Zionism and Anti-Zionism with Ronit Lentin

Transcript

Ronit Lentin – Zionism and Anti-Zionism

EMMAIA: This is Unpacking Zionism. I’m Emmaia Gelman, your host and director of the Institute for the Critical Study of Zionism. As this podcast goes out, we’re on the 220th day of Israel’s genocide in Gaza. This week, Israeli settlers in the West Bank are burning Palestinian olive groves, while soldiers are firing on people who try to extinguish the fires. And as CNN recently reported, Israel is torturing Palestinians inside Israel. 

Critical Zionism Studies means looking at how Zionism works as an ideology, as a set of political institutions, as actions taking place every day under the banner of Zionism. And to help lay out the field in this podcast, we’ve been interviewing thinkers about keywords that are central to our understanding of Zionism. On this episode, I’m joined by Ronit Lentin to talk about two very central keywords, Zionism and anti-Zionism. These are terms that are often used without much definition. So this is our second episode about them. 

A few weeks ago, we talked with Miriam Osman of the Palestinian Youth Movement. And these two discussions together, Miriam and Ronit, expand the frame on Zionism and anti-Zionism, taking account of Zionism as a racial regime, a historical project, a political project, an imperial project, and anti-Zionism in response to those definitions. We hope you find it useful. 

Dr. Lentin is an anti-racist and pro-Palestine activist. She was born in Palestine under the British mandate, grew up in the state of Israel, and lived for 53 years in the Republic of Ireland, which, as a side note, is where I first encountered her work on racism 25 years ago. So I was extra thrilled to be in conversation with her about Palestine now. At Trinity College, Dr. Lentin was Associate Professor of Sociology, the Founder Director of the Master’s Program in Race, Ethnicity, and Conflict. Among her many books are Women and the Politics of Military Confrontation, Racism and Anti-Racism in Ireland, and the book that’s the starting point for this conversation, Traces of Racial Exception: Racializing Israeli Settler Colonialism. You can find the introduction and first chapter of that book in the show notes. 

*** 

Ronit Lentin, thank you for being with us. Zionism is a term that holds a lot of things. It describes the existing state of Israel and its collaboration with other powers, and its history, politics, ideology, and culture built around them. And your work invites another crucial way of understanding Zionism, which is as a way of producing racial identities and hierarchy, racial supremacy, in fact. Tell us about that.

RONIT: Well, I published a book six years ago and I’ve read through it in the last couple of days. Lots of things seem a bit outdated, but not really. I think that this was missing from understanding of Zionism, because Zionism was seen in all sorts of ways, you see. It was seen by lots of people as a national liberation movement, liberating the Jews from antisemitism in Europe. It was seen by some people as an ethnic regime, like in Oren Yiftachel’s Ethnocracy, based on the differences between various ethnicities. 

But I would say that what was missing in understanding Zionism was understanding it as a race ideology. It’s a European-based colonial race ideology, colonial movement, not only ideology but movement. So it’s a political ideology which puts race at the center, without calling it race, even though — and I’ve done some research into what the early Zionist ideologues were saying and writing — they themselves thought of the Jews as a race apart, not very unlike the Nazi Germans, or even people in Europe before the Nazi regime, thought of the Jews as an inferior race, but as people apart. Now, being a people apart is not something new to Judaism, because if you look at a lot of what’s in the Bible, I mean, there is this sense of an apartness, a purity, and this was picked up by some of the Zionist ideologues from Theodor Herzl to Max Nordau to Pinsker to Moshe Hess to Arthur Ruppin and to some others who saw Jews as a race apart, and aspired to create this race apart in its own homeland. Without actually looking at what Zionists themselves wrote about Jews being a race, we really cannot understand the nature of Zionism. And this goes together with the notion of supremacy. 

EMMAIA: When you talk about race, you note that race doesn’t exist outside of the structures that make it. So it’s made by conditions like policing or immigration law that affect people differentially, or by the way resources are distributed. And those are functions of states generally. So when you talk about Zionism as a mode of racialization and the originators of Zionist thought as imagining a racialization of Jews, where does that come from before the creation of the Israeli state?

RONIT: Basically if you look at European colonialism, which created races as it went along, if we take race — I take Alana Lentin’s definition of race here as a technology for the management of human difference, the aim of which is to construct, produce, and reproduce white supremacy — then race existed before the advent of the nation state, and in the case of Zionism, it existed before the advent of the Israeli state, basically looking at the Jew in the diaspora as some sort of inferior being, a degenerate being.

