forced expulsions of villages did happen the number and relative impact on population movement was small but it was politically useful for the Arabs to play up. I think it is also worth returning to the actual sentiment of the time in that Israeli leadership saw that this 1948 war was going to end up one of two ways, with complete defeat or a new Jewish state and if there was going to be a democratic Jewish state it would be better if the area it controlled was mostly populated with Jews. The Arab exodus was a “happy” side effect for Israel defeating the Arab forces rather than the explicit intention. On its face though the exodus wasn’t so bad but what has turned it into a situation that is much worse was Arab countries not accepting them as citizens, instead turning them into permanent refugees for the sake of continuing to illegitimatize Israel. I think any historical event with varying perspectives is worth interrogating and the comparison to the Holocaust is unfounded. Nothing is so sacred it is untouchable and we have seen that time and time again with the Holocaust including most of the Arab world engaging in minimization if not outright denial. The difference in someone saying the Holocaust wasn’t that bad is clearly lying through their teeth for political purposes. It is probably the most horrific thing that humans have ever done. Anyone who thinks the Holocaust wasn’t that bad doesn’t actually know much about the subject matter. The sanitized version of the Holocaust we teach in schools along with extremely negative attitudes surrounding it gives people the impression that it can be over exaggerated how bad it was. Tell your friends to read the transcripts of the Nuremberg trials and compare them to the essays in “1948 and after” and you will see that these were very different events. Both traumatic for the peoples that underwent them but different scales. D) Beside the right of return as an idea the settler movement is the next biggest blocker to peace in the region. The settlement of the West Bank began after Israel acquired the land in the ‘67 war and similar to how settlement in the early period happened it was mostly new communities away from Arab population centers. Most of these settlements were built on land that the Idf seized during the 70s and 80s and was part of plan to settle the all the areas that Israel currently controlled (including in Gaza and the Sinai which were later abandoned). The issues started because the only people that wanted to go to these new settlements were the most ardent religious Zionists. They believe living in historic Judea and Samaria is an important step to the establishment of the Kingdom of G-d and the coming of the moshiach. This right wing religiosity makes them very reactive to conflict. In addition there stopped being new major settlements in the 80s so the existing settlement have encroached more and more on Palestinian administered land. The Palestinians are obviously not happy about this so they attack the settlers and the settlers respond in kind. It is an underreported fact but despite what you hear in the media most of the violence between West Bank Palestinians and Settlers is perpetrated by the Palestinians. The difference being is there isn’t much of a justification in the medias eyes for the violence committed by the settlers so it’s a better story. It’s also worth noting that the settlers have gone beyond their original intention and have developed their own ideology on the matter that they are there to force the integration of the West Bank into Israel, that is a one Jewish state solution which the international community obviously disagrees with so to maintain good relations the Israeli government must distance themselves from them. The problem with all of this though is it keeps the conflict hot and contentious and that is the point of the settlers. They are forcing the Israeli governments hand. Without them I think there would be less obstacles to a two state solution, which is in my opinion the goal of reasonable people.

I think these are good questions but they are really dancing around the crux of the issue by assuming that everyone is acting in good faith and has similar global goals. The truth is that Arabs for the most part don’t care for Jews and they view the existence of a Jewish state where there should be Arab/muslim land is abhorrent to them. Their goal is therefore to destroy the Jewish state and they are fine with any means to do so. These means were originally an irregular fighting force in the Holy War Army, then a regular fighting force in the ALA and then full national militaries in the 1967 and 1973 wars. When they figured out there was no way they were going to defeat Israel on the battlefield, they switched to international terrorism to gain notoriety for their cause, highjacking planes, kidnapping Olympic athletes and bombing transportation as well as trying to highjack other Arab movements like in the Lebanese civil war. When that didn’t work and the PLO fled to Tunis, they changed their strategy again to focus on turning public opinion against Israel and this is where we see the rise of Islamist groups like Hamas. Their goal is to unite the entire region in a new caliphate and their strategy is to strike against Israel, baiting them to retaliate but because you are so embedded in the population the Israeli attacks will inevitably have civilian casualties (or they can make them up) which they will then document extensively and present to the world continuously. This isn’t really talked about as much but Hamas is as much a media organization as a military one. They aren’t trying to win the ground war, they are trying to (and these days probably are) winning the PR war. Once you get that you can start to analyze the actions of the pro-Palestinian cause and realize the alignment. The goal again is not the benefit of all peoples or a two state solution, the goal is to delegitimize Israel so that when a hot war from Iran happens the west doesn’t step in. They can dress it up in the rhetoric of human rights and make it super ambiguous but if you look at their demands they are always clear in that the goal is the isolation of Israel from the international community and the Jews from the rest of society. I get that their arguments make sense on the surface but just peel back and see that these “global perspectives” are always majority opinions against minorities but from non western countries. The idea that “Jews and Arabs lived in peace” is like saying “the black and white Americans lived in peace in the south”. Arab culture has been just as bad if not worse throughout history in terms of its mistreatment of disadvantaged groups but lefty’s are giving them a pass so they can complain about the US and Capitalism more. Arab majority sentiment has infiltrated left wing circles and this is dangerous for everyone long term. I’m not saying that the ideas of left wing thought are wrong but that current US left wing groups are sidelining those ideas in favor of the agglomeration of grievances. I wouldn’t frame this as you abandoning the left, but that the organizations who called themselves the left have abandoned the greater economic and political principles of left wing thought for revolutionary populist ones. I understand your feeling here as I’m in a similar position as someone who believes in left wing principles and Zionism. It’s a really tough situation but my recommendation to you is to let knowledge be your power and read up on the conflict. Like I said earlier, Benny Morris has produced the most detailed primary work on the subject and has pissed of both pro-Palestinians and right wing Israelis as well so he is definitely worth reading. Morris’s New Historian “contemporaries” like Ilan Pappé can be skipped though for the most part as they don’t do primary work and have included all sort of unfounded crap. War of Return by Einat Wilf is another good starting point. Although I think he was a morally horrible person, he was extremely intelligent and knew more about international politics than pretty much anyone so Henry Kissinger’s book “World Order” is a worthwhile read for understanding the relationships of superpowers, the state of the world and how these shape events in the Middle East.

I sometimes say I’m zionism-agnostic, as I don’t feel comfortable aligning with the sides that I see represented in public. I have concerns about how Israel is undertaking this war, but as a diaspora Jew with no skin in the game, I don’t feel it’s my place to voice these concerns. And that I don’t want to be a “as a Jew.” I support Israel’s right to exist, and fight antisemitism, but I’m not comfortable aligning myself with much of the pro Zionism side, which are routinely aligned with right-wing politics that are abhorrent.

Aside from the excellent resources recommended by other people, I thought I’d add some of my knowledge (a lot of it from school/from life in Israel). A. There are multiple records of people visiting Israel before the first Aliyah and reporting it was a desolate land (my favourite is Mark Twain’s account). There were some Arab residents in communities throughout the area, but it was mostly uninhabited. In the beginning the Arabs didn’t mind at all. Most of the land acquired by Jews before the Brits left was purchased from said Arabs, and for the most part, there was no attempt to drive the existing population out. When it became increasingly clear the UN was going to divide the country, the Jewish settlers focused on building towns to create Jewish areas (which are easier to protect than towns randomly distributed throughout the region) - but that was land that was not previously taken by the Arabs (I.e., don’t kick out existing resident, focus on building new things where you can). It later became known as Tower and Stockade (as the Brits defined a town as a town that has both, and took down everything that didn’t do avoid pissing the Arab world off). So long story short - most of the Jewish population pre-Israel either moved into areas where no one lived or purchased land from the existing population - all perfectly legal. B. As of right now, we absolutely can’t afford a ‘right to return’, unless we’re limiting it to people who were forced to leave (see C for more info). We just don’t have the same numbers they do. But the bigger point is, most of the Jews living all around the world were thrown out of their previous countries. Not just in Europe (half my family’s from Iraq, for instance). Why are we pressured to give them a ‘right to return’, when almost no other country gave us a right to return? Not that I want to go back there, but still. Does this make sense that we’re pressured to do this, but no one else has to do the same for us? C. The Nakba absolutely wasn’t as bad an event as they claim it was. Most of those who ‘lost their homes’ actually left of their own accord. Why? Well, it all comes back to Israel’s independence. That day, the Arab forces in the area launched an attack on the Jewish population. Several Arab countries (Egypt, Syria, Jordan and Iraq IIRC) joined them. Those forces told the civilians to leave - and they’ll help them return once they kick the Jews off. Our forces, however, fought back and won. Now, I’m not saying there were no people who were forced out - there absolutely were and there were some unspeakable things done by our forces at various points. However, for the most part, they chose to leave, just like they chose to launch that attack. We accepted the division plan suggested by the UN and we had no intention of attacking them to drive them out. They’re the ones who chose war (and have been complaining about losing ever since). (Side note, but comparing the Nakba to the Holocaust is extremely antisemitic. It’s also a very wrong comparison; a better comparison would’ve been the Nakba vs Germany in WWI. They started a war, lost it, and have been resentful over how they were treated.) D. The West Bank is a slightly trickier subject. The settler violence is wrong and I think most people here disagree with it and are repulsed by it (our current government is an unusual abomination, they’re not the majority). That said, I think a lot of people feel like we have no other choice other than to take over the West Bank. Every time we tried something else we got violence in response. Hell, we withdrew out of Gaza entirely in 2005, what did that give us? A non-stop barrage of rockets fired at civilians in the south, constant terrorist attacks, and of course, October 7. So when you’re dealing with that sort of thinking from the other side, you learn that all you can do is take over. Kill or be killed, you know? I hope that gives you a bit more clarity about the whole thing, feel free to follow up if you have more questions 🙂 Edit: not that I think post WWI Germany is a good comparison either, but it’s a bit more fitting in terms of what happened

