You Mean It’s All Zionism’s Fault? Who Knew? Vienna with Palm Trees?

My Facebook friend and Times of Israel correspondent Sarah Tuttle-Singer has been posting a lot lately about Israel and Gaza. I’ve seen Anti Zionists online saying if it weren’t for Zionism…

My sarcastic Mark Twain like meter is off the charts. Is the entire thing the fault of Zionism? I got the feeling some Anti Zionists want to dig Theodore Herzl up and charge him with war crimes. That will take some doing.

Herzl wanted a secular European style state. We want what Europe has, but they don’t want us. He thought the Arabs could live peacefully next to Jews and they, the Arabs would benefit. Herzl died in 1900, so he didn’t see any of this.

What about modern Israel?

Born in War: Herzl imagined diplomacy, not Jewish groups fighting Arabs and the British. He would never have imagined Arabs invaders.

Military Culture: Herzl imagined lawyers, engineers, and intellecturals in coffee houses. He didn’t imagine a hyper military culture. He might have even seen it as vulgar. Herzl was a contemporary of Cecil Rhodes. Those two were nothing like each other. Herzl may have wanted to form a colony, but he was not up to being the bull in the China shop. Herzl might even have said please, lol.

Jewish Diversity: Herzl meant Zionism to be for his fellow Europeans. Americans were told send your money, but don’t be pioneers, you’re too comfortable. Thirty years ago, there was a book about Paul John Paul II’s closest friend, who happened to be Jewish. They grew up together in Poland. The protagonist, Jerzy Kluger’s father described Zionism in the following manner: One Jew taking money from a second Jew to send the third Jew to Palestine. Seems like a lot of labor. Mizrahi Jews? Who are they? Ethiopian and Indian Jews? They have Jews there?

Religion’s Role: Herzl was secular and that’s what he expected of Zionism. I can see someone religious looking at Herzl and saying, You’re no Messiah sir, and I’ve followed a few. Sabbtai Zvi comes to mind. Think Monty Python’s Life of Brian. Herzl would’ve been driven mad by the Haredi. He thought secular education would eliminate them. So did Israel’s first Prime Minister David Ben Gurion. Great minds think alike.

Technology and Identity: Modern Isaeli Hi Tech? Skyscrapers? Herzl is looking for a cafe, coffee, and a pastry. Maybe he could follow his journalistic career and interview start up heads. Would have been rather heady…

Would modern Israel have occurred to Herzl? Probably not in its  present form.

He forsaw sovereignty and refuge. That was his main goal. He didn’t envision Jewish plurality, constant wars or Middle Eastern rootedness. He was imagining a European country in that sense. I can’t picture Herzl eating the local food, walking through the Old City and what to him would be the lack of manners and culture. What have I done, he would cry.

Final question and answer for those Anti-Zionists. Is Zionism Colonialism? OK, the first Zionists were European, but normally colonizers are sent by an empire. There was no Jewish empire to send colonists. There was the Balfour Declaration that provided some British involvement. Jewish settlement had more backing, financial, eventually military help. The local Arabs didn’t have that. Again, there wasn’t an already existing Jewish power in Europe to send the colonizers. Jews can point to millenia of history in the region. It wasn’t like the French colonizing Algeria for example. Jews went to farm the land, not exploit non existent minerals to Europe. That’s what Europe had Africa for. Israel through history was a land bridge to somewhere else, not the place providing the wealth. That’s a different history lesson.

Here’s an irony. Israelis see Zionism as anti-colonial. Jews were second class citizens in Europe. Palestinians see it as settler colonialism. We can all argue about the history, we can argue which side. I know which side I am on.

To sum up, was Zionism Colonial? If you have a strict definition of Europeans moving onto that land as the Anti Zionists do and nothing else, yes there are strong colonial features. If you define Zionism strictly as imperial powers ruling a colony for their own benefit, no it doesn’t fit. It’s definitely a nationalist project with colonial tools and consequences. That’s why the debate never ends.