This goes together with the Jew being disdained by Zionist thinkers. Which is actually absurd if you think of it, because they were considered untermenschen, an inferior race, by the Nazis and other antisemites. But in fact, the early Zionists thought of Jews as inferior and degenerate in diaspora themselves. And in this respect, it’s very important that Zionism, in fact, is essentially a European movement. I’ll quote something here, “Zionism sought to be internal to Europe, a civilized nation state, thoroughly European in culture and allegiance. However, by laying claim to the Palestinian territory as a home for the Zionist movement, Zionism placed itself outside of Europe, they found expression in diasporan narrative of temple destruction and ensuing exile.” So the whole story of the Jews’ exile from their erstwhile homeland has been disdained by the Zionist leaders, who wanted to recreate a new type of Jew, which was called the New Jew: the more masculine, muscular type of Jew. Max Nordau spoke about “muscle Jewry.” And these New Jews were going to be a new type of race, a race that was, that will exceed and excel his mostly degenerate diaspora Jewish counterparts.

So all this idea of creating, constructing Jews as different from others and as superior to others existed before the establishment of the State of Israel. But then in the State of Israel, it became more powerful because the institutions of the state were used in order to substantiate and invigorate this idea of the Jewish race as superior and stronger. The creation of the Jews as a race and the insistence on its own homeland was based on ideas of blood, on ideas of soil, and ideas of folk. All of these are very much Nazi ideas. 

EMMAIA: Let’s dig in a little bit more to European supremacist notions of race. You explain very clearly how Zionism comes out of the racial supremacist thinking of colonial Europe, and moves from the idea that Jews are racially inferior there to the idea that Jews are racially superior in the Zionist state. In the present though, there’s an argument that gets trotted out to say that Zionism is not white supremacist, and that in fact, Israel can’t be a white supremacist ethnostate because there are Jews from Middle Eastern and North African origins, Mizrahi Jews, who are an integral part of it. There’s also an argument about the inclusion in Zionism of Jews from Ethiopia, although to be honest, you don’t see U.S. Zionist organizations pushing that very hard; they generally focus on Mizrahi Jews. The claim is that the project of Israel and Zionism has brought together a larger set of Jews than just European Jews.

How do we move from this, the roots of a European colonial white supremacy, to the present moment where it’s possible to effectively brownwash Zionism by pointing out that it includes Jews who aren’t European in origin?

RONIT: Well, I would say it’s a rather whitewashed Zionism. Because in assuming their new existence in Palestine Jews actually became European, they became gentile, they became white. And yes, the advent of Mizrahi Jews, non-white Jews, Arab Jews, who were not favored by the early Zionists, definitely not, were incorporated into this whiteness, process of whiteness, of whitening, of superioritizing the Jews above both Palestinian natives of the land, but also above Mizrahi Jews who were non-European.

So because it was such a European project, Mizrahi Jews had to be — even though at the beginning there was quite a lot of objection to their immigrating to Israel or to Palestine by the early Zionists — became incorporated in the project of making Palestine the land of the Jews, completely ignoring the fact that there was another people there. People who were considered to be, yes, natives, but not really owners of the land, which was seen always as the land which once belonged to us, the Jews.

And these are discourses that are in fact voiced every single day. I mean, we see today people who are working on the construction of a new Hebrew Gaza when the war is over, and constructing a new Hebrew city there on the ruins of the Palestinian Gaza. They say: from the river to the sea, it’s all Jewish, as promised to Abraham, to Jacob, and to Isaac, who were chosen above and elevated above all other nations. Something that we Jews say in every single prayer, every single day. I mean, if you just bless the wine and the challah on Friday night, you thank god for elevating us above all other countries and elevating our language above all other languages. So there is a sense of superiority which is drummed into us from a very early age when we were growing up as Jewish people, whether be it in Palestine, Israel, or in the diaspora. 

EMMAIA: You’re bringing us to a Zionist idea that draws really heavily on biology and lineage to assert Jewishness as an inherited form of supremacy. But right now we’re seeing Zionist institutions attack Jews, those who are anti-Zionist — those of us who are anti-Zionist, right — to denounce them and call for them to be violently policed. The Zionist rhetoric here is saying that Jews who object to Israel, to Zionism, are not part of that racial supremacy regardless of their lineage. This should remind us again that race doesn’t actually describe biological facts, but a position in relation to others; a position of power, a group position of power. How does Zionism as a racial supremacist ideology make sense of excluding anti-Zionist Jews from this supposedly biological category of supremacy and identity?

