
There is a difference between Zionism and being Jewish, also important not to confuse the two. You can be a Zionist and not support the Israeli government. You can be Jewish and not be a Zionist. However, stating that the Jewish people should not have a sovereign state is also wrong too as everyone should have a place that they can call their homeland. Using Zionism as a way to spread hate against Jews without taking in the different perspectives (left, right and moderate), is antisemitic.
The diaspora has not decimated direct Jewish descent tho, and now you want to pick and choose instances where your argument applies? You feel the same way about a 3rd generation Palestinian born in Lebanon whose parents were also born in Lebanon? Palestinian isn’t a race after all
You’re conflating expansionism with national self-determination. Manifest Destiny maps better to Greater Israel. Zionism is closer to Texans (former Mexicans + US residents) after independence defending an existing society while the borders remained contested (by Mexicans that became “foreign”).
Im not sure that supports your premise. You could easily come up with a story to ban genetic testing if there was genetic identifiers of Jewishness if there are different groups within it (say not one market but 2-3). This also could be explained if Palestinians share one of those markers.
Judaism already has a built in system for who is Jewish. It only requires one parent to be Jewish. You can have 50% Jewish DNA and still not be Jewish. Native American tribes also had outsiders join their tribe and be considered 100% one of them despite what DNA says. Would you take upon yourself the liberty to tell them no, they’re not actually part of the tribe?
The zionist movement was developed around the active settlement of Jews in Palestine. I think it’s most similar to the settlement of Mormons in Utah. The Mormons were settling in a religious promised land (which they said was a New Zion) to escape religious persecution in the eastern United States.
Texas was a political secession from Mexico (one of several at the time) focused primarily on legal disputes with the Mexican central government and on the desires of Anglo-Texans to have slavery. That is very different from the “utopian haven from religious and ethnic persecution” that motivated Israel’s creation. The puritans or Quakers could also be considered somewhat similar.
They have actually done genetic studies on Jewish and Palestinian populations. Because of the propensity for genetic disorders within Jewish populations, they are an extremely well understood demographic genetically. The genetics show that most Jewish populations are of Levantine descent, with varying degrees of admixture from the populations in their host countries. The Palestinians are closely related, with some genetic admixture from peninsular Arabs and Egyptians.
There were members of the original Zionist movement who themselves were not ancestrally Jewish. The Subbotniks were Russian Christians who adopted Jewish religious practices, and many immigrated to Palestine in the very first waves of Jewish settlement. There was a time where the Israeli government, decades later, attempted to deny their eligibility for Aliyah. But this was overturned.
Revisionist Zionism and labor Zionism were the primary competing ideologies prior to the founding of Israel. Plus I think revisionist Zionism is pretty damn relevant given it’s what the current Israeli government follows. And Jhabotinsky turned out to be right while his Labor rivals were wrong. The Arabs did not just roll over and allow for Israel to be founded without resisting.
Israelis that live in that Occupied Palestine are aware that is wrong because according to the Talmud, Ketubot 111a commands that Jews should not mass-return to the land by force, rebel against the nations, or hasten the end times. Therefore they go against their own laws and faith to mass occupy, genocide, ethnically cleanse Palestinians off their own land. So no, you can either be a genocidal Zionist freak and steal land or be a diasporic Jew who believes in a free Palestine.
I see the parallel to the Mormon in Utah more than American Expansionism too. The majority of Israel being middle eastern/African groups (“eastern” Jews, Kurds, Druze, Ethiopian, etc) makes it hard to call it solely Anglo (whether we even consider any Jews “Anglo” is a whole other can of worms)
I mean they kinda did. The principalities in Russia faced massive population migrations and invasions following from the South, East and west. Wars by kingdoms trying to invade Europe did happen although they tended to get sick by the disease and weaken. Scotland invaded England when they were struck with the plague. But all that accomplished was spreading the plague back into Scotland. Due to all the deaths of nobles smaller lords and merchants were able to get land(with the king’s permission)
I mean that’s just large scale actions. Pleanty of towns and villages were abandoned or died out completely it wasn’t that uncommon to stake a claim. The problem is more serfdom and the requirement of people to stay to their land but the plague allowed people to leave and create new lives in these areas taking homes, lands, etc from the dead
That’s bs… land reverted to lords if everyone died. It wasn’t just given to invaders. The closest parallel to America is actually (and ironically) Jews being dispossessed of lands rightfully theirs during the turmoil. Of course, no one thinks that was just unoccupied land being taken like they do for native Americans.
Again a lot of people died including the lords. Also land is vast and you may not own it in name but you are basically left to your own devices as if you did. Land becomes uninhabitable and you can stake a claim even a lordship depending on your money and rank it’s not a great parallel because nobody in the history of the world had basically 2 continents up for grabs. Where whoever can enforce their control over an area can have it.
