Israel’s Operation Swords of Iron has killed liberal Zionism. But unlike the more than 40,000 Palestinians dead, liberal Zionism doesn’t deserve a eulogy.
Liberal Zionism is a blatant incongruity — a colonial ethnonationalist movement with a “progressive” adjective thrown in front. It is more of a personal identifier than a legitimate political movement — a way to espouse belief in liberal democracy and human rights while simultaneously believing in a Jewish settler state.
An ideology more prevalent outside of Israel than within, liberal Zionism is heading toward the garbage heaps of history. Pew Research Center’s May 2024 survey compared views held by Jewish Israelis and Palestinian citizens of Israel. It showed that only 4 percent of Jewish Israelis believe Israel’s military response which has been a series of some of the most egregious human rights atrocities this century, has gone too far. For context, this is less than the percentage of Americans who believe the moon landing was faked.
Liberal Zionists pride themselves on their Enlightenment ideals yet elect to enable, cover for and even join the far-right’s efforts to kill and displace Palestinians. Yair Golan is currently heading the Democrats, Israel’s most “progressive” party in Knesset outside Hadash, which represents the interests of Palestinian citizens. The Democrats formed as a merger of the Labor Party and Meretz and represent the lineage of labor and Israeli worker parties that preceded its formation. They claim to offer a “real alternative to the path of the failed and dangerous government.” Golan can thus be looked to as the throne-bearer of liberal Zionism — let’s see what he has to say about the genocide in Gaza.
“First of all, close all the electricity switches to Gaza. I think that in this battle, it is forbidden to allow a humanitarian effort. We need to say to them: listen, until the [captives] are released, from our side, you can die from starvation. It’s totally legitimate.”
Quite the lefty.
In a similar light to liberal Zionism, left-wing Zionism has been instrumental in displacing Palestinians. Kibbutzim, or communal farm settlements in Israel, are considered the embodiment of left-wing Zionism, but a quick look at their history makes clear their true allegiance lies with colonialism. They are generally owned by the Israeli Land Administration and usually adhere to the guidelines of the Jewish National Fund, the largest land-purchasing organization used by Zionists in the 20th century. Kibbutzim membership is exclusionary to Palestinians but sit on Palestinian land, with many being established along the Gazan border.
While certainly not alone in their opposition to allowing humanitarian aid into Gaza — according to the Israeli Democracy Institute, an astounding 68 percent of Israelis oppose the transfer of aid — some kibbutz members can be seen in videos of aid blockages at the Kerem Shalom crossing. Two of these members were confirmed to be of David Ben-Gurion’s former kibbutz, Sdeh Boker, and are members of the Kaplan Force.
The main organizing group of the Israeli judicial reform protests in 2023, Kaplan Force, is a coalition advocating liberal democratic principles in lieu of Netanyahu’s increasingly tyrannical rule. Kaplan Force’s role in the blockade is indicative of the minimal separation between liberal Zionists and their far-right counterparts. Tsav 9, the right-wing organization that led efforts along Israel’s borders to thwart aid from reaching Gaza and has been sanctioned by the U.S. State Department, named Kaplan Force as a collaborator in its activities.
It is clear Oct. 7 made kibbutzim more hawkish. A former secretary general of the kibbutz movement, Nir Meir, told Haaretz, “Many of the kibbutzniks who experienced October 7 can’t bear to hear Arabic and want to see Gaza erased.” They’ve always been a willing participant in colonialism since the Nakba.
Settler violence and Israeli socialism were deeply entwined — they have even shared the same buildings. Constructed by Jewish architects in the 1920s, the Red House (HaBayit Ha’adom) was built to house the local worker’s council, but in 1947, it became the headquarters of the Haganah, the principal Zionist militia in Palestine. Decades later, it was transformed back into a labor Zionist hub as the central office of the kibbutzim movement. It will be hard for some, but anti-Zionist Jews have to stop pretending the kibbutzim represent left-wing ideals and are anything other than bastions of colonialism, a constant reminder to displaced Palestinians that even Israeli “socialism” cheers on their extermination.
As much as liberal Zionists claim otherwise, Zionism will never be progressive, no matter the adjective preceding it. Although now seen as controversial, the terms Zionist colony and Zionist settlers were used repeatedly by The New York Times during the era of Zionist colonization. Settler colonialism is the most apt description of how the Israeli state was formed and has been used by leading scholars such as Rashid Khalidi and Noam Chomsky. Jews lived alongside Christians and Muslims in historic Palestine for millennia — only Zionism, an ideology founded in the late 19th century, prompted the horrors of Israel’s current apartheid regime.
Colonial dynamics are parasitic, permeating every corner of settler society until the dehumanization of the colonized subject becomes the default — even liberal society comes to adopt ethnonationalist mentalities. From apartheid South Africa to our own 50 states, history is full of parallels to the current Israeli regime.
Liberal Zionism has no desire to end the ethnic cleansing of Palestine. Instead, it has been central in theorizing and codifying it. The ideology’s waning popularity is not only indicative of a further shift rightward in Israel, but it’s also an unmasking of Zionism’s character as a whole. It’s clear that the vision offered by liberal Zionism — as well as its conservative and fundamentalist counterparts — is one of extermination and displacement, not the liberty and coexistence the Levant deserves.
Nathan Sommer is a senior double-majoring in history and Latin American and Caribbean American studies.
Views expressed in the opinions pages represent the opinions of the columnists. The only piece that represents the view of the Pipe Dream Editorial Board is the Staff Editorial.