Zionism and Zionists
Further, submissions to my Inquiry have demonstrated how contemporary Zionism is viewed by a
range of people who describe themselves as its critics and supporters of different political persuasions.
At first glance, dictionary definitions seem straightforward enough (e.g. Oxford: "A movement for
(originally) the re-establishment and (now) the development and protection of a Jewish nation in what
is now Israel"), but even these contain subtle, yet significant, variations (see e.g. Webster: "an
international movement originally for the establishment of a Jewish national or religious community in
Palestine and later for the support of modern Israel"). Even more importantly, language evolves
constantly with events, politics and identity.
Crucially, I have heard testimony and heard for myself first-hand, the way in which the word "Zionist"
has been used personally, abusively or as a euphemism for "Jew", even in relation to some people with
no stated position or even a critical position on the historic formation or development of modern
Israel. This has clearly happened so often over a number of years as to raise some alarm bells in Jewish
communities, including amongst highly orthodox people who, whilst perhaps most "visibly Jewish"
(e.g. in dress and or observance), would never see themselves as Zionists.
A further complexity comes from left-wing British Jewry, including, but not exclusively, young people
becoming increasingly critical of, and disenchanted with, Israeli Government policy in relation to
settlements in the West Bank and the bombardment of Gaza in particular. This has led to some people
personally redefining their Zionism in ways that appear to grant less support to the State of Israel and
more solidarity to fellow Jewish people the world over. A further complexity still arises from those
people who are uncomfortable with criticism of the State or Government of Israel or who are
suspicious of repeated criticism of Israeli policy in a way that they see as disproportionate or out of
synch with human rights abuses by other states and governments around the region or the world.
It seems to me that it is for all people to self-define their political beliefs and I cannot hope to do
justice to the rich range of self-descriptions of both Jewishness or Zionism, even within the Labour
Party, that I have heard. What I will say is that some words have been used and abused by accident
and design so much as to blur, change or mutate their meaning. My advice to critics of the Israeli State
and/or Government is to use the term "Zionist" advisedly, carefully and never euphemistically or as
part of personal abuse.
Freeing up speech
This is not to shut down debate about what has been one of the most intractable and far-reaching
geopolitical problems of the post-war world, but actively to facilitate it. Labour members should be
free and positively encouraged to criticise injustice and abuse wherever they find it, including in the
Middle East. But surely it is better to use the modern universal language of human rights, be it of
dispossession, discrimination, segregation, occupation or persecution and to leave Hitler, the Nazis
and the Holocaust out of it? This has been the common sense advice which I have received from many
Labour members of different ethnicity and opinion including many in Jewish communities and
respected institutions, who further point to particular Labour MPs with a long interest in the cause of
the Palestinian people with whom they have discussed and debated difficult issues and differences, in
an atmosphere of civility and a discourse of mutual respect.
12