Thursday, October 06, 2005
An artilce on the BBC today about the Israeli supreme court banning the use of people as shields (Israel bans use of human shields) prompted an e-mail to the rc.political listserve which concluded as follows:
I have heard many peers tell me that one can be progressive (in the contemporary political sense of the term) and still be Zionist. I vehemently disagree. My question to you all is: do you think Zionism and Progressive values can be reconciled given the utterly appalling, inhumane and self-righteous ideology at play behind most of Israel's political history?
I find it that the response to an article about the Israeli supreme court ruling that human shields are illegal and against international law (a good call, I would say), is questioning weather Zionism can be progressive, especially today when Bush in considering vetoing a law that would make torture of US detainees illegal. I also continue to dissagree that Zionism is inhernetly anti-progressive.
Zionism is simply the idea of a Jewish homeland somewhere in the region of what is now Israel. When you separate the idea from the actions taken by the movements leaders and now government as a definition of what Zionism is, the inconsistencies with progressive values do become pretty obvious. But, If you take the definition of early 20th century pioneers (i.e. AD Gordon, my personal favorite, or Syrikin or Borochov or even Biolic), or contemporary activist and political groups (ie yachad, New Israel Fund, Habonim Dror, Union of Progrssive Zionists) Zionism becomes pretty damn progressive (especially when you compare their tactics of settling a new homeland to that of the founders of our marvelous USA).
It really is strange to me that in a world of oprresion, injustice, imperialism etc... Israel and Zionism are examined through a finer tooth comb that other developed nations and nationalist movements.
I applaud the Supreme Court on its ruling today and hope it will continue to push Israel in the path of justice.
I have heard many peers tell me that one can be progressive (in the contemporary political sense of the term) and still be Zionist. I vehemently disagree. My question to you all is: do you think Zionism and Progressive values can be reconciled given the utterly appalling, inhumane and self-righteous ideology at play behind most of Israel's political history?
I find it that the response to an article about the Israeli supreme court ruling that human shields are illegal and against international law (a good call, I would say), is questioning weather Zionism can be progressive, especially today when Bush in considering vetoing a law that would make torture of US detainees illegal. I also continue to dissagree that Zionism is inhernetly anti-progressive.
Zionism is simply the idea of a Jewish homeland somewhere in the region of what is now Israel. When you separate the idea from the actions taken by the movements leaders and now government as a definition of what Zionism is, the inconsistencies with progressive values do become pretty obvious. But, If you take the definition of early 20th century pioneers (i.e. AD Gordon, my personal favorite, or Syrikin or Borochov or even Biolic), or contemporary activist and political groups (ie yachad, New Israel Fund, Habonim Dror, Union of Progrssive Zionists) Zionism becomes pretty damn progressive (especially when you compare their tactics of settling a new homeland to that of the founders of our marvelous USA).
It really is strange to me that in a world of oprresion, injustice, imperialism etc... Israel and Zionism are examined through a finer tooth comb that other developed nations and nationalist movements.
I applaud the Supreme Court on its ruling today and hope it will continue to push Israel in the path of justice.
# posted by ilan @ 10:07 PM 
