‘Zionism is Racism’ is Rubbish

The Green Party of England and Wales, which in years past focused on the environment, has this month adopted a resolution asserting that Zionism is a form of racism.  So, the “green” in the party’s name can now be understood as referring to both environmental issues and also to Islam–green is the color regularly associated with Islam, and many Muslims will eagerly endorse the gist of that resolution.  How convenient!

But, on analysis, it turns out that the Green Party resolution is nothing more than nonsensical rubbish, and that isn’t very convenient for anyone.

I submit that virtually everyone who identifies as a Zionist would agree that, in broad outlines, Zionism is a political doctrine that affirms that there should be a sovereign Jewish nation-state in all or part of the ancestral Jewish homeland.  Different people might add details to the definition, but I think very few self-identifying Zionists would reject it.

Here is the key question: what are the essential features of a political doctrine that qualifies as a form of racism?

To answer this question, let’s examine a doctrine that unquestionably was racist through and through: the doctrine underlying the Jim Crow laws.  For decades spanning the end of the nineteenth century and more than the first half of the twentieth century, many States in the U.S. had laws imposing racial segregation.  These Jim Crow laws governed virtually every aspect of public life, compelling whites and blacks to be separated in schools, in vehicles of public transport, in recreational facilities, etc.  And the laws also encroached on some of the most intimate areas of private life–it was unlawful in many States for mixed-race couples to marry.

There can be absolutely no doubt that the Jim Crow laws were a form of racism.  We know that because we know that the laws were enacted by legislators who were unanimously white, and that those legislators all believed that black persons were inherently inferior to white persons.  Thus, there were two quite sharply-delineated races that were separated because members of one of those races believed that members of the other race were inferior.

How does Zionism compare to Jim Crow?

Zionism–the doctrine that there should be a Jewish nation-state in the ancestral homeland of the Jewish people–does not on its face make any reference at all to any race.  Members of the Green Party would probably insist that Jews constitute a distinct race of humans, but there are three problems with that view.

First, it means the Greens accept racial categorizations that are virtually synonymous with nazism–the idea that Jews constitute a distinct race of human beings, separate from all other races.  Not many thoughtful, rational persons would be comfortable with that association.

The second problem is literally visible to the naked eye:

(Israel Defense Forces)

The above is a collage of photos of seven I.D.F. soldiers who were killed in Gaza when their armored vehicle was hit by an explosive device.  If you look at the skin colors of these seven fallen young men, you will see virtually every shade known to humans.  Jews from Europe, from the Levant, and from Ethiopia all belong to one single race?  Are you going to trust the Greens, or your lying eyes?

The third problem is that many of the most ardent, dedicated Zionists are not Jews at all.  In the U.S., numerous evangelical Christians strongly identify themselves as Zionists.  It therefore defies reality to presume that Zionism pits Jews, and Jews alone, against some other race of people.

So, unlike Jim Crow, Zionism is not a doctrine that is embraced only by members of a single race.

And, what is more, Zionism is not a doctrine that targets any particular race for disfavored treatment.  In Israel, Muslims comprise almost twenty percent of the population, and they enjoy all the civil rights–the right to vote, to form political parties, to serve in government–that are accorded to Jewish Israelis.  There is no majority Arab or Islamic country that has anything approaching such a substantial percentage of Jewish citizens.

Members of the Green Party would no doubt insist that Israel’s Law of Return, which permits all Jews in the world to become citizens of Israel, somehow discriminates against Muslims, including Palestinians.  But Israel is avowedly the nation-state of the Jewish people; Judaism is the established or favored religion of Israel.  It is a mistake to think that Israel is unique in favoring one particular religion over all others, and Islamic countries are particularly noteworthy here.

For example, in Saudi Arabia all citizens are deemed to be Muslims, any foreigner seeking to become a citizen must convert to Islam, and the public practice of any religion other than Islam is unlawful.  In Iran, the head of state and the president are both required to be Shi’ite Muslim (and the head of state must be a man).  In the Maldives, all citizens are required by law to be Muslim.  I could go on, but it should be obvious that Israel is not alone in favoring one religion over others.  But the Greens do not insist that these Islamic countries are inherently racist.

In summary, Zionism is a doctrine that is neither promoted or advocated solely by members of a particular race, nor is it designed to handicap or harm members of any particular race.  The Green Party nevertheless labels Zionism as a form of racism.  But perhaps we can understand how that party could officially adopt such ridiculous nonsense.  After all, the Greens’ leader, Zack Polanski, in his previous career as a hypnotherapist, assured women that, if he hypnotized them, he could increase the size of their breasts.