Zionis-As a Racial Slur

Zionism, what is it? In its most basic form, it is the belief in the existence of a homeland for the Jewish people, no more, no less. And a Zionist is someone who supports this belief. The Zionist movement was founded in the late 19th century "as a response by Ashkenazi Jews to anti-semitism and the anti-Jewish pogroms in the Russian Empire" (as taken from Wikipedia). And ever since, it has been used as a common expression for hatred directed against the Jewish people and anybody who dares support them.

The use of the concept of "Zionism" or a "Zionist" as a racial slur was first popularized in 1903 by the Russian secret service who wrote the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, one of the most vicious anti-Semitic literary works to date. This book, written as propaganda to scapegoat Jews, claimed that the Jews had a secret plan for global domination, and portrayed them as evil, power hungry manipulators. The book has long been exposed as a fake.

Hitler then adopted many of the themes from the Protocols, as it is more commonly known. He actually refers to it by name in Meim Kampf, and had it taught to German school children after the Nazis came to power.

After WWII and the Holocaust, use of the word Zionist when applied by non-Jews or those criticizing Jews or Israel in general was recognized as a form of racism and anti-Semitism, and its use in this context was mostly marginalized, particularly in public and media discourse in the West.

Though it did show its ugly head from time to time. For example, in 1975, the United Nations, the international body meant to protect the rights of the oppressed and fight racism and xenophobia, passed resolution 3379 that equated Zionism with racism. Ask yourself, how can the belief in a national home for the Jews be racism?

This most heinous of UN resolutions stayed on the book for more than 15 years, only to be finally revoked in 1991 after being recognized for what it was, a racial slur by the International community.

Today use of the word Zionist as a form of abuse, expression of hatred, an insult, and a slur is gaining traction. It seems most common among American and European activists that seem to primarily find their political home in the far left.

Their narrative sees Israel as the "foreign imperialist colonial power," that took over "Palestinian" land (Jews were Palestinians too by the way), in a pre-meditated assault after WWII (and even before) and set out to occupy the West Bank and Gaza Strip in what was apparently some watered down quest for world domination. Another is those of foreign origin, particularly Arab or Muslim, who are typically at some level hostile towards Israel. They use the term to describe anything related to Judaism or Israel, or Israel's supporters without distinction. Much like we see with Mahmud Ahmadinejad, Hamas, Hizbulla and others.

The use of the word "Zionist" as a racial slur is at the foundation of what is called the "New Antisemitism, and is spreading beyond the European mainland, its native home, into the heartland of the United States. In it, political activists with little to no knowledge of the wider Arab Israeli conflict have been brainwashed into believing that Israel is the evil colonialist power that is oppressing and indiscriminately murdering Palestinians and any humanitarian that comes to their aid. And in the comment sections of online international award winning media outlets like the Huffington Post, the Guardian UK, and even the Israeli Ha'aretz can be found insulting references to Zionists (its almost never used in its true context) an any given day.

This ever growing mass of people that use the word Zionism to insult do it for one of two reasons, either out of ignorance as to its meaning and the history of the Arab Israeli conflict, or latent racism. In either case, their intended meaning when using this word is vague. It's used interchangeably to mean Jewish, Israeli, supporter of Israel, colonialist, Nazi, war criminal, kike, and more. And it is always used as an affront, an attack or a slur, meant to imply negativity, insult or offense. For the word zionist has no place in proper discourse unless discussing of whether one supports a Jewish homeland in a philisophical sense, and not, as many would like to believe, whether or not one supports Israel. Really, the word Zionist should not be used by anyone besides an historian, or someone Jewish.

When used by the racists, the vagueness is intentional. They'll typically try to justify their use of the term like we'll see in an example below, while at the same time using it as an insult. More often than not the person using it takes pleasure in its ambiguity, and is even proud of his getting away with insulting another. Once you've read a few comments written in this manner this usage becomes clear, it's meaning unmistakable.

The bottom line is that the new anti-Semitism allows people to openly project their anti-Semitic views on Israel while hiding behind what they claim is a legitimate form of anti-Israel sentiment, hence the criticism of "Zionists" and "Zionism," and not Israel or its policies.

