The Book |
Reclaiming the Meaning of Zionism from its Enemies
Especially since October 7th, the term “Zionist” has been thrown around as pejorative term, a wholly negative phenomenon with no redeeming qualities whatsoever. Whether those weaponizing the term in this manner are on the political Left or, increasingly, on the Right, the idea is to associate the longing for and preservation of a Jewish homeland with colonialism, greed, racism, inhumanity, etc. Before we can gauge the accuracy of those associations, we need to ask what precisely is Zionism?
With cultural and religious roots that stretch back to Biblical times, the origins of the modern Zionist movement can be traced back to Theodore Herzl. Born into a Jewish family in Hungary in 1860, Herzl became an attorney and later, a journalist, covering events all over Europe. His cross-continental experiences as a journalist made him realize that Jew-hatred was not restricted to the Austro-Hungarian Empire but was pervasive throughout Europe.
By early adulthood, Herzl, with remarkable prescience, realized that Europe was not nearly as safe for Jews as some prominent Jews seemed to think. (In light of what was to unfold in Europe just a few decades later, even the most ardent anti-Zionist would have to concede that Herzl was not entirely wrong about that.) He soon came to the conviction that, if the Jewish people were to survive, they would have to establish their own state.
Notably, Herzl initially considered the prospect of a piece of sparsely populated land in East Africa that might serve as a refuge for world Jewry. Although that proposal never materialized, the fact that Herzl pursued that option enthusiastically speaks volumes about the purpose of Zionism. Clearly, his main impetus was to establish a Jewish homeland, not to displace or cause harm to any other people.
By the late 19th century, not only European Jews but also some from Yemen and Morocco began settling in the Holy Land at a time when the entire Middle East was under the control of the Muslim Ottoman Empire, administered by the Sultan in Istanbul. So, if these early Zionists were “uninvited occupiers”, “invaders”, and so forth, how did this return of Jews occur at a time when Muslims, not Westerners, ruled the region?
The answer can be found in the land purchase records of the Ottoman Empire. To illustrate, see the following Wiki summary of the origins of the modern Israeli city, Petah Tikva:
With cultural and religious roots that stretch back to Biblical times, the origins of the modern Zionist movement can be traced back to Theodore Herzl. Born into a Jewish family in Hungary in 1860, Herzl became an attorney and later, a journalist, covering events all over Europe. His cross-continental experiences as a journalist made him realize that Jew-hatred was not restricted to the Austro-Hungarian Empire but was pervasive throughout Europe.
By early adulthood, Herzl, with remarkable prescience, realized that Europe was not nearly as safe for Jews as some prominent Jews seemed to think. (In light of what was to unfold in Europe just a few decades later, even the most ardent anti-Zionist would have to concede that Herzl was not entirely wrong about that.) He soon came to the conviction that, if the Jewish people were to survive, they would have to establish their own state.
Notably, Herzl initially considered the prospect of a piece of sparsely populated land in East Africa that might serve as a refuge for world Jewry. Although that proposal never materialized, the fact that Herzl pursued that option enthusiastically speaks volumes about the purpose of Zionism. Clearly, his main impetus was to establish a Jewish homeland, not to displace or cause harm to any other people.
By the late 19th century, not only European Jews but also some from Yemen and Morocco began settling in the Holy Land at a time when the entire Middle East was under the control of the Muslim Ottoman Empire, administered by the Sultan in Istanbul. So, if these early Zionists were “uninvited occupiers”, “invaders”, and so forth, how did this return of Jews occur at a time when Muslims, not Westerners, ruled the region?
The answer can be found in the land purchase records of the Ottoman Empire. To illustrate, see the following Wiki summary of the origins of the modern Israeli city, Petah Tikva:
One may scoff at using a Wikipedia reference (not to worry, as you can verify by looking at my previous historical book, A Brief HIstory of Entrepreneurship, I do not use Wiki references when sourcing something in a book but, in the context of this web page, the entry for Petah Tikva provides an excellent synopsis of an important dynamic that will be further explored in the book). However, it is worth noting that this historical summary about Petah Tikva has been up for at least 7 years. Both anti-Israel and pro-Israel editors are vigilantly on the lookout for anything related to the conflict on Wikipedia that may be incorrect or misleading and it has not been challenged. Moreover, even in debates, most anti-Israel debaters will concede the fact that there were significant land purchases by Jews during the Ottoman era – all agreed to voluntarily by Arabs and approved by the Muslim powers-that-be in Istanbul.
The reason even anti-Israel debaters concede this point is that the evidence is directly from records written in Turkish and Arabic from the era of Ottoman control of the region. The following images (credit: Times of Israel) provide just a sample in that regard, from a few decades later in the Ottoman era:
Yet, how often do we hear about these well-documented land purchases? The pro-Palestine movement and its many supporters on both the political Left and, to some degree, the political Right as well don’t want to hear about any land purchases. Their preferred narrative is that “European Jews” just jumped off a boat right after WWII and, gun in hand, evicted a wholly “innocent and peace-loving” Palestinian family from a home that the family and its forebears had lived in since the Arabs conquered the region in the 7th century.
It's a convenient narrative and clearly effective from a rhetorical standpoint but how true is it? The historical record contradicts all but one aspect of that narrative 100% and the remaining aspect is verifiably over 90% false. (Of course, those lies and false innuendos will be addressed in an engaging and informative manner in the proposed book.) By spreading misinformation and omitting anything that doesn’t support their anti-Israel narrative, millions of activists around the world have managed to taint the history of Zionism and, thereby, the true meaning of the term.
By countering those narratives while detailing the history of Zionism and the founding of the Jewish state honestly – including its most problematic, even shameful, moments – Is Zionism a Bad Word? will provide readers with enough context and, above all, indisputable historical FACTS, to defend the word Zionism, the movement it represents and, ultimately, the legitimacy of its greatest and most enduring accomplishment, the modern State of Israel.
It's a convenient narrative and clearly effective from a rhetorical standpoint but how true is it? The historical record contradicts all but one aspect of that narrative 100% and the remaining aspect is verifiably over 90% false. (Of course, those lies and false innuendos will be addressed in an engaging and informative manner in the proposed book.) By spreading misinformation and omitting anything that doesn’t support their anti-Israel narrative, millions of activists around the world have managed to taint the history of Zionism and, thereby, the true meaning of the term.
By countering those narratives while detailing the history of Zionism and the founding of the Jewish state honestly – including its most problematic, even shameful, moments – Is Zionism a Bad Word? will provide readers with enough context and, above all, indisputable historical FACTS, to defend the word Zionism, the movement it represents and, ultimately, the legitimacy of its greatest and most enduring accomplishment, the modern State of Israel.