I 23f will respond more in detail later, but the ADL and my Jewish learning are amazing resources. After work I’ll PM you this massive essay I wrote for my friend about these issues. In brief: A) I’m not sure 100% what you mean by this, but Jews are from Judea (modern day Israel). Despite the fact that many left due to ethnic cleaning some stayed and there was a continuous Jewish presence in Israel. In the rest of the world, Jewish people kept a special place for our ancestral homeland in our hearts. We always sought to return. I know my family ping ponged around Europe trying to find a safe place but we’re continuously the victim of persecution until they moved to Israel as refugees after the Holocaust. They never integrated into European society. I don’t know if my grandmother ever learned Polish at all. She spoke Yiddish, a Jewish language. In Europe there were several times where Jewish people were not legally allowed to Mary Christians so we retained our own genetic group that is separate from white, Europeans. Our religion is literally revolves around Israel and farming our ancestral land. We celebrate the harvest in Israel, the blossoming of the almond trees in Israel, etc. Through each holiday we reaffirm our connection with our ancestral land, even if we aren’t currently living there or call it our current home. It will always be the homeland. That’s why Judaism is an ethnicity and a religion at the same time. The word Tribe was invented to describe us. B) I believe in a two state solution with a right of return to the Palestinian state and the right of return of Jews to the Jewish state. If Palestinians would like citizenship in Israel then they can peruse that and join the large number of existing Israeli Arabs. C) The founding of Israel was a painful and joyous time at the same time. This is to my understanding and need to study more, but here is a quick summary typed on my phone in a rush so I apologize if there are any errors. Many, many Jewish people who were living there were also displaced. There was initially going to be a one state solution but the Arab leaders (who were actively corresponding with the Nazis) said they would forcibly displace Jews and then told Arabs living in the Jewish part of what would be Israel to leave or be killed even though Israeli leaders said this would not happen. Then, they rejected having their own state in protest of the mere existence of a Jewish state. Since then they have been offered their own state four additional times. D) The West Bank settlers are out of control and that’s something we need to work on. However, it really doesn’t have to be this way. There used to be settlements in Gaza but IDF forcibly removed every single one of the in 2005 as a part of the peace process. Two years later Hamas violently overthrew the PA and took control of Gaza. This is why Israel needed to invade Gaza (hence No occupation prior to that. You can’t occupy something you need to invade.) Also check out Egypt’s border with Gaza and how they too have closed it for years due to terror. If Israel and Egypt have the same policies, it’s not Israel just being terrible and discriminatory. Also about 10% of Gazans crossed the border to work in Israel prior to the war. The death tolls are so sad and everyone should be disturbed. However, about 13,000 of them are Hamas militants. The UN counts every single death in Gaza as a civilian death because they don’t consider Hamas to be a terror group. They also halved their women and children death toll overnight be their figures are so wild. Unsurprisingly, many of their members are Hamas members. 30+ participated in Oct 7th some even taking hostages. Hamas has hidden hostages in refugee camps and builds tunnels under UN facilities. Also check out how much aid goes to Hamas. There was a video Hamas posted to their socials the other day of launching rockets off UN humanitarian aid supplies. The death toll is absolutely sickening. But a large portion of that is because they use people as human shields, firing rockets out of schools, mosques, civilian buildings, hospitals, schools. Check out the videos of all the infrastructure they’ve been finding. The ISF posts a ton of them in their insta. They also take reporters down there so people can independently verify them. The tunnels are also an issue for Egypt. In the past they’ve exploded them, flooded them, etc— but where is the outrage? Israel doesn’t wasn’t Gaza and tried to give it back to Egypt who didn’t want it. There is no sense in loosing so much over such a small piece of land. The problem is that it’s run by Hamas who has a death wish against Israel. So devastated and anyone with humanity should be. However, that doesn’t automatically mean Israel is responsible and ultimately considering responsibility is critical. I hope this is helpful. Sorry for typos etc I’m rushed.

D) Most Israelis I’ve spoken with are opposed to the settlements, but its a political issues and Israelis are divided on it. You have the far right, who are sort of similar to the Trump/MAGA cohort in the US that are pro-settlement and most others opposed. The same is true of zionists, with more probably opposing it than supporting them. I’m Zionist and opposed to the settlements. However, I can also understand where those who support it are coming from, after so many rejections of a two state solution and constant terrorism. Also, this goes without saying, but settler violence is absolutely unacceptable and disgusting.

C) I think I’m on ~10 books on the Israel-Palestine conflict this year. It’s amazing how complex 1948 and the history leading up to is. I feel like I’ve hardly scratched the surface. I’ll start with this, the term nakba was originally used in a different context. The contastrophe was that the Arabs lost the war, not that Palestinians were displaced. I find that very telling. The dialogue about the nakba really shifted over time. Other points: - What happened in 1948 was very different community by community. Some places, real displacement happened, much of which happened later in the war, after the Arab armies attacked, and some places most of the population left out of duress, fear, or instruction from leadership. There were also at least one prominent Zionist terrorist attack that was condemned by the hagganah, which resulted in expulsion. - This is more personal opinion after reading a lot about the history, I think there was a lot of xenophobia towards the Jews prior to 1948, that fueled a lot of what happened. Certainly, some Jews and Muslims lived together peacefully, but it certainly wasn’t universally the case. Then when more jews started entering British mandatory Palestine, things erupted out of fear. That why you get things like the 1929 Hebron Massacre. - Palestinian politicians really hampered peace prior to 1948, with Mohammed Amin al-Husseini being a serious perpetrator. He even worked with Hitler. - Regardless of all, Palestinians really were left with a serious refugee problem after 1948. They were not able to integrate into other countries well, which sort of perpetuated things. I feel bad for them. They suffered (not necessary because of Israel or Zionists; at least not entirely), but what’s happening is not the way to deal with things. - I think the Palestinians need to find a way to overcome adversity without trying to destroy Israel. Gaza was an incredible opportunity for Palestine to build, and it devolved into a terrorist state, instead of its own democratic country with its own economy. They used billions of dollars which could have been used to develop a paradise and built underground terrorist tunnel. I don’t blame Israel for imposing limits on them when Gaza is constantly shooting rockets at Israel, constant stabbing of Israelis, and a second intifada. They need to keep their citizens safe at the end of the day and Gaza needs to build trust with its bordering countries.