RONIT: ​Before we go to speaking about anti-Zionism, let’s talk a bit more about Zionism. Because Raphael Falk, who’s an Israeli geneticist, has written a book called Zionism and the Biology of the Jews. And he looks at the various discourses by various Zionist leaders in the early days, but they also looked at experiments done by doctors on Mizrahi and Arab Jewish children to discover what percentage of their blood, so called, is African, is not white. This is actually scary, because the person who conducted these experiments, his name was Professor Chaim Sheba, and he happened to be my mother’s beloved cousin. And when I read this in Raphael Falk’s book I fell to the floor, because Sheba was supposed to be a lovely man, helped everybody, I mean, the family and whatever. He came from northern Romania, like my mother, and he was the Director General of the Ministry for Health. He was a Chief Medical Officer in the Army, and then he established a hospital called Tel Hashomer, which today is called the Sheba Medical Center, and he conducted these experiments to discover the continuity of today’s Jews, today’s European Jews, from the Judeans who lived in Palestine during the biblical times.

Now, Judeans and Jews are not the same thing, and in fact, in Palestine of the Bible time, there were Judeans and Israelites who were different sort of tribes. They were part of the tribes that lived there. So, Jews were never one thing. The thing that united them was the religion, the supposed belief in a one God. But even monotheism is not a Jewish thing, it’s an Egyptian thing. And these things are being researched more and more now by biblical scholars, both textual scholars and archaeological scholars, to show a lot of the stories we grew up on, of the exodus from Egypt and the various other stories of King David and King Solomon and the temples and all the rest of it, that these historical characters were not historical characters, but they were legendary characters.

So we actually all grew up on some combination of myths, of sagas, which every group, every national group has, constructed and written much later. Like, the flood and various other stories of that nature, and the promises by God to the patriarchs that this is our land and this is where we need to live, are all constructions rather than facts. So we, we all grew up in a sense that Jews were all the same: both genetically the same or similar, and all have the same history, because these stories were taken to be historical. So, I mean, from the very beginning, Jews were not a united group, ethnically we are very heterogeneous. As you say, there are Mizrahi Jews, there are Black Jews. No genetic studies that try to show that there is a gene pool of Jewish people has managed to prove that, and Falk very clearly goes through it, and he’s a geneticist, and he’s done genetic tests, he worked with Sheba himself to show that there is not such a thing as a Jewish race, even though Jews were conceived and constructed by the Zionists as a race apart, a race, not only apart, but also superior, as I say. 

We also grew up on another important myth: not only are we superior, we also are the eternal victim. Therefore, everybody hates us. Everybody wants to eliminate us. And these things justify what we allow ourselves to commit against the Palestinians. But we also allow ourselves, as European Jews, to commit against non-European Jews. So when Yemeni Jews came to Palestine and then to Israel, there’s a whole story to Yemeni children. An abduction story that hundreds of Yemeni children were abducted from the parents and given in illegal adoption to Ashkenazi parents. When Jews from Arab countries, particularly Iraq and northern Africa came, they were discriminated against, put in transit camps, and even though many of them were very well educated they were sent to do manual labor. And over the years, Mizrahi Jews were incorporated into these whitening projects. And I think this is important to remember, that Zionism constructed a unity where it doesn’t exist.  

EMMAIA: This raises the question of how these ideas are constructed, right? Most public discussion about the project of Israel and about its connection to Jewish identity is limited to Zionist Jewish perspectives, it comes through Zionist Jewish perspectives. Because any discussion that uses other lenses, whether through Palestinian perspectives or critiques of race and capitalism, et cetera, until now has generally not made it into wider public conversation.

That has meant that discussions about Zionism are constantly reinforcing the racial ideas that Zionism presumes. So for instance, the idea that Jews are a single biological racial group is totally naturalized in the United States, it’s presumed in public life to be true. Not because of historical evidence, which contradicts it, but because of Zionist narrations of Jewish identity, as you have pointed to. And since Jews are not racially homogeneous, but European, Arab, Black, Asian, then the single-race story demands that our sameness be located very far in the past. And that itself becomes a claim that Jews were a single group in ancient times that was cast out of Judea and Samaria into diaspora. It gets translated into a whole additional claim of indigeneity, a claim of a prior right to Palestine that supersedes Palestinians’ rights. And these ideas about Jewish racial peoplehood, and the resulting right to an ethno-state on Palestinian land, are constructed and reconstructed in a public culture that’s threaded through with Zionist narrative. It doesn’t depend on Jewish Zionist institutions. It’s repeated now in legislative debates in Congress, in White House rationales for military action, in news reporting, advertising campaigns, school curriculum, and of course by Christian Zionists.

