Not ALL Zionists supported the Genocide and the Apartheid and the Occupation... Some were marginalized and persecuted.

Idk about Einstein being a Zionist. Iirc, he very much opposed the colonial project, and even refused to become president of “Israel”.

Read the article. He was a tepid and exceedingly humanitarian Zionist, at best. But he wasn't particularly religious, either - and that's the primary reason to oppose ANY kind of Zionism.

Just checking out the introduction of the Jewish prophets article, I can tell it’s gonna be a good read, and I’ll definitely look more into it. I knew that “Israel” didn’t see anti-colonial and anti-Zionist Jews too fondly before, especially after seeing the video of cops brutalizing Orthodox Jews demonstrating against the genocide. However, I didn’t know about too much of the details, so this will definitely help with that.

A small correction I’d like to make in your statement, however, is that there isn’t such a thing as a “humanitarian Zionist”, since it calls for the expulsion of the Palestinian people from their native land. Which, now that I think about it, I should probably write the definition of Zionism in the rules. Both because Zionists tend to bemoan about how it’s supposedly just an insult (it is in a sense but it’s much more than that), and Anti-Zionists might sometimes get confused on what it means.

As you read that article (and perhaps the book) what you'll see is that the humanistic and humanitarian faction didn't agree with the idea of expelling anyone from the land. That's what separated them from the more driven and ethno-supremacist, expulsionist sorts. When you think about it - there's plenty of room in the Negev and not many people (still). So it wasn't impossible to envision a future consociational state, in the early 1890's, where Jews and gentiles lived in peace and harmony. The first figure covered in the article (a forgotten/suppressed contemporary of Hertzl's) seems to have been envisioning just such an outcome - and was decrying (even in 1891 - six years before the 1st Zionist Congress in Basel) the bad behavior he observed amongst some early resettlers in Palestine, towards the indigenous population there.

Yeah, I have actually heard about the ‘humanitarian’ faction that had existed prior to the establishment of the colonial state of Israel. They have advocated for either Zionist settlers living along side the Palestinian native population, or they believed in a peaceful method in getting the Palestinian people to leave their land. However, Theodor Herzl, the self-proclaimed father of Zionism, famously spoke out against the said ‘humanitarian faction’. For example, an essay written by Ze’ev Jabotinsky, disciple of Herzl, called “Iron Wall” has this excerpt:

"It is utterly impossible to obtain the voluntary consent of the Palestine Arabs for convertin Palestine from an Arab country into a country with a Jewish majority. My readers have a general idea of the history of colonisation in other countries. I suggest they consider all the precedents with which they are acquainted, and see whether there is one solitary instance of any colonisation being carried on with the consent of the native population. There is no such precedent. (...) This is equally true of the Arabs. They feel at least the same instinctive jealous love of Palestine as the old Aztecs felt for ancient Mexico, and the Sioux for their rolling prairies. (...) Every native population in the world resists colonists as long as it has th slightest hope of being able to rid itself of the danger of being colonised. That is what the Arabs of Palestine are doing, and what they will persist in doing as long as there remains a solitary spark of hope that they will be able to prevent the transformation of Palestine into the Land of Israel."

Basically saying that no one is ever willingly displaced from their home, especially not an entire population of a people.

https://tikvahfund.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/Jabotinsky-Iron-Wall.pdf if you want the source.

Looking back on the ‘humanitarian’ Zionists from a modern perspective, its safe to say that it probably wasn’t much more than wishful thinking, or, may I be so bold to say, perhaps a way to justify ethnic cleansing. It’s clear that you couldn’t establish “Israel”, a Jewish majority state that is mostly comprised of European settlers, without, well, not being humanitarian.

The author of the book is probably abit naive, but her point is that there could have been a mutually agreeable alternative, had the Zionists opted for this tendency over the ruthless and murderous one.

"In much of his writing, Ahad Ha’am wanted Jewish settlers in Palestine to treat Arabs fairly, cautioning that hostility and cruelty would lead to resentment and put the Zionist project in grave danger. Implicitly endorsing a two-state solution, he stressed that the only legitimate claim Jews could make for a sovereign nation was if it reflected Jewish traditions of morality and universal conscience.

Levit writes that because his ideas so often contradicted the dominant narrative of contemporary Israel, he has been relegated to secondary status after Theodore Herzl and is not yet appreciated as the visionary that he was—except by those who actually read his essays."

And it should be noted that there are a (very) few Zionists who still call for a South African style solution. I think two states is unworkable, personally - since inevitably it will shortchange the Palestinians... But I could see a one State solution being achievable - provided that the Zionist criminals give back what they stole, and face justice.

https://youtu.be/x-BnEAid7kY - This is just more evidence of MONSTEROUS Zionist behavior.

And here's the solution for anyone trying to do anything to stop it...at least on College Campuses...

https://scheerpost.com/2024/05/02/jewish-groups-decry-house-passage-of-bill-defining-criticism-of-israel-as-antisemitism/

If only the South Africans had been this PR savvy... Anyone calling for Divestment against THEIR Apartheid Regime (which was no where near as Genocidal) could have been labeled anti-Afrikaaner...or anti-white, or something. Then there'd still be TWO Apartheid Regimes.

https://covertactionmagazine.com/2024/04/29/jewish-prophets-who-predicted-nightmarish-escalation-of-israeli-palestine-conflict-were-blacklisted-and-ignored/

Even if one is to accept the false premise that you can have a "Jewish State" (that's not established in divine fashion by the Messiah, and at a time of G-d's choosing, rather than man's) - one can support the idea of a Zionist State, that conforms to the morality of the Torah and Judaism - without descending to the unconscionable horrors, Terrorism, War Crimes, Crimes Against Humanity, Ethno-Supremacist Ultra-Nationalism and racist Chauvinism that typifies the Zionist Entity of today. In fact, there were once many different visions of what Zionism should look like. This book argues that best and most human of those proposed formulations of Zionism have been systematically erased from the history of Zionism and persecuted - much like the suffering of the prophets of old.

"On September 22, 1967, three months after ... the 6-Day War in which Israel acquired Gaza and the West Bank, members of Matzpen, an Israeli socialist organization supported by Arabs and Jews, placed an ad in the Ha’Aretz daily newspaper explaining their opposition to the occupation. It read:

“Our right to defend ourselves against annihilation does not grant us the right to oppress others. Conquests brings in its wake foreign rule. Foreign rule brings in its wake resistance. Resistance brings in its wake oppression. Oppression brings in its wake terrorism and counter-terrorism. The victims of terrorism are usually innocent people. Holding onto the territories will turn us into a nation of murderers and murder victims. Let us leave the Occupied territories now.”[1]"
...
"Matzpen activists unfortunately were attacked by state media within Israel at the time that the statement was issued and the organization was identified as a national security threat and disbanded by the 1980s."

"Known as the conscience of Israel, Yeshayahu Leibowitz (1903-1994) was a professor at Hebrew University and public intellectual who warned about the growing racist chauvinism of Israeli leaders and deplored the massacre of Arab civilians... In a televised interview, Leibowitz claimed that Israel could not be considered a democracy as long as it ruled over two million people deprived of legal and human rights. He also condemned... Judeo-Nazism, a term that he coined.[10]"7