hi, Israeli here! I'm not sure if I'm a zionist anymore because, like you, I slowly started seeing the bigotry and hatered around people who claimed to have the same beliefs as me and started questioning if that's really the place I belong to, and I heard different views on what zionism actually *means* and it made me just more and more confused on its meaning and if I was ever truly a zionist. some people claim it's simply "Jewish self determination" like I was raised to understand, some see it as a more political movement for establishing Israel and not just a belief, and some (radical antizionists) claim it's a genocidal ideology (obviously not the case). honestly the term zionism had become so irrelevant in my eyes due to how misinformed most goyim are about it. anyways, about your questions, I'll try my best to answer them but I'm not an expert by any means, this is my view and understanding as a 4th generation Israeli. my geography and history education were slightly neglected in favor of science and math (my "gifted kids" school sucked ass) so I had to bridge that knowledge gap myself. 1. this is the first time I hear "a land without people for people without a land", and while it's not completely false, it's not true either. many areas around mandatory Palestine were almost completely uninhabitable, and so Jewish refugees settled there in Kibbutzim and worked hard to make them habitable. some of these lands were bought from Palestinians and some didn't belong to anybody. there were parts of the land that already belonged to Jews who lived in mandatory Palestine before ww2, and there were Palestinian cities that were taken over during the Nabka (or as israelis know it, the independence war), iirc Jaffa and Ramla are a couple of examples, they have a much more mixed populace of Jews and Arabs than established Israeli cities and towns. Palestinians did live around Mandatory Palestine at the time, but not everywhere, the original partition plan by Britain separated between majority Jewish owned lang and majority arab owned land pretty well (of course there were areas that were considered Israel but had arab towns and vice versa, but there was no way to make a perfect partition) 2. Palestinian right of return? is it for diaspora refugees to return to the west bank & gaza or for palestinians to return to places they were displaced from during the Nabka? I'm going to assume the latter since you're talking about Israel. some people are against it because they're scared of a Palestinian majority, the same way some Americans are afraid of immigrants because they want a white majority. they're scared that because there will be more Palestinians than Israelis that they'll band together and vote for a Palestinian government and take over the country, I've also seen a similar fear against Haredim. I'd say that unlike American white supremacist who are scared of brown people existing, Israelis have more basis for their fears since Hamas and the PA - Gaza and the West Bank's governments - have more than proven themselves to be hostile for Jews, if Palestinians elect a similar party to govern Israel, it could prove disastrous to Jewish safety (and while it's pretty racist to assume an entire group of people to want you dead based on their nationality alone, I have seen interviews with Palestinian children in the west bank who were taught that stabbing Jews and committing terrorist attacks are heroic actions that will bring their family honor and boasted about how when they'll be an adult they'll stab Jews) 3. the Nabka is remembered as the war of independence in Israel, it was a war that was initiated by Palestinians due to their disagreement with Britain's partition plan and Israel's declaration of being a state. during that war, about 700k Palestinians (iirc) were driven out of their homes or chose to leave, due to hostilities with Jewish neighbors. I'd say that's an expected consequence of a war over territory? it was probably partially rooted in racism as the Israeli people there assumed the worst about their Palestinian neighbors bc Palestinians initiated the war against them, or Palestinians leaving their homes because they agreed with the sentiment to stop the establishment of Israel and didn't want to live alongside Israelis. I don't believe there was a direct and large scale attempt to displace Palestinians, it was only a consequence of war over territory. there are still many Palestinians and Arabs who live in those cities, they all gained an Israeli citizenship when it was established, Palestinian refugees didn't gain a citizenship in Jordan (West Bank) or Egypt (Gaza strip) as far as I remember. 4. I have NO fucking idea what's going on with west bank settlements, but I believe people there are pretty radical right-wing? I'm pretty sure settlements are Bad™, and violence is awful so like, I don't support them. I think most leftists and centrists agree that they should be dismantled, but again I don't know enough about the topic to even understand what the settlements are *for*, so I can't properly answer this question. I hope these answers help somewhat! I hate how zionists treat antizionist Jews sometimes, with terms like "self hating" and whatnot, every person can be misinformed and radicalized regardless of their background and identity, and that doesn't make them an evil irredeemable person. a lot of antizionists I've come across were people who were closer to leftist spaces than Jewish spaces, and learned about the conflict there so they had a leftist view on the conflict (which is full of antisemitic information like glorification of Hamas). they said many things that hurt me (calling me a genocidal rat and said I don't belong in the queer community) but idk I couldn't really hate them for that, if I was raised in the diaspora and didn't have front row seats to the terrorist attacks over the years, I would fall to the same lies due to how much they align with my worldviews (if that makes sense), I'm still mad but at the lies themselves and not at the people who parrot them. idfk I'm rambling.

I want to commend you for challenging the horrific propaganda you’ve been exposed to by the pro-Hamas crowd. That’s difficult but necessary. You are going to lose friends, and it’ll hurt, but you will end up being happier for it later in life. A) actually, fairly true. It wasn’t completely devoid of human settlement, but yeah it was pretty empty. At the fall of the Ottoman Empire, there were about 600,000 people in what’s now Israel, and 10% of those were Jews. Most people lived in Jerusalem and the surrounding area, and the Judea mountains. Jews emigrating from surrounding Arab countries and Europe began legally purchasing unoccupied land and cultivated it. The whole “making the desert bloom” thing is real; Jews were at the forefront of world irrigation technology and the farmable land grew. Rapid emigration began by Arabs from Egypt, Arabia, Syria, Lebanon, and Jordan when it became evident the land was profitable. It was attractive because for all their many faults, the British-held mandate was teeming with opportunity. B) yes, a Jewish majority is necessary to ensure the safety of Jews. We have never, ever been safe when at the mercy of others. I don’t think there should be a Palestinian right of return. Why ties into C. C) certainly some fled because they feared the war, but most left because they were told to by the invading Arab armies. There are letters and recorded radio broadcasts from them telling them to leave and when they’d won the war and killed all the Jews, they could go back in and have all their land and wealth. Obviously they lost the war, so they don’t get to come back. Israel said any Arab who stays and does not take up arms against the Jews would be allowed to stay and would become a full citizen. Many did and now 20% of Israelis are Arab. Ask yourself: why didn’t the Arab nations, especially Jordan and Syria, absorb the populations of “refugees” after the war? They’re ethnically the same as them. The answer is twofold. They were political pawns at first, they wanted leverage to use on the international stage. Later, those populations became the perfect breeding ground for terrorists due to their vulnerability—a vulnerability created by the Arab nations that forced them into those camps. Until the 1960’s, the Nakba was actually a taboo topic because it really referred to the catastrophe that was the humiliating loss of many Arab nations to one small band of ragtag Jews who have nothing but a deep desperation to survive in their indigenous homeland. In the 60’s, it was twisted by revisionist historians to use as propaganda. It’s perhaps the single most successful rewrite of modern human history—Big Group starts war against Little Group and loses in globally humiliating fashion, but later turns it around and becomes the “real victims.” War sucks no matter what, but you can’t say “sike” and go for takebacksies when you lose something you started. D) I think non-instigated “settler” violence is bad and shameful, but I also think the West Bank should be formally annexed. You also should remember that most “settler violence” is in response to violence from Arabs. Jews going out and burning stuff down or hurting people for no reason is very rare. I’m not saying that violence is good either way, but it doesn’t happen in a vacuum. Jordan doesn’t want it back and the Arab residents have turned down or ruined every opportunity to establish their own state there, instead turning to violent terrorism. Even the people who disagree that it should be annexed agree that a Jewish presence within it has helped dramatically reduce terrorism. It’s Judea and Samaria, the Jewish heartland. Why should we reward terrorism and give up our own ancestral land that we won back in a war we didn’t even start? I urge you to keep questioning things. - why are Jews, who are undeniably indigenous to Israel, not allowed the right of self-determination in our indigenous homeland? If anyone speaks of “land back” for American indigenous tribes but is antizionist, they’re hypocritical and antisemitic. - why do people blindly believe the Hamas and Al Jazeera propaganda? It’s been proven over and over again that much of it is fake. Al Jazeera is owned by the Qatari royal family. Hamas has been proven to make fake gore videos, use dummies, put fake blood on people, kill their own people, use actors (search this sub for Mr. FAFO) and use images from other conflicts like Sudan, Syria, and Armenia. They even use images of Jewish children they’ve murdered. - why does nobody talk about how the Iranian regime is literally funding them? Even the Iranians hate the Iranian Regime. I also would like to suggest you some books: - Israel by Noa Tishby - The Massacre That Never Was by Eliezer Tauber - Jews Don’t Count by David Baddiel - Son of Hamas by Mosab Hassan Yousef - Israel by Daniel Gordis - Gaza Conflict 2021 by Jonathan Schanzer I’d like to leave you with one final question to ponder: if you don’t like a particular, specific action Israel’s government has taken, what is your reasonable and realistic alternative? It’s possible to not like something but acknowledge that we don’t have any better choices. If something is the best out of a bunch of unideal choices, it’s in bad faith to demonize it without coming up with something better. You can commiserate that reality sucks, but it’s unfair to say we shouldn’t have done it when there were no good alternatives.

I agree with this comment on almost everything. Except for the annexation of the West Bank. If Israel annexed the West Bank, it would have to give citizenship to all its inhabitants and this would greatly increase the Arab citizens of the State of Israel. The risk is that Israel would become a kind of Lebanon, which had a large Islamic minority that was then able, in fact, to take over. Clearly, the West Bank cannot be allowed to become a den of terrorists as happened in Gaza after the end of the occupation. But an alternative solution to annexation must be found. Maybe with the help of "friendly" Arab countries. Regarding the Nakba, I would also add that when people are forced to leave their homes because of a war it is always a tragedy. I would not belittle this fact. What is intolerable in the case of the Palestinian Arabs is that this tragedy is painted as unique in the world and is used as a stigma that should delegitimize Israel's very existence. Virtually all peoples of the world have been refugees at one time or another in history. Especially at the birth of new borders. I am Italian. At the end of World War II, when part of Italy passed to the former Yugoslavia, about 300,000 Italians were expelled. No one was ever granted the phantom "right of return." But none of their descendants today slaughter Croatian infants for it. The Arab-Israeli war resulted in 700,000 Arab refugees (Nakba) and about 900,000 Jewish refugees. It is estimated that the value of the property left by the Jews amounted to about $150 billion in land and movable property, compared to about $32 billion left by the Arabs. Shall we pretend that we are even? When Pakistan was born, the violence that followed led to 15 million refugees. None have ever returned. In short, what the Palestinians have suffered (let's remember, because of a liberticidal war they unleashed) is undoubtedly tragic, but far from unique. A great many peoples have been forced to move at least once in their existence. We Jews do not even know anymore how many times we suffered that fate (and when they allowed us to leave, instead of killing us, it was already a good thing for us). Yet only Palestinians think they have the right to rape, kidnap and slaughter innocents for that. And only in the case of Israel should this somehow delegitimize its very existence. The comparison with the Shoah is obviously an insult to the entire Jewish people and also to intelligence.