Again, that’s not how any of this worked. Almost all of Europe has some sort of land tenure system. When people died tenure reverted up the chain. Invaders were just that, invaders. They could make a deal with the tenure holder but it was never “land is empty so whoever can take it “
But areas of Europe were depopulated by the Black Death. Verona lost nearly 60% of its people. I am not sure what “the population rivaled Europe before ‘settlers’ arrived. Are we talking population density? Sheer numbers? Which settlers? The Jews from other nearby lands? The Muslims that followed them? Only the Ashkenazi Jewish population?
Mostly because most of it was already settled. The only real empty places were in Russia where one could easily move to one of the Khanate and settle due to the vastness of the land/uncentral gov. Like the Cossacks or the Rus. A lot of natives didn’t have land systems like that in Europe meaning no chain of ownership or in most cases a system of ownership. So when a tribe is wiped out due to smallpox the land has no claim on it and this happened often with 96% of natives dying due to disease
What do you think the Principalities bordered? The consolidation of the Russian Principalities following the fall of the mongol empire and the rise of the Khanates. One of the largest being the Crimean Khanate which had a border with the Principality of Moscow. You don’t know what you are talking about bud
Land empty people move on to empty land says it’s there’s. Government comes and says you’re part of us. People either stay or move further away quite similar to American settlement on the frontier where native populations decimated by disease were few meaning more empty land to take. I’m tired of this back and forth and i want to go to bed
We’re talking about native Americans. And Verona is a perfect analog. Even though it got depopulated by disease, no foreign settlers were aggressively taking over the land claiming it was empty and pushing the remaining people out so the population recovered. Israel was obviously even worse because there wasn’t even any disease, then forcibly made the land “empty” for settlers.
Ah, yes, we were so generous when we gave them forced dependence on a government that routinely overlooks, abuses, and disenfranchises them, constantly freezes any funding, has unnecessary and targeted legal barriers, and continues to encroach on ancestral and spiritual land— in short, the genocide of Indigenous Americans never stopped, it just changed form.
The analogy is about the structure and motivation of the conflict, not a perfect ethnic one-to-one. Manifest Destiny was territorial expansion; Zionism was a national self-determination movement. Texas ~ Israel; Mexico ~ the invading Arab states; Anglo immigrants ~ newer jewish immigrants; and pro-independence Tejanos ~ the alliance of locally rooted groups that supported Israel, including established Jews, Druze and some Bedouin and Arab communities. Other Tejanos remained loyal to Mexico, similar to the Arab groups that became the Palestinians opposed the new state. Tejanos (on both sides) were later intimidated, marginalized, displaced and dispossessed. Had those who fled been denied integration in Mexico, kept as hereditary refugees, and told their only solution was reconquering Texas, they would be like the Palestinians #FreeTexas
I agree that obtaining safety and autonomy was a core part of Zionism, like it was for Texans (not Expansionists). Texas had both longtime residents and newcomers on the independence side, just as Israel did. It wasn't based on removing every member of the other ethnic group. Many Tejanos stayed in Texas, like many Arabs stayed in Israel and became citizens (~20% of the country today). The Palestinian crisis isn't an inevitable consequence of Zionism itself. It is the consequence of selfish and apathetic leadership on both the Israeli and Arab sides that repeatedly chose, and continue to choose, politics over a durable solution.
I mean some are, mainly the Mizrahim and Sephardim that inhabited it prior to the Zionist movement. Indigeneity isn’t about “were you there in the distant past” it’s about what side you are on in a colonial dynamic. The Japanese originated in Korea 2,500 years ago. But they were the colonizers in recent times. Same goes for the Americo-Liberians and some Northern Irish. They were colonizing a land their ancestors once lived in and displacing the local people.
If you don’t do any fucking research and get all your info from TikTok that’s on you, but the only difference is that Arabs don’t get drafted into the military. They can still volunteer. There are far more Muslims in Israel than Jews in ANY Muslim country. You don’t know what apartheid is
Btw the plantation of ulster in Northern Ireland (which I named as an example) was made after the Irish revolted against increasing English domination, so when the English won, they ethnically cleansed ulster and filled it with Protestant settlers so there wouldn’t be risk of another Irish revolt.
Fucking what. Palestinians are just local Jewish, Canaanite, and Samaritan peoples who adopted Arabic culture after the 600s what the fuck are you talking about. You told someone to do research and you try pulling that shit????? And you’re bringing up collective ethnic responsibility for past actions? Sounds an awful lot like the “Jewish decide” which was a massive component of historic antisemitism.