Zionism is seriously misconceived outside of Israel. It is identified to a large extent with support of the settlements. However, the settlements are an undermining of Zionism rather than a continuation of it; not just politically but also ideologically.

There are two different conceptions of Zionism which I call ‘the Zionism of liberty’, which is about self-determination, and ‘the Zionism of land’, which is about redeeming the old Jewish homeland.

My book, The Settlers and the Struggle over the Meaning of Zionism, shows that the settler movement is a kind of ‘blood and soil’ nationalism, whereas Zionism was originally a republican form of nationalism. Its ideals were liberty and self-determination and its goal was a state as a means to secure Jewish self-determination. By contrast, for the settlers, the state is a means for redeeming the land and for abiding by what they see as the commandment (Mitzvah), to settle the Land of Israel.

Zionism was not like any other movement that wished to go back to the Land of Israel. It was a specifically modern movement that had its origins in a question which had no connection to the land of Israel whatsoever. The question arose during the Haskalah (Jewish enlightenment), when the ideal of human sovereignty over human faith became central. Jewish thinkers asked, ‘How does that ideal apply to the Jews?’ ‘How do we make Jews free without giving up their Jewish identity?’

Read the article in full at Fathom Journal.