Depends on who’s saying it. Often times it’s obvious from the context that “Zionist” is just being used as a loophole, and pretending that the difference is then still important is disingenuous.
Someone writing “F Zionists” very likely does not make a distinction between Zionists and Jews.
The Jewish Council of Australia is not going to name their hotspot “F Zionists”. Ultra Orthodox Jews are not going to use swear words to express their view.
I’ll go as far as say that anyone who genuinely wants Jews and Arabs to live in peace side by side is not going to go about it with antagonistic one-sided rhetoric.
>It's always one sided though. Israel has a right to exist, Palestine doesn't have a right to exist.
"Right to exist" is a misnomer.
Israel exists, and anti-Zionism is wanting it to not exist.
Palestine does not exist.
What exists is two geopolitical entities, West Bank and Gaza, which are:
- geographically separate, not even sharing a border
- historically coming from being occupied by different countries (Jordan and Egypt)
- ruled by different entities (PLO and Hamas, respectively)
- ...with different ideologies (PLO/Fatah is a secular terrorist group, Hamas/PIJ are fundamentalist Islamist terrorist groups)
- ...and have been at war with each other for the past 20 years - and are at war to this day[1] in spite of attempts[2] of other countries to mediate the conflict.
Sure, Yugoslavia also existed even though Yugoslavs weren't a thing.
It also didn't end too well, if you remember the 1990s[3].
So what? Israel wasn't a thing for almost 2000 years. If we can make one country out of whole cloth, why not another one? Why is Israel privileged here?
>So what? Israel wasn't a thing for almost 2000 years. If we can make one country out of whole cloth, why not another one? Why is Israel privileged here?
Because Israelis were able to defend their newly created country from the Arab invasion in 1949 when it was created, and people of Palestine, which was created out whole cloth the same exact moment, didn't consider it necessary to put up any resistance to their Arab siblings.
That's why.
Perhaps because Palestinians themselves didn't really consider themselves to be a group distinct from other Arabs, and in a need of their own state, but you're welcome to field your guess.
Here's a friendly reminder that the "Arab state" known as Palestine today was created out of whole cloth from the same British Mandate, and was occupied by Jordan and Egypt right away.
I don't even know what that question means. Israel does exist. There's no "should" to discuss. Are you asking if I think Israelis should be kicked out of Israel? No.
I mean, the real question is surely whether you think Palestine has the right to exist or what you think should be done. The Palestine side is the part that's really up in the air.
>Its all signaling comming from you and people like you.
And just what is this supposed to mean, exactly? Yeesh.
Ok, bad faith it is then. Nobody reasonable in good faith could conclude that I "hate Jews" based on my reply. Just because I called Zionism settler colonialism? That's a view so prominent that it (apparently) has its own wiki page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zionism_as_settler_colonialism
And as mentioned in the wiki, that's probably a characterization that the leaders of the movement 100 years ago would agree with themselves!
The core of Israel is orthogonal to settler expansionism.
The first is what we, Australia, beach headed for Jewish communities back in 1917. The second is deplorable behaviour that was initially somewhat excusable and has since degenerated into a sickness.
eg: https://www.jewishcouncil.com.au/who-we-are