So now that we understand how the word "Zionism" is used to offend, lets see how the modern day media and journalists from publications such as the Guardian UK bring this slur into the mainstream through a couple of examples.

The first comes to us from none other than the Guardian UK itself. In a piece titled Why this obsession with Israel and the Palestinians? the author Mr. Robert Fowke rhetorically asks the following:

"What are the implications of such a level of passionate interest (with the Israelis and Palestinians)? Perhaps I am an anti-semite? Seen from Zionist eyes, where Israel does little that is not justified, this has to be the first and most likely explanation for why I follow their affairs so closely.

We'll call this the "academic" approach. In it the author tries to absolve himself of anti-Semitism by bringing it up himself. He then goes on to accuse the "Zionists" (what exactly is a Zionist here?), of believing that "Israel does little that is not justified." In this sentence we can understand that he believes that Israel indiscriminately murders Palestinian children and that the Israelis believe it's justified. Yes, that is what he is insinuating. According to the anti-"Zionist" rulebook, anything that Israel "justifies" must be the most heinous crime one can think of. Then finally he pre-emptively accuses the "Zionists" of accusing him of anti-Semitism.

And while the point of the sentence relates to the title of his article in which he says this accusation stems from his "obsession with Israel," the truth of the matter is its much more than that. His anti-Semitism permeates his writing and the language he uses in the context of that obsession. He's just too in awe of his own cleverness to realize it.

Don't worry folks, our author (unsuccessfully) absolves himself of that very anti-Semitism in the next paragraph of his article in which he states "But delving into my deepest heart, I cannot honestly say that I am more hostile to Jews than I am towards Scotsmen and Welshmen."

Well that's good to know Mr. Fowke, if only you could lose that insulting habit of using the word "Zionist," to relate to a larger than life sinister cabal that "justifies" things.

Let's take another example. An article posted today on the Huffington Post website titled "To the Chorus of Chronic, Compulsive Critics of Israel", the user of the forum by the name of Marcus01, the Community Moderator no less, said "I will never understand the sentiment so common among Zionist saying that Palestinians do not have a right to remain on land they have populated since ancient times. They often site dictates imposed by foreign imperialist colonial powers, these outside powers do not have these rights, only the peoples of those lands have such rights."

This is a classic example in which the person accuses those "Zionists," of the evil intentions of stealing rights from the Palestinians who have remained on "land they have populated since ancient times," (error number one, as many "Palestinians" were planted in the territory by the Ottomans as Jews that immigrated from Iraq). He then goes on saying Israel "cites" dictates by "foreign imperialist colonial powers." This is insinuating that those nasty Zionists are 1. Foreign (again, there have been Jews in this land since the time of Abraham), 2. Imperialist, and we all know that an "imperialist" in today's lingo is an bad thing, and 3. Colonialist, accusing the "Zionists" of wanting to colonialize some unnamed territory in addition to the territory they have already "colonialized:" Israel, apparently in their secret plan for world domination.

When another user, one Ralph Noyes complained of his use of the word "Zionist," by saying "I think the use of the word "Zionist" is inflammatory, at least in this context, whether so intended or not. It's like "colored" (thank you Mr. Noyes). Mr. Marcus01 rebutted, "Zionist is a descriptive term, there is no other that accurately describes them. They use it themselves."

There is no other that describe "them?" Need I say more?

Help help help

So there you have it, none other than a Huffington Post Community moderator, in an article on Israel, uses the term "Zionist," to insult, insinuate any number of negative impositions. No wonder the Huffington Post, what was supposed to be a liberal, open minded forum has become infected with racists that hide behind the vague word "Zionist."

Go into the comments section of any article dealing with Israel on almost any subject and in any media publication, you'll see this discourse taking place. You will see the word zionist thrown about as a slur, if the person is not Jewish, or racial slur, if they are.

So the next time you see someone using the word Zionist out of context, as an insult, or a slur, try to analyze their usage as I did above, then call them out on it. Let them know that what they are saying is offensive, and that the way they are using this term can be interpreted to be racist. It's about time they started taking note.