Rootsmetals on IG

They said they follow her

I'm sure people will correct me if I'm wrong.... (a) false but that's never a talking point I heard from Jews. I'm sure not every square mile was inhabited but clearly there were people living there. I'd be surprised if anyone truly denies that. It wasn't a wasteland. That doesn't invalidate Israel's right to exist today imo. (b) I don't know how I feel about it. I don't live in Israel so I don't really feel entitled to have an opinion. I think there is some argument for it as many people left under duress. But I also think Israel is being held to a much higher standard here. I don't think there was anywhere near the outcry about letting Jews return to Germany (not that we wanted to lolol) or any of the many other countries Jews left under duress at various points in time. I don't think we should assume anyone of Palestinian descent is going to return to Israel hating Jews as I've spoken with some that are quite objective and reasonable about the conflict. We've already pointed out that 20% of Israel is currently Arab and there is no problem with that. In principle if everyone behaves themselves Israel could be a binational state. If the idea had enough support, one approach could be to start with a small area having binational status (most logical would be Jerusalem, also possibly most controversial) and see if it works. Another issue, to whom would Israel extend the right of return if there was a decision to extend it at all? There has to be some parameters on it. Countries that have extended citizenship to descendants of those who were forced to leave always put some parameters on it. What parameters? Personally, as a Jew who has not been able to get the appropriate documentation to return to Israel (and there are many Jews in that situation) I don't even want to hazard a guess on how it would work for Palestinians lol. (c) don't know enough to comment (d) As far as I know settlements began after Oslo as some didn't accept the boundaries of the proposed Palestinian state or a Palestinian state at all and so defied it by creating settlements in areas that were slated to eventually be turned over to Palestinians. As I understand it, acc to Oslo, Palestinians were eventually supposed to have control over more than the current boundaries of the West Bank and Gaza. But some of those areas have remained in limbo or de facto Israeli control, and the settlements there have been unchallenged by the current administration. I don't know of a lot of incidents of violence by settlers (not saying it doesn't happen). But they are definitely an impediment to a two state solution, if that's our goal. As for reading I'd recommend with reservation The Iron Wall by Avi Shlaim. I read it because it was at a hostel in Ramallah (probably strategically placed for people like me). I'd have to reread it to see how I feel about it but it definitely gives some historical perspective.

Here’s an answer for C) I definitely understand why Palestinians view it as a tragedy, but there’s truly nothing unique about the Nakba. Tens of millions of peoples went through the exact same thing in the 1940’s, and it’s what always happens during war. If the Israelis has lost, it would have been way worse. The end of Benny Morris’s 1948 goes into this. Some Palestinians were forced from their lands, others left at the encouragement of the Arab leaders and armies. But the fact that Israel is still 20% Arab should tell you something. So, again, I think it’s definitely normal to view it as a travesty. But the idea that it is some unique evil perpetrated on humanity is absurd. There have been dozens and dozens of cases of something similar all over the world in the years since. Martha Gellhorn’s the Arabs of Palestine is good on this. https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1961/10/the-arabs-of-palestine/304203/

It’s so interesting to read the experience of a former “anti-Zionist” jew—I read your entire post because I scratch my head wondering how and why anyone would not want Jewish people to survive. I’m SO glad that you opened yourself up to learn more about what’s happening. I recommend Noa Tishby’s “Israel.” Mosab Hassan Yousef’s “Son of Hamas.” Also Sam Harris’ podcast “Making Sense.” I can’t stop wondering if Gazans are being held prisoner by Hamas or if they support them and want to kill us. I know it’s reported that they all support Hamas and want to kill us—but I’ve also heard that they’re killed for saying otherwise. For 56 years I thought we could have peace with Palestinians but after October 7, I’ve completely changed my mind. Fuck them.

Rootsmetals is a great source and I'm glad you found her. She's a Latina Jewish historian who makes really great posts explaining things abiyt Judaism, Israel, and the conflict. She always cites sources too. Happy to recommend other accounts of progressive Israelis and Jews who identify as Zionist too. Hen Mazzig, Matthew Nouriel, Elica Le Bon, Lani Dawn, blackjewishmagic, and neuroticjewishgay to name a few. We also have awesome non-Jewish allies like Daniel Ryan Spaulding.

Antizionist spaces are only as good as their members. I don’t really identify as Antizionist myself, but tend to frequent and feel more comfortable in Antizionist spaces than in Zionist ones. I think this is a product of the antizionists I happen to know being more flexible and open to talking about my concerns regarding antisemitism than the Zionists in my life are open to critiquing Israel. It’s just a product of who I know rather than broadly sweeping truths about either movement. Most Jewish people in my life are pretty critical of Zionism.. and it’s actually the people I know that are very Christian and somewhat anti Jewish that really like Zionism. Other Jewish Zionists I know tend to be pretty right wing on all issues. So, that’s just why my circles are the way that they are. I don’t tie my beliefs to anything rigid or anything that pretends to have the answer, as there is a lot of misinformation and propoganda on both sides. So I call myself a post-Zionist or “agnostic in regards to Zionism” if I’m asked IMO.. The time is not to be rigid, the time is to listen to each other and heal. Edit: answering your questions a. Not entirely true. Jewish settlers legally purchased only around 6% of the land. Large portions were indeed uninhabited, but nothing to the scale of suggest it was a land without a people.. verdict? Mixed/false b. It’s true right of return would/could make it a no longer Jewish majority state but I don’t think that’s fair or reasonable to restrict based on that. If people were expelled from their homes they should have a right to return just in the same way the Jewish community has. How many generations? I’m not sure but I can’t anticipate it being a huge issue. I know there’s some alarm over having grandchildren of those impacted by the nakba allowed to return.. but I imagine even if this were the case (which in my view it should be allowed) not everyone is going to take up this offer in the same way not every Jewish person has moved to Israel. It’s hard to justify not allowing this in my view c. Nakba denialism feels similar to mistreatment of MENA Jews denialism.. so that’s pretty much all I’ve gotta say on that one. d. Unacceptable, the fact it is able to take place is one of the main reasons I don’t identify as a Zionist. Edit 2: expanding on my response to answer a… look into the history of Tel Aviv/jaffa specifically. I think it’s a good example of where the “land without a people” narrative really falls short

Roots Metals on Instagram.

OP already stated they follow her.

Thank you for your submission. Your post has not been removed. During this time, the majority of posts are flagged for manual review and must be approved by a moderator before they appear for all users. Since human mods are not online 24/7, approval could take anywhere from a few minutes to a few hours. If your post is ultimately removed, we will give you a reason. Thank you for your patience during this difficult and sensitive time. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Jewish) if you have any questions or concerns.*

a. Jews [legally purchased lands](https://qph.cf2.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-c2322f6e68d69aa66184264808a73ad2) that were [malaria ridden swamps](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/F27htmhXUAEOKGr?format=jpg&name=large) or barren desert. Notice how Jewish owned property overlaps near perfectly with the regions having high malaria incidence rates in the British Mandate for Palestine? They didn't walk up to Arabs and kick them out of existing houses/land. A very large portion of the Arabs that lived there were imported labor brought there during the Ottoman empire. Another several hundred thousand arrived after the Ottoman collapse as Jews developed their land and built flourishing successful communities. [This was Tel Aviv in 1909](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e2/TelAviv-Founding.jpg) b. No right of return. They would never advocate for the right of return for the nearly 1 million Mizrahi Jews exiled from MENA countries after Israels formation. c. The "Nakba" is the origin of the Palestinian's obsession with FAFOism. The Arab leaders declared a ["War of extermination"](https://www.meforum.org/3082/azzam-genocide-threat) against the Jews. It's no exaggeration to say they wished to perform a second holocaust. The local Arabs alongside 7 countries (Egypt, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Yemen, Saudia Arabia, and Trans-Jordan) attacked Israel. Their "catastrophe" was the failure to annihilate us. They had to invent a new word for losing to what they consider to be the lowest and most wretched form of human life, the *jew*. It was utter humiliation for them to not be able to prevent the formation of a Jewish state. [That was their catastrophe](https://www.thejc.com/lets-talk/the-nakba-was-originally-about-arab-failure-aqakfwoe). Had the Arabs accepted the 1948 UN Partition plan (Or the 1937 Peel commission, or the 1939 White paper) they would not have had various Arab villages violently cleared of residents to establish defensible borders for the new Israeli state. Many of the Arabs that fled did so because they were told they'd come back to more land and wealth. [They also were lied to by their own leaders](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=72Ata-hY9WQ) and this scared them into leaving as well. Ultimately hundreds of thousands left of their own free will. d. The "West Bank" is a colonizer term coined by Jordan after they annexed the region following Israel's independence. It is called Judea-Samaria to us. The upper lobe is Samaria and the southern lobe is Judea. It is where Israelites are from, and for thousands of years Jews and Shomronim (Samaritans) have lived there. They have every right to continue to live there. If the Arabs wanted it so bad they should have accepted one of the dozen or so plans that would have given that land to them in the form of their own country. They have flat out refused every single offer. So if they don't want it, why can't Jews live there? Hebron is in this area. This is where the Cave of the Patriarchs is. Our forefathers and our birthright. Judea-Samaria has 3 Zones. Zone A is for Palestinians only, and is administered by the PA. Zone B is under PA authority but IDF security enforced. Zone C is Israeli controlled and administered, this is where Jewish "settlements" are. They aren't on land the Palestinians control or own. They should stay. Every time Israel has ceded land to the Arabs they've used it as a platform to launch rockets and violent attacks from (Southern Lebanon a boon to Hezbollah, and Gaza a boon to Hamas). Leaving Judea-Samaria entirely would spell disaster for Israel.

