What’s Wrong with Zionism

In an age where buzzwords are at the forefront of social causes, Zionism has become a loaded term. The idea of Jews having autonomy in their ancestral homeland has become muddled with stipulations and caveats imposed by its opponents.

In the latest mutation of antisemitism, people hate Jews for their state. But opposing an indigenous group reclaiming their ancestral homeland isn’t a fight with which most people are willing to get on board. So, the definition has been modified, remarketed, butchered, even, by those who hate Jews and cannot stand that Jews have a state. 

While most Jews still firmly believe and understand the original and true meaning of Zionism, the buzzwords that have latched onto it have taken over in the broader context of social justice. In order to make Zionism deeply unpopular, it has been labeled as the antithesis of what modern progressive society believes.

Like every mutation of antisemitism, anti-Zionism assesses what values are popular in contemporary society and paints Jews as the opposition to them. In the modern era, when racism, colonialism, and white supremacy are the evils society is rightfully focused on trying to eradicate, Zionism has been remanufactured to fit perfectly into that box. 

The West has by and large agreed that a marginalized group is the only one who defines the means of their oppression and liberation without third parties dictating the narrative. But because Jews are subjected to a double standard, that principle is thrown out the window. Instead, the Jewish reality of yearning for 2,500 years to return home to Zion is stomped out by a more trendy cause. The shadow of supposed racism and colonialism that has been cast over the Jewish liberation movement has made people hesitant to support it. 

Many people don’t want to publicly associate themselves with Zionism. Whether the reason is fear, disdain, or just a need for social acceptance, ‘Zionist’ has become an undesirable label. The word has become so loaded, so tainted, that despite people’s connection to its meaning, they know that uttering the ‘Z-word’ shuts down all avenues of productive conversation. The use of the buzzword is met with others that have been overused and stripped of their true meaning, like fascism, apartheid, or ethnostate.

The more these words increase in popularity, the more their definitions are diluted. Self-proclaimed activists base their arguments against Zionism on the fact that it has these unpopular attributes. But as they so clearly display, they do not grasp the definitions nor the practical implications of these words, and this builds a false definition of Zionism. Trendy buzzwords give a false and intimidating weight to a concept like Zionism that deters people from supporting it in its authentic and agreeable terms.

The weight and numerous caveats imposed on the word Zionism are not a unique phenomenon. We see this also in the case of feminism: the true definition is simple and morally imperative. However, people who want to maintain women as second-class citizens manipulate the definition of feminism to make it less appealing. According to people who oppose feminism, women who are feminists are shrill, angry, and all-around undesirable. Men who are feminists are weak and submissive to women. But in both cases, people just want the equality and freedom to which they’re entitled. It’s not these words that are so problematic, but rather, the people who stand against them trying to dirty the cause.

In the words of former member of Knesset Einat Wilf, “Feminism and Zionism are ongoing rebellions against millennia-long power structures that assigned women and Jews a ‘proper place’ in society.” Despite the majority of people agreeing that women deserve full and equal rights to men, people are afraid of the word feminism due to its baggage. 

Wilf adds, “Nowhere has the backlash been more apparent than the words that denote these two revolutions. These words have become so ‘stained’ that even those who support their underlying political purpose—whether it be equal rights and opportunities for women and men or political self-determination for the Jewish people in their ancient homeland—feel at times uncomfortable to publicly identify as a feminist or Zionist.”

The future of Zionism is in the hands of those who stand by its premise, despite what the word means to its opposition. A key part of dismantling Zionism is making people afraid to use the word; it becomes dirty and taboo. From digital advocacy to pro-Israel college students facing opponents on campus, upholding Zionism and Jewish resilience starts with reclaiming the word itself. Everyone who believes in a people’s right to sovereignty in their ancestral homeland should, and must, be able to openly and confidently identify with Zionism.

Zionism, the Jewish liberation movement, must be defined by the group it aims to uplift—no one else. Just as all other decolonization efforts and marginalized groups are granted this basic respect, so, too, Jews and Jews alone will determine what Zionism is and isn’t. Our millennia-old liberation movement is not subject to the caveats and stipulations antisemites impose on it. It’s time we remember that, reclaim Zionism, and fully reject outside impositions on the terms of our liberation or identity.