The Rise of Zionism
Tracing the roots of the zionist ideology
The story of Zionism is complex, intertwined with European anti-Semitism, nationalism, and the colonial mindset of the late 19th century. Understanding these origins is essential to understanding why, for many, Zionism represents not only a nationalist movement but also a settler-colonial project that has dispossessed an indigenous population and created an apartheid state.
Zionism emerged in the late 1800s, primarily in Eastern and Central Europe, as a response to widespread anti-Semitism, marginalization, and exclusion that Jewish communities faced. Pogroms, expulsions, and institutionalized discrimination throughout Europe led many Jews to seek a place where they could be safe from persecution. This aspiration, while understandable, soon transformed into a political movement aimed at establishing a homeland, promoted by influential figures like Theodor Herzl. Zionism sought not just refuge but a state of its own.
The choice of Palestine as the location for this homeland was tied to both religious symbolism and practical strategic considerations. But Zionism’s leaders adopted the language and approach of European colonialism, portraying Palestine as a land to be “redeemed”—overlooking or disregarding the Palestinian Arab population that had lived there for centuries.
The Influence of Theodor Herzl and Early Zionist Thinkers
Austrian journalist and political activist Theodor Herzl is credited with formalizing modern political Zionism. In Der Judenstaat ("The Jewish State," 1896), he advocated for a Jewish homeland as the solution to European anti-Semitism. Herzl envisioned a state that would provide security, arguing that Jewish self-determination could only be achieved through a nation-state. However, like many of his contemporaries, Herzl held a colonial worldview, seeing the region as a land to be "civilized" rather than considering its native population.
The language of early Zionist leaders often “minimized” the presence and rights of Palestinians, treating them as an obstacle rather than as indigenous people with their own culture, identity, and history. This minimization, though less overtly hostile than later rhetoric, laid a foundation for more profound dehumanization, which escalated over time. By initially framing Palestinians as insignificant or invisible, Zionist leaders fostered an “us vs. them” mentality that made it easier to overlook or disregard Palestinian humanity altogether. The Palestinians were seen as devoid of a "national consciousness"—a perspective that justified the goal of creating an exclusive Jewish state.
This mindset would continue to shape Zionism as it gained momentum, influencing not just policies but the very way in which Palestinians were perceived by Zionist leaders. The step from minimization to outright dehumanization has intensified across the years and is evident in current policies and rhetoric, where Palestinian rights and lives are frequently depicted as secondary—or even irrelevant—within broader political objectives.
The British Connection and Zionism’s Colonial Framework
Zionism emerged within a broader colonial framework, taking advantage of European ambitions in the Middle East as the Ottoman Empire waned. The Sykes-Picot Agreement (1916) had already revealed European interest in dividing the region. Zionist leaders sought British support, leading to the Balfour Declaration (1917), in which Britain promised to support a “national home for the Jewish people” in Palestine—despite the overwhelming Arab majority there.
Britain’s backing of Zionism provided a legal basis for its advancement and led to discriminatory policies that severely impacted the Palestinian’s rights to land, political voice, and sovereignty. This connection further solidified Zionism’s settler-colonial trajectory, as Zionist leaders relied on external powers to facilitate the establishment of a Jewish homeland, often at the expense of the indigenous Palestinian population.
The Ideological Roots of Zionist Settler-Colonialism
Zionism incorporated settler-colonial ideologies from its start. Like other settler movements, it sought the establishment of permanent control over a land already inhabited. Structures like the Jewish National Fund facilitated the exclusive acquisition of land, often evicting Palestinian farmers. Zionist leaders advocated for a state with a Jewish majority, implicitly acknowledging that this would mean Palestinian dispossession.
Viewing the land as “empty” or “unclaimed” reflected and perpetuated colonial narratives that were historically used to justify the displacement and subjugation of indigenous populations. These ideas echoed earlier imperial practices where the land was often portrayed as vacant or uninhabited, conveniently ignoring the presence and rights of the indigenous people. Even when Zionist leaders were fully aware of the existence and social structures of Palestinian society, they continued to circulate the notion of Palestine as “a land without a people for a people without a land,” reinforcing a dehumanizing view of the land and its inhabitants. This rhetoric not only minimized the Palestinian presence but also rationalized the ongoing dispossession and erasure of Palestinian identity.
All articles on Diaspora Dialogue are free to read for one year from publication. If you’ve enjoyed this piece and would like to support my work, you can do so by buying me a coffee. Thank you for reading and being part of the dialogue!