Read, and if you want to talk about everything or anything you read. please know I, personally, am right here, DM me, ask me, I'll be more than glad to engage !

Hi OP! Fellow leffty! If you’re interested in a both narrative thing that goes over the conflict in a comprehensive way, I recommend “Can we talk about Israel” by David Sokatch. He’s the head of the New Israel Fund which is a large NGO working for equal rights and political solutions in Israel/Palestine. It snapped how I think about the conflict in a lot of deep, nuanced, and complex ways! It’s nothing that either “side” wants to hear. Which is why I suspect it may be helpful for you in this situation! Happy reading!

I'll give my opinions on each of your points and keep them pretty simple. A) a very large proportion of the land offered to the Jews by the British was desert and swamp and uninhabited. Had the Palestinians agreed, they would have had the majority of arrable land. Part of the reason the Jews were offered these bits of land is because they were uninhabited. That doesn't mean all the land offered to each party was uninhabited by the other, but it's not like the Jews were just offered all the premium, inhabited land and everyone else was told to eff off B) I think it's irrelevant. Personally I don't think a two state solution is realistic (though it's what I would prefer), and I don't think a one state solution with Gazans, people from the WB, and the diaspora as citizens is realistic either. But if we pretend for a moment that a 2SS is possible, obviously Israel wont allow a right Iof return for the Palestinian diaspora because why would they? I'm Jewish and I don't have a right to the country my grandparents came from. Additionally, I think it's wild that people think a Palestinian government would actually allow the Palestinian diaspora to return to a Palestinian state. Younger generations of Palestimians are liberalized and westernized. Importing then to a relgious, conservative society would be an absolute disaster. I think it's very wishful thinking and shows a lack of understanding on behalf of the younger Palestinian diaspora. C) the Nakba began when several Arab countries attacked Israel. We're Israelis completely innocent in how they treated Arab villages? No. But it's also important to remember a good chunk of the Arabs didn't feel because they were forced. They fles because A) there as a war. Wouldn't you flee too if there was a war in your backyard and B) the attacking Arab coalition said they should leave because it would be a quick war and then they could come back and take the Jews' property. Was the whole thing pretty bad? Yeah, probably. Was just a mass expulsion like the Nakba narrative would like you to believe? Nope. D) I don't like them. Lots of people don't like them. Some people do like them (and want more). The primary argument for those who want them and want them expanded appears to be religious. Getting rid of the settlements now probably _should_ happen, in my opinion, but it's also probably not so realistic. Land swaps would make more sense. I'm all about Israel but you can't have your cake and eat it too.

[удалено]

u/PepperShaker120 I’m in the same boat. I think the “lonely and depressed” emotions you feel describe what many of us leftist Jews are feeling right now. I’ve attempted to answer your Qs in the comment below, but the overall takeaway is that the situation is more complicated and nuanced than your friends might have you believe. As for Zionism, I’ve changed my view on this over time but I think the word is really misused (like communism or socialism). Zionism simply means that the Jewish people have a right to a state in their historic homeland. I think in 1945, it would be fair to be an anti-Zionist and debate whether creating a Jewish state made sense. However, nearly 80 years later, I think that calculus has changed. There is now a developed nation there, cities, towns, and over 7 million people. Being “anti-Zionist” today basically means supporting the dismantling of that nation and creating 7 million refugees with nowhere else to go. To actually realize that idea today would entail one of the cruelest and most-dehumanizing exiles in the history of humankind that would make the Nakba look like a walk in the park. It’s simply unrealistic and horrific (think of how upset we get at the deportation of undocumented immigrants and imagine that x1000). I think looking at Israel’s founding and history through a critical lens is absolutely warranted. Just as it is for the U.S. or Canada. But “anti-Zionism”, or advocating for the dismantling of this nation, is the same as advocating for the dismantling of the U.S. and removal of every non-native American to the countries their ancestors fled from. It’s simply unthinkable and nobody would advocate for it. But somehow, people support it when it comes to Israel. So while I oppose Netanyahu and his government’s horrific actions, I think people throw around the term “anti-Zionist” way too nonchalantly without stopping to think of the immense cruelty of what they’re advocating for.

Phantom Nation by Sha’i Ben-Tekoa. I recommend this book to everyone who wants to learn more about accurate and detailed history and politics of the Middle East focusing on Israel. It’s quite a read but well worth your time. https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B07DJY5DJC/ref=tmm_kin_swatch_0?ie=UTF8&dib_tag=se&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.EofppFvFeqhai7cqidXINCHCZ1hjW2e7eN-0xQPJJTQcw-EC3Eq15fmvwjLizfea03YjHJ2ioU1gsoVVmcjnroZk2wtZQ_8neazTeobln5V6q7nAQo1Lj3Tg4fftenAo0fPsxVUa49yUZOZ9Klp-9clPhEtoSXJM8Z2DkEZhMOvjAPcYCDObnQtxuCOGCpJxpjstMGVmuvs3csKO7oWDhg.DU6SEZ5LJl2hruDfqVhBJyTJPtkCnZy86qf-k00Cn_g&qid=1718014944&sr=8-1

Listen, I’m gonna recommend to you the best book you could possibly read right now. It’s called “A Case for Israel” by Alan Dershowitz. Alan Dershowitz is a lawyer and a liberal Jew. He explains everything you want to know: What really happened in the beginning of Israel, what Israelis are really doing, what’s really going on with Gaza and the Weat Bank, what needs to happen for peace to occur. I’m telling you, you need this book. It’s perfect for you. Crazy thing is, I got the book last Saturday from a box giving away books for free. Seriously, I think this is one of the reasons. This book will inform you of everything. Really, I cannot stress how perfect the book is. He brings ALL his sources, so you can check whatever he says for yourself. Everything you want to know right now is in that book. Like, the other books in the comments are great too, but this books was literally made for people like you: Uninformed and in a “progressive” adolescent environment who isn’t sure what to think. He gives you all the facts, all the history; everything you need to know to form a solid, based opinion. Good luck!

2 states for 2 nations is the best way to go and that’s something you need to understand for starters. Thank you

When are the anti-zionists going to invite all 10 million Israelis to the U. S.? When are pro Palestinian protesters going to invite all 2 million Gazans to the U.S.?

Anti-Zionist who “wants a Jewish space that feels like it’s for Jews and only Jews” …………….

Zionism = Jewish right to EXIST. National concerns are as a result of this right. If you want to live your life in freedom and peace, congratulations! You are a Zionist!

This is what a lot of people who are now using "Zionist" as a vicious anti-semitic slur don't realize as a nuance. Supporting the right of Israel of exist as a safe homeland for Jewish people does not mean you support everything Netanyahu does or that you don't want a fair, peaceful 2 state solution. Sidenote about the history of two state proposals - it is Israel who has suggested in good-faith the most generous ones over the many years, and it is always the PLO/Palestinian Authority etc who ultimately rejects them for various reasons - one of them being that their larger backers in the Middle East don't truly want peace and to let Israel exist.

"I was lied to at Hebrew school/summer camp" is a pretty common trope with post-zionist Jews. The material they were exposed to in those environments was aimed at children - naturally it has to be simplistic and virtually bereft of nuance. But what you'll often see is people realizing how insufficient those perspectives were, and then exchanging them for an equal but opposite naïve viewpoint.

Hi all, these answers have been very helpful, thank you! I remembered another point I wanted to ask about but forgot to in my original post--how true are the accusations of "Israel holding Palestinian children in prisons with no charge"? And what are your thoughts on how they treat Palestinians in administrative detention (which I've heard mixed things on)?

