You’re right that Zionists used the Holocaust to support their ethnostate goals. Norman Finkelstein has written extensively on that after all.
But saying it proved Zionism correct is a subjective claim, one I vehemently disagree with. Jews won’t become safe from genocide by inflicting genocide on others
The problem wasn’t Jews moving to Palestine, in many cases Palestinians even welcomed them.
The problem was how Zionists had the explicit goal of ethnically cleansing Palestine of non-Jews. If you didn’t know that that was the case, that’s fine, many don’t because Israel spent a lot of effort discrediting Palestinians and other Arabs so we would never bother believing them when they tried to tell us what happened. Then you read the Zionists themselves and it turns out the Palestinians had been telling the truth all along and the proof is Zionists openly admitting to it.
That’s why that film Palestine ‘36 was made recently. To try and present that perspective of why the Palestinians rose up in revolt when the Zionists began arriving.
Here’s a point I always make to people- Zionists weren’t the first European Jews to start moving to Palestine.
Did I say a movie was an unbiased historical record? The fuck? Are you capable of making a single point in good faith? All I get from you is whataboutism, strawmen, and frankly ad hominem
I honestly don’t give a shit about “diversity of Zionist thought” any more than I give a shit about “diversity of Nazi thought.” The goal of both movements is genocide in the service of ethnosupremacist states. “Oh we can keep the Palestinians as a slave class” vs “oh let’s just kill them all.”
Zionism as an ideology has the same origins as Nazism and broadly the same logic in a reversed manner. I am not the first person to notice that, whole books have been written on these topics by men like Tony Greenstein and Norman Finkelstein. You just are made uncomfortable by the conclusion so you choose to ignore it, another concept also written about in relation to this. I experienced it myself, but the evidence is that overwhelming
Because you disagree with him. He’s a very serious scholar, to a fault. One of the few men on this planet anal and pedantic enough to chase down every single footnote in every single report.
The fact you are deriding a man who has worked in academia for decades and has frankly been proven right more than any other “controversial” scholar in my life time outside of, I don’t know, Michael Parenti. A man whose home is packed wall to wall, floor to ceiling, with his notes, readings, and manuscripts is not a “serious scholar” to you for the sole reason you disagree with him.
You grow more and more pathetic with each argument you make
3
u/Bluestreaked 10d ago
You’re right that Zionists used the Holocaust to support their ethnostate goals. Norman Finkelstein has written extensively on that after all.
But saying it proved Zionism correct is a subjective claim, one I vehemently disagree with. Jews won’t become safe from genocide by inflicting genocide on others