Israeli Settler Colonialism is a Form of Genocide
by Kirk Baltimore & Felicia Davenport
The spirit of liberation declares that Palestine will be free, yet the decries of oppression have historically been overlooked. The genocide happening in Palestine today is an offspring of the Israeli settler colonialism in the 1940s. Israel’s attempt to control and proclaim as much land of native Palestine as possible remains consistent, and they’re successful. It’s difficult not to be successful, despite the cause or impact, when ideology justifies it. And for decades, Zionism has been the motivating factor for Israeli settler colonialism.
Zionism is Israel’s national ideology, while Judaism serves as their religion. Zionists believe in a single-state existence, Israel, as it is the holder of its significant ancestral roots. Zionism varies in its makeup; however, in today’s context of Israel-Palestinian affairs, the strain is political. Political Zionism holds the belief that Jews manifest an intrinsic entitlement to native Palestine. These beliefs only intensified through establishing laws and policies that backed Israeli sovereignty throughout Palestine. Such laws have enabled Israel to assume power and control over resources throughout the land and an annexation of thousands of Palestinians out of their homes and communities.
"Settler colonialism is an ongoing system of power that perpetuates the genocide and repression of indigenous peoples and cultures. Essentially hegemonic in scope, settler colonialism normalizes the continuous settler occupation, exploiting lands and resources to which indigenous peoples have genealogical relationships" -Alicia Cox
The underpinnings of Zionism are compacted with the ideals of nationalism. In the process, Israeli settler colonialism occurs with indifference to those who are native to that land or community, as single-state ideology, which is usually rooted in religious fervor, only acts in their interests. Settler colonialism is not just about self-interests but the suppression of those who are forced to live with it. It’s important to note that the religious justification isn’t mutually exclusive. Still, it’s convenient and allows for a subdued rationalization posing as a “debate” in situations where there should be none. While not all Jews universally subscribe to Zionism, and despite distinctions among different ideologies in particular, there are commonalities shared among all Zionists.
“It must be clear that there is no room in the country for both peoples. … The only solution is a Land of Israel without Arabs. There is no room for compromises. … There is no way but to transfer the Arabs from here to the neighboring countries …” -Joseph Weitz
Western societies’ indifference and apathy toward Palestinian suffrage and ethnic cleansing have been ongoing for decades. And religious justification has been supplemental, especially in how our news media delivers information. Yet, Judaism itself isn’t the problem, as it doesn’t defend the idea of oppressing Palestinians. The genuine concern resides with the posture of Zionism. "Zionism is a choice. It is a set of political beliefs and a public expression of one’s values." And the stance of Zionism bears within the parameters of hegemony.
Predominance isn’t a new concept, and it’s certainly more common in Western civilizations, especially with those who are disenfranchised. Perhaps this helps to temper the message of what’s going on in Palestine. Zionism and its stance don’t deviate far from other examples of oppression, and with the right “angle,” it can be an “easy pill to swallow.” That is, if Palestinians are depicted in a light that suggests that they’re “less deserving” or “less human,” it’s convenient to use Hamas as a pretext to portray Israel’s airstrikes as solely a component of a two-sided conflict. It’s the same social playbook used wherever a dominant group attempts to oppress a more vulnerable group.
As prominent as oppression is, we should never get comfortable with refusing to see humans as humans. And if millions of people around the world can quietly accept genocide, then how much more acceptable is settler colonialism? If airstrikes, terrorism, and killing innocent people don’t provoke any anger or outrage, how much easier will it be to make this genocide a “two-fault” argument? Settler colonialism is part of genocide; it’s not after-effects or the preparatory work. Settler colonialism, in its many facets, is a form of genocide, and it seeks as many people who are willing to be complicit in its goal.