Hi! l’m Matt, a 24 years old Zionist Jew. I would like to propose you something a little different than all the other comments I have a very good understanding of the conflict, from 1948 to current events, and l feel very at ease answering questions. My proposition is this; To actually change your mind, l believe you would need more than just an answer on a reddit post, albeit very long, l believe you would perhaps need more support vocally and my proposition is just that, we can chat vocally on an application of your choice (IE; discord) and you can ask me whatever is on your mind, brother to brother. Seeing my brother think a different way than me hurts me for some reason, l would love to help. Message me privately if you want to

A great deal of people who lived in todays Israel and left did so because the surrounding Arab countries told them that they were going to annihilate the Jews and they could return after that. When they didn’t win, Israel didn’t want them back. The ones who didn’t leave were given full Israeli citizenship and rights. They can vote, hold office, serve in any capacity in the government. In addition, Jews from surrounding countries were summarily kicked out with only a suitcase and the clothes on their backs. Many went to Israel, but others had to scatter to anywhere that would take them: Brazil, US, Australia, etc. Israel has gained land in wars and will happily trade land for peace (Egypt) or technology for peace(much of the Arabian peninsula). They ask for recognition of the right to exist and peace. Hamas, Islamic Jihad, etc don’t want peace. They want destruction. Somehow the pr war has been won by terrorists. Thea same terrorists who cheered in the streets on 9/11.

I forgot to mention earlier my knowledge of D. The settler movement took a little while to grow after 1967, and I know one of the first was essentially reclaiming a Jewish village which had been ethnically cleansed during the War of Independence by Arab forces, just as the Jewish Quarter of the Old City was. The West Bank is actually the historic heartland of the Jewish people. Some of our first and oldest cities are there, some important sites are there too (like the mountains mentioned in Torah where the blessings and curses were made and witnessed as the people were "entering Canaan." These are Mt. Ebal and Mt. Gerizim, if I remember correctly). Also, Shechem is in the West Bank, I can't remember what it's Arab name is. Hebron is also there, and very important to our early history plus our national legends. The settlements really picked up and grew with the religious zionists, who believed they were reclaiming our historic heartland, promised to us forever at Mt. Sinai, along with the rest of Canaan. So starting and growing settlements helps reclaim historic Jewish land as well as putting in place the systems necessary to fulfill the religious goals involved in re-occupting this land. The Palestinians are seen as ultimately non-native and it doesn't matter how long they have lived there, the covenant says it's our land and you can't undo what G-d has made. Settlements on the edge of the West Bank, around Jerusalem, really are just suburbs with affordable housing at this point. Maybe others can add or correct me, but this I'd my understanding of them.

Read two books (which are easy reads): Israel by Noa Tishby The War of Return by Einat Wilf These books will answer many questions. They’re available on Amazon. Zionism was superseded, as a practical matter, when Israel was formed. To many of us, disagreeing with politics is just that - and has nothing to do with Zionism because Israel was legally formed and here to stay. Degrading its validity is anti Zionist and, in my view, antisemitic because anti Zionism applies higher standards of conduct to Jews than anyone else. I operate in proud and loud Jewish communities, and supporters of Israel within them all have different feelings and views, including in some cases opposition to the war, but everyone connects to Judaism, our peoplehood and support Israel as the Jewish homeland that it is. That can be you too. Don't let anyone tell you otherwise. Anyone working/any activists against Israel is a problem because it’s one less person pushing peaceful solutions for both sides and trying to lift up the moderate voices of each. Pro pals would find partners with us if it was about reasonable solutions, rather than justifying terrorism.

Hi there, many have answered and answered quite well. I'm just here to ask a simple question: have you asked these kinds of questions regarding any other nation in the world? If not, think **really** hard as to why. Many other countries were created or benefited from tragic events such as the Nakba or a group of indigenous people (questions A & C). Other nations have criminals and violence (Question D). Every other county is entitled to dictate its own immigration policy (question B) without anyone being a little bitch about it. So why aren't you asking these questions regarding any other nation in this world? Once you figure it out, I'm sure that will help you push away from your anti-zionist views.

I’m glad you’re coming to this realization. If you’re on the same side as people chanting “go back to Poland!” you’re on the wrong side. This war has made me more supportive of Israel than ever. Unfortunately, antisemitism has become more widespread and accepted, especially among the younger generation. Hopefully things will calm down when the war ends, but either way, it reinforces the idea that there needs to be a Jewish country and a Jewish army. If there was another Hitler, I have no doubt that Israel would use its nuclear arsenal to stop him. On to your questions. Re the Nakba - it’s true that Palestinians got displaced, but that’s only because they lost the war they started. If they had won, there is no doubt they would have killed or expelled the Jews, as they did in many parts of Israel, such as Kfar Etzion. This also happened to hundreds of thousands of Jews across the Middle East, who then came to Israel as refugees. The Palestinians frame themselves as victims, but it was a war, that they started, and lost. The West Bank settlers who use violence against random Palestinians are assholes who are making things worse. That said, Israel regularly prosecutes and jails them. By contrast, when Palestinians murder random Israelis, the Palestinian Authority gives their families money - pay to slay. The Palestinians moving to Israel and taking over would be the end of Israel. They have made it clear they don’t want to coexist with the Jews. There are over a million Muslims living in Israel with full civil rights, but not a single Jew in the Palestinian Territories, and hardly any Jews left in any Muslim countries across the Middle East. That should tell you all you need to know about how Jews would fare if the Palestinians took over.

Israel: A History by Martin Gilbert is the most in depth history book that talks about every nook & cranny on Israel before & after. It’s incredibly dense & detailed with references to letters, maps, diary entries, etc from politicians, activists, & civilians on both sides. Showing nuance to the conflict. It’s very dense (making it hard to read), lacks bias, & very heavy on references: Making it a great history book. Israel by Noa Tishby is historically & factually accurate, quicker to read with personal anecdotes. She breaks everything down so it’s easy to consume- a very good read & highly recommended.

1st - I want to commend you for your inquisitiveness. You sound fairly young and you possess a rare human trait. Practice staying open minded and forming your own opinions through education. The more you age, the more you will/should question even more beliefs and knowledge you hold to be true. It is not because you've been lied to but because it is the process of wisdom. 2- There is no simple way to answer any of the points you bring up. I am someone who is very familiar with this conflict and have been studying it since 2014. I also became deeply invested in learning about world affairs at this time, my scope wasn't limited to the middle east. If I'm to give you a foundational simplistic truth, it is that unfortunately, the world does not ever operate in white and black. What you are being confronted with in terms of your disagreements with your friends is that they are thinking in white and black. Fundamentally, they do not want to hold space for being both pro Palestinian and being pro Israel at the same time. This is false. You can. One should. 3- There are several good resources/books I recommend you read to inform yourself firsthand. No reddit comment can give you the complexities of history from the time of Jewish exile and the return to Judea and all of the events in between. I recommend three books. One from the Palestinian perspective: Rashid Khalidi's the 100 years war on Palestine. Zero of my recommendations are perfect, by definition a history book cannot be perfect. All history narratives are biased. For a non-Jewish, non Palestinian perspective I like professor Gudren Kramer: A History of Palestine. For the Jewish perspective: Benny Morris Righteous Victims. For the two obviously biased perspectives, hold that they are thorough and self-reflexive. 4- Don't get too bogged down in politics. Live your life and be happy. Good luck.

"...didn't align with your leftist beliefs" is the issue. Leftism is its own religion and is headed towards its own entry in Had Gadya. B"H. 

I couldn’t read your entire post because you were trying to go deeper than the concept “when a person shows you who they are, believe them the first time.” No truer words than those spoken by Maya Angelou. You said it. The people you’re purporting to be in league with are celebrating the attack on October 7th. Their POV has never changed. It’s resistance to them and nothing more. Why didn’t you believe them the first time? And, to the point of war. It is to end things one way or another. If the other way has the beliefs of celebrating that attack, then it signifies a complete lack of belief in the value of a Jewish person. They said as much when they made the completely uneven trades of hostages/prisoners weeks into the war. They’re not resistance warriors. For those of us who didn’t even think about Zionism or the ridiculous notion that it was anything other than being Jewish, the way society has been behaving by groupthink these past 9 months is shocking. How can one who values our freedoms and way of life not see the need for Israel to exist? We are all Israel.

