Certain historical revisions of this page may meet criterion RD1 for revision deletion, as they contain significant copyright violations of https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0032329221999906 (Copyvios report) that have been removed in the meantime.
Note to admins: In case of doubt, remove this template and post a message asking for review at WT:CP. With this script, go to the history with auto-selected revisions. Note to the requestor: Make sure the page has already been reverted to a non-infringing revision or that infringing text has been removed or replaced before submitting this request. This template is reserved for obvious cases only, for other cases refer to Wikipedia:Copyright problems. Note to others: Please do not remove this template until an administrator has reviewed it. |
Zionism has been described by some scholars as a form of settler colonialism in relation to the region of Palestine and the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. The term has gained significant traction among leftist groups and individuals engaged in campus activism.[1][2][3]
Patrick Wolfe, a theorist of settler colonial studies defines settler colonialism as an ongoing "structure, not an event" aimed at replacing a native population rather than exploiting it.[4][5][6] Many of the founders of Zionism themselves described it as colonialism, such as Vladimir Jabotinsky.[7][8] and major zionist organizations central to Israel's foundation held colonial identity in their names or departments, such as Jewish colonisation association and Jewish agency's colonization department.[9] Proponents of the paradigm of Zionism as settler colonialism include Edward Said, Rashid Khalidi, Noam Chomsky, Ilan Pappe, Fayez Sayegh, Maxime Rodinson, George Jabbour, Ibrahim Abu-Lughod, Baha Abu-Laban, Jamil Hilal, and Rosemary Sayigh.[10][11]
The first application of the settler colonialism paradigm on the Palestinian struggle emerged in the 1960s alongside the processes of decolonization of Africa and the middle east, Which remerged again in the 1990s among Palestinian scholars in Israel who "reframed the history of the Nakba as enduring" as a result of the political conditions in the Israeli Palestinian society in 1990s that caused a shift from supporting two-state solution to a one-state solution that constitute a state for all citizens equally which challenges the jewish identity of Israel.[12][a] Rachel Busbridge contends that its subsequent popularity is inseparable from frustration at the stagnation of that process and resulting Western left-wing sympathy for Palestinian nationalism. She writes that while a settler colonial analysis "offers a far more accurate portrayal of the conflict than...has conventionally been painted".[13] Hussein Ibishargues that such zero-sum calls are "a gift that no occupying power and no colonizing settler movement deserves."[14]
Critics of the paradigm argue that Zionism does not fit the traditional framework of colonialism. Many Jews oppose the paradigm, saying it denies their historical connection to the land.[1]
Colonisation can have only one aim, and Palestine Arabs cannot accept this aim. It lies in the very nature of things, and in this particular regard nature cannot be changed...Zionist colonisation must either stop, or else proceed regardless of the native population.
Calling Israel a settler colonial regime is an argument increasingly gaining purchase in activist and, to a lesser extent, academic circles.
Cite error: There are <ref group=lower-alpha>
tags or {{efn}}
templates on this page, but the references will not show without a {{reflist|group=lower-alpha}}
template or {{notelist}}
template (see the help page).
© MMXXIII Rich X Search. We shall prevail. All rights reserved. Rich X Search