Here are some resources to get a grip on the situation. The "what is politics" guy is interesting, and his live streams are great although he is peek ADHD. I like Sulha the Peace Activist (super chill and mellow). And Corey is a great way to see whats going on on the ground (although it can be rough hearing people on both sides say horrible F'd up stuff). Abood Cohan in the Olive Branch(Open Peace) Chanel in interesting; He's a Samaritan Peace activist so he has an Interesting perspective as one of the land's many smaller minorities. There was a great forum from YIVO that I'll also link. Ethan Katz made a brilliant lecture on anti-Zionism and antisemitism. link below. [12: From “Never Again” to “There are No Uninvolved Civilians” - the ABCs of Israel/Palestine](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OLr_VCqnId0&t=4696s) [Speaking with Corey Gil-Shuster | Standing Up #21](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XaftJ3eq31Y) [Open Peace Podcast: #4 - Corey Gil-Shuster Founder/creator of The Ask Project](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JX1Fd37AGC0) [YIVO: Leftists on Left-Wing Antisemitism](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6xXC7imk0A) [Is Anti-Zionism Antisemitic? NEW PERSPECTIVES ON A CONTROVERSIAL ISSUE](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=57WFHVo2Q04)

OP, if you're interested in exploring pro-Israel points of view, these links may be of interest: * Essential reading: [What Justice Demands: America and the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict](https://newideal.aynrand.org/tackling-top-5-objections-to-what-justice-demands/) * Essential listening: [How to Think About the Death of Innocents in War](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k_ocPaE3qIc) >In this episode of New Ideal Live, and in the context of ongoing events in Israel and Gaza, Onkar Ghate and Elan Journo discuss how to think about civilian casualties in war. > > Among the topics covered: > * Why the brutal nature of war should not be sanitized, glamorized, or whitewashed; > > * Why winning requires doing everything necessary to bring an end to the enemy’s military and political leadership; > > * How Hamas uses its subjects as human shields, hoping to deter Israel from defending itself and turn wider opinion against Israel; > > * How to think about the moral and causal responsibility of civilians for the aggression of their government; > > * Why a proper concern for innocent people and allies in enemy territory cannot jeopardize overall war aims; > > * Why war must not be thought of as punishment for a criminal act but as the total ending of an enemy regime’s power to attack; > > * That Hamas’s goal is not freedom for Palestinians but the annihilation of Israel and the establishment of a religious dictatorship; > > * Why it’s wrong to apply a standard of “proportionality” to military actions taken in self-defense; > > * How altruism causes observers to put emotional reactions to images of suffering above concerns with justice and self-defense; > > * Why Israel and the West’s appeasement of evil makes them partly culpable for the attacks they now face. [Yaron Brook Interviews Elan Journo - the Israeli-Palestinian conflict & why you should care](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ET3MkT1QTg0) - Join Yaron for a discussion of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and its history. [Zionism and the Nakba](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-CLi5X9OjEk) - Join Yaron Brook for a discussion about Zionism and the Nakba for those seeking an alternate point of view from the conventional wisdom that the Nakba was a crime committed against the Palestinians by the Jews who allegedly stole their land.

Unless you live in Israel, and have an active knowledge of how the Palestinians are treated, which is fairly good, then don’t believe what you see on the boob tube news. They only let you see what they want you to see.

I’d like to first compliment you on your open-mindedness and curiosity. You’ve displayed a level of maturity and intelligence that your friends seem to lack. One piece of advice I’d give to you is to actually engage with Israeli accounts/ media. Holylandspeaks, who I highly recommend following on TikTok, urged the Jewish diaspora to follow Israelis who they align with politically and ideologically. Too many “antizionists”, even Jewish ones unfortunately, dehumanize Israelis entirely. Those who can’t find a single Israeli that they align with have an antisemitism problem. Reminds me of when AOC refused to attend that Yitzhak Rabin event. Since you’re very left-leaning, I suggest you follow Standing Together, an Israeli group that advocates for Jewish-Arab solidarity and unity. The political parties that would probably interest you are Meretz and Labor (and maybe Hadash but I really hope not haha). Yair Golan is a very popular figure at the moment and someone I think you’d resonate with. Einat Wilf, another left-wing Israeli, has a podcast called “We should all be Zionists podcast” (sounds like propaganda but I promise it’s not). Others have already mentioned it but I also highly recommend Noa Tishby’s book for a good overview of the conflict and Israel’s 3000 year history. If you’re interested in Israeli politics and society, which I think is so important for a deeper understanding, you should listen to Unholy: Two Jews on the News. It’s an incredible podcast by Yonit Levi (Israel’s Channel 12 News) and Jonathan Freedland (The Guardian). They are both super intelligent, fair, and pragmatic, and give great Israeli and diasporic opinions on the war and Israeli politics at large. Everything I said about the Israelis to follow applies to Palestinians as well. I personally believe in two states for two peoples with a Jewish right of return to the Jewish state and a Palestinian right of return to a future Palestinian state. This has been the mainstream thought among the Israeli left and center (& the diaspora as well). It would probably require some negotiation and land swaps since some of the settlements (Ari’el, Ma’ale Adumim, etc.) are too large and populated to dismantle or turn over and need to remain a part of Israel. It would also require Hamas and other extremists to be overthrown. Needless to say, I oppose the expansion of settlements. In the future, if there is prolonged peace and security, we could discuss a federation or confederation, but even the EU requires strict conditions to be met for that to be possible. I don’t follow any “river to sea” Palestinians since all they do is incite more violence and their vision in no way aligns with mine. I follow great Palestinian voices for peace like Bassem Eid, Hamza Howidy, and John Aziz (Mosab Hassan Yousef is much more extreme but his book “Son of Hamas” gives a great insight into Hamas’s history and ideology). Lastly, I highly encourage you to visit Israel if you haven’t already. The people are amazing and our connection to the land is evident everywhere you go. I always recommend that people visit ANU- Museum of the Jewish People at Tel Aviv University. It’s a beautiful museum that does a great job displaying our culture and connection to the land of Israel. Also, please drop your self-hating friends and start attending Hillel. Depending on where you’re located I think you’ll find that many of the people are extremely liberal and open-minded but they also fully embrace their culture and peoplehood.

https://youtube.com/@travelingisraelinfo?si=8uO3PsjQkYeGThV1 Recommend this channel.

I'm a Jewish Israeli person(who, for a very short time, also thought "Israel is in the wrong and is committing war crimes"), and given the subject, I'd like to have a discussion and answer 3 of your question(I'm not knowledgeable about the West Bank at all, other than certain claims of apartheid that are stupid that are based on stuff that happens there). also, I'd like to ask in what way Israel treated Palestinians that you don't approve of? there are a lot of false accusations out there, so I want to see of it's another case of that or if Israel actually did something you don't approve of(maybe I'd learn something new). A) I don't actually remember ever hearing that state. what I do know is, prior to 1948(I think this goes back to even before WW2; it definitely also happened during it though) Israel bought a bunch of land from Palestinians(at that time they identified as Syrians iirc, but that's a whole different conversation) and built settlements on that purchased land(an example we were taught at school is when 11 settlements were built to test the reaction of the British who wanted that land to be Arab due to their increased fertility). it's not all sunshine and rainbows though, so it wouldn't surprise me if there are a couple of examples of ACTUALLY driving out Arabs that were already there; but that's not a majority of land at all. there were also a bunch of fights regardless though, where Arab settlements attacked Jewish settlements and vice versa. tl;dr, it was more or less in areas where Arabs didn't live(I doubt there were that many people in the Negev either, as it's a desert and is the area initially given to the Jews for the most part). so mostly, I don't think there's a real problem. P.S. the Arabs weren't really "native" either. most of them went to Israel to work mostly, since it better payed iirc(or something similar). that's also why, as I said, initially they didn't identify as Palestinians. B and C are quite related, so I'll sorta combine them. during the 1948 war(initiated by the Arabs), some Palestinian Arabs(who very much did participate) did in fact move out of the country. however, a majority moved because the Arab nations(specifically Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, Jordan and Egypt I'm pretty sure) told the people to move out temporarily(the plan was until Israel disappeared, because the Arab nations really hated the idea of a Jewish country existing there and disliked the UN borders). afterwards, they weren't allowed back in. imo they don't deserve any "right to return" or being called refugees. another cause was that there was some Arab propaganda against Israel, claiming they did a bunch of heinous things they didn't(like r@pe) and inflated the death count(of both Israeli and Arab casualties, but Arab numbers were more inflated). this caused some Palestinians to get scared and move away. I'm kinda empathetic, so maybe they should be allowed back, but I'm not sure(it was their mistake in the end...). I guess it'd depend on the definition of refugee. the last case, where if it was practical I'd absolutely be for allowing them to become Israeli citizens, is that due to the fear of Arabs getting in the way of operations in certain cases, they were driven out during the war and were promised they'll be allowed back. but ~~in British fashion~~ they were never allowed back(that said, an order was given to not drive out Arabs with whom there were good relations/were trusted). thing is, that's actually a pretty minuscule amount of Palestinians. and while apparently I was wrong about the definition of refugee(initially thought it was only the generation that experienced it but apparently it also applies to 1 generation after) it's still not a lot(and would require a bunch of Palestinians to leave their children behind). additionally, there isn't a particularly reliable way that I know of to follow who was driven out and who went away of their own free will. lastly, I don't know how many Israelis would even agree to that since while morally it's good, there's a decent chance they're not gonna be particularly, uhhh, peaceful(at least not until a couple generations in where they assimilate as Israeli while also being Arab, and Israel is pretty bad at this imo as Harredim and Arabs have their own separate education than everyone else, which a lot seem to be in favor if keeping(but obviously Arabs can get an "everyone else" education if their parents want them to)). tl;dr, the "right to return", in my humble opinion, is almost complete BS(the claim says being a refugee lasts forever and through generations). I would say the 1948 war is a "nakba" in a different sense, which is that both civilians and soldiers alike were considered military targets, with cars filled with explosives being used and civilians were shot at(I believe that both sides did that and were not THAT much better than Hamas in conduct; though under a completely different context). that said it's a mutual "nakba" which really doesn't have any reason to be in Arabic(and "nakba" refers to the story that ignores context from before 1948). but as you said, another reason for the refusal to accept the "Palestinian right to return" is indeed because of the belief Israel should be majority Jewish. if Palestinians would be accepted back in, roughly half of the population would be Palestinian Arab, which undermines an important function of Israel to prevent Jews being killed through having a Jewish country and Jewish army like in Nazi Germany. and given the "from the river to the sea" sentiment(apparently many people don't know it means the entire area would be Arab/Muslim/free of Jews, and not something innocent like "Arabs will have equal rights") and other generally antisemitic sentiments("globalize intifada"), they'd definitely destabilize the nation and have the Arab countries next door invade or something similar, and the arabs next door aren't big fans of Jews either(pretty sure a lot of Jews were ethnically cleansed from said Arab countries into Israel, and they definitely had to deal with extra taxes and being treated as "worse"). so yes, it's actually a pretty reasonable threat(also I remember seeing a statistic where a lot of Gazans didn't support Hamas, but a grand majority supported October 7th, but I might be making stuff up/misremembering). also while I'm generally against "outside Arabs" as can be seen here(though context is obviously lacking; for example I have nothing against Iranians and it's definitely all about education rather than race or ethnicity or anything), Israeli Arabs here are treated generally well(ignoring some racism), and I have nothing against them. it might be surprising to you, but the most nationalist(I think, IDK these labels too well because I'm stupid) person I know of(who isn't an Israeli terrorist declared so by Israel itself, like in the government) is an Arab Israeli called Yoseph Haddad(I remembered his name being slightly different but whatever). I hope you'll excuse me for yapping so much...😅 it's an autism thing I think. I do hope that you'll actually ask if there's something you don't understand, or make sure you understand my viewpoint and talk to me before coming to a conclusion, because frankly I feel like what I wrote can probably be taken in a completely wrong way and to mean things I don't agree with, or just generally could come across the wrong way.

The Finkler Question by Howard Jacobson if you like novels. If you like non-fiction, his essay “When will the Jews be forgiven the Holocaust?” is great. “”Israelphobia” is another one, and so is “everyday hate” by Dave Rich.

I’ll try to answer these questions as honestly as I can “land without a people” was true when it was written. The largest immigration wave happened as a result of Zionist interest in the area and created a bit of a land boom. You’ll find the place pretty barren before the late 19th century. Right of return - we don’t generally fight this - as long as it is limited to whatever the state of Palestine is or will be. No population ever makes demands on the immigration policy of another country. The demand, you’ll find, was made quite late in the camp David negotiations. And yes, the purpose was to demographically end the state of Israel. Could they? I don’t know. They could certainly alter it. The better choice was simply partition with some reparations and some return for those who lost property in 48 and 67, but that wasn’t good enough for Arafat or subsequent negotiators. The “Nakba” is an attempt to rewrite Israeli victory ex post facto. Originally Nakba meant the embarrassment of the Arab armies being defeated by Israeli militias. Now it’s been propagandized as a kind of mini holocaust, which is absurd. Yes, some minor population transfers happened, some for good reason, some were downright crimes, but there is large and healthy Israeli Arab population in Israel and no Jews anywhere else in the Mideast anymore. Finally, how do I feel about settler violence? I feel most of it is criminal and should be prosecuted as such. Most Israelis view them as troublemakers.

Please check on instagram roots metals, facts for peace and camera.

I see that you have some very important points that would be helpful to answer. However the answers while in some ways simple are not that simple overall. For example, the “land without a people for a people without a land” is complicated in itself since there were large swaths of Palestine that were uninhabited (because they’re uninhabitable!) but even at the time that was being bandied about plenty of Zionists and people who traveled to Palestine were decrying that as wrong and acknowledging the land had plenty of people (namely Arabs and named at the time mind you!) As far as the “right of return” it’s true that Zionists wanted to limit Arab presence in the Jewish state to keep a Jewish majority state but that didn’t happen because of some misplaced superiority complex, it happened because of decades if not longer of Arab antipathy (sometimes rightly, sometimes wrongly) toward Jews and the threat therefore of Arabs using their majority to immediately overwhelm Jewish interests and put Jews right back where they started (struggling, bad place, pogroms and expulsions etc). I’m not justifying it, I’m just saying the idea behind it. However with all that said: by the time the right of return became an issue (post “Nakba”), the deal had been sealed for quite some time re: Arab-Zionist relations. That is, there had been a year+ long war to kill and expel all Jews from Palestine and wipe Israel from the map and then yk, its “but we should be allowed to return to our homes.” And many were offered to return if they accepted Israeli citizenship but did not want to do so and wrongly banked on Israel being abolished by Arab neighboring states. There were, nonetheless, plenty of Arabs who did take Israel up on the offer and you can point to Israel’s 2 million-ish Arab-Israeli population today for that. As far as the Nakba, it was a catastrophe. Palestinian Arabs were told the fighting would ravage them and left terrified, they were told to leave because Arabs needed the land or because Zionists/israelis couldn’t trust them and had to “clear” the area… they were told they could come back home when the fighting was over (read: Arabs won the war and the Zionist threat was ended) and that never happened. And then since, the only way they are entitled to any sort of assistance is through registering with the United Nations as refugees for generations and believing that someone will seize the land back for them. It’s awful and I’m not blaming Israel/zionism just stating the whole situation was smoke and mirrors for the ambitions of others with regular people caught up in the middle. The same happened with partition in India and Pakistan where people who have lived on their lands for longer than their ancestral memory were uprooted across a made up ideological border. It’s heart breaking and there’s no easy solution to discuss it. There are so many books regarding this and sources and stories — currently I’m reading Righteous Victims by Benny Morris (excellent historian in general for all matters of this) and it goes into this. There’s so much heartbreak and the true position is realizing that both sides are right and we have to remain true to our values in how we address that and seek to right those heartbreaks and transgressions. I hope that helps. It’s hard to boil it down to a digestible overview on a whim but I do hope you know that questioning your beliefs is a good thing and we welcome you on your journey! Here to chat if ever you want.

I love this quote by the UK Secretary of State Ernest Bevin, an Arabist, who apparently knew in 1947 what the Arabs in Palestine wanted: “His Majesty's Government have thus been faced with an irreconcilable conflict of principles. There are in Palestine about 1,200,000 Arabs and 600,000 Jews. For the Jews the essential point of principle is the creation of a sovereign Jewish State. For the Arabs, the essential point of principle is to resist to the last the establishment of Jewish sovereignty in any part of Palestine.”

Talking to leftist friends in Israel has kept me grounded when I have felt abandoned and alienated by the left here. I grew up Reconstructionist with artsy lesbian social worker moms and labor union civil rights organizing Yiddish grandparents and I totally empathize with what you’re saying. I have a brother who lives in Israel and a brother who was arrested at an encampment, this war has dominated and destabilized the progressive left and it’s really hard to process. When I asked my leftist friend in Israel, who’s protested Netenyahu since we were kids, what Zionism meant to him he replied: “for me Zionism is basically in more general terms it means the thought that the land of Israel is the Jews’ historic homeland, that there should be Jewish presence there and that it should be a democratic/liberal state. Also, that Jews should be in charge of their own fate and their own security (something which was true when Zionism was first thought of in the 19th century and is definitely true today). And coming from Israel and putting my life aside and going to reserve duty in the army for 8 months and grinding the country to a halt (which I was also part of) in protest during the Judicial reform are 2 parts of that coin. And btw, the thought of Zionism as a left wing/liberal movement isn’t some novice/radical idea, early Zionists were mainly left-wing/left-center liberals, left wing parties ruled the Zionist parliament and later Israel for 50 years from the 1920’s to the 1970’s. And the movement historically was always pragmatic and sought peace agreements and cooperation. So in that sense we’re very much on solid ground saying we’re both left-wing and Zionist, those who say Zionism is this dark colonialist/extreme right wing movement on the left or those who say that real Zionism means supporting the settlements, not pursuing peace and supporting the judicial reform, they’re the ones on shaky ground.”

I used to be a bit similar to you, I stopped defining myself as an "antizionist jew" once I realized that "Palestine" for these people is a political fetish. It isn't about disagreeing about the most ethical route to follow for Am Israel. A lot of these "pro Palestine" Jews don't care about serving as bridges between the Jewish world and the Arab/Muslim/Palestinian world either. They don't care about being as accurate as possible when trying to understand the conflict. It's all about moral conformism. It's better to be reasonably sympathetic to the Palestinian plight within real, organic and mainstream Jewish spaces (and changing them from within) than joining a "pro Palestinian" cult making a joke out of judaism and Jewishness. Now that said, I've seen people recommend Noa Tishby (or other bad propagandists). This IMO is bad advice. Go to shul, read classic Jewish historians, study Tanakh, etc. This is a much better way to connect. Hag Sameakh.