Okay, so in your writing, you’re very careful to center Black scholarship that looks critically at race and racial supremacy, and in fact, at the production of these very kinds of ideas. And you also center Palestinian critiques of Zionism, which do some of the same work. Why, to you, is it important to read beyond the usual boundaries to study Zionism? What do we get from that?

RONIT: Look today, who do they critique? They critique Netanyahu as if, if Netanyahu went, everything will be fine, the genocide will stop. You know, so basically, self-critique is not — it’s not a critique. And ultimately much of the critique is “let’s bring Israel back to its democratic self” as if any, at any time Israel was a democracy. Even if we look at good critics such as Ilan Pappe, who looked at the Nakba, he still called it called the ethnic cleansing of Palestine. And ethnic cleansing was a term coined in Bosnia by Milosevic, and it’s a state term, a statist term. Nobody really wants to talk about race. 

Some Palestinians would say it’s not about race. It’s about land. It’s about rights. It’s about entitlements. But in fact, it is about the construction of race. And this reading Alexander Weheliye, who’s one of the people I used most in the book, who talks about racial assemblages, which is set of political processes that construct difference and differentiate between fully human, not quite human, and non-human people. Now we see that all the time, this sense of dehumanization. And I think today, when we look at the Gaza genocide, we see racialization at its worst. Comments on articles in, in the Israeli press, when they talk about starvation, it’s Hamas’ fault, talking about killing of children, they are potential Hamas terrorists. People are not seen as human beings like Jews see themselves. People are talking about releasing those Israelis kidnapped by Hamas, as if this is the ultimate aim; not talking about Palestinian prisoners, many of whom were kidnapped by Israel at the dead of night, many children who’ve been kidnapped and put in jail. In other words, there is a human, and there’s a non-human, and there’s a process of dehumanization, which is a racializing process.

And this is important to remember when we’re dealing with the genocide in Gaza, because we have to think about, about it not only politically, but also theoretically. You know, I think theory is a tool here. It’s not, an aim in itself. But if you want to reach a political understanding what’s happening and, arrive at anti-Zionism, we have to understand the theorization of Zionism as a racial European project, which has created the colony. And again, lots of people refuse to look at Israel as a colony. I mean, I write about it in social media. People say, “What sort of colony? I mean, what, what colonies are you talking about? Itamar and Yitzhar?” which are settlements in the West Bank. I said, no. Basically, colonies are Tel Aviv and, and whatever, you know? Zionists themselves, in the first Zionist Congress in, I think it was 1879, they spoke about creating three types of colonies in Palestine. They saw colonization as a positive process, making it progressive, making it modern, and ultimately eliminating the natives. The aim of settler colonialism, as Patrick Wolfe would say, is the elimination of the natives. And the elimination of the natives started long before the Nakba, continued in 1967, and is continued as we speak, all the time.

EMMAIA: As we’re watching these events unfold on our phones, we’re seeing exactly what you described, the apparatus of states dehumanizing Palestinians, sort of super empathizing with Zionist Jews, and enacting violence that is deeply racial, deeply racist. But we’re also seeing a phenomenon where Zionism is embodied by individuals and groups of individuals, like soldiers posting brutally celebratory videos of their own violence on social media. And then we’re seeing this violence in transit between the U.S. and Israel. I mean, there was a soldier in Gaza holding up an ad for a real estate company in the U.S. as a photo on social media. These are channels of Zionism that are not outside the state necessarily, but somewhat beyond it. 

I want to ask you about this because we — meaning anti-Zionists and the Palestine solidarity movement and anti-racists — are very careful to identify structures of power as the problem, and not so much people. It’s a way of recognizing how people are used by racist power structures to enact racism. And it’s a bit hopeful that if we can dismantle the violent military project of Israel and imperial states, that we can also dismantle Zionism. But it’s also clear that Zionism is transmitted as culture. Even though Zionism is not endemic to Jewish culture, it has been attached, to the point where it’s not always compelling or particularly true to say “that violence isn’t Jewish violence, it’s Zionist violence.” Like, sometimes it is. Soldiers are spray painting Stars of David on missiles before dropping them on Palestinians in refugee camps deliberately to make it Jewish violence. 

RONIT: I think what the Zionist project has done, it has subjected us to become Zionist subjects. From a very early on, from very early childhood, you are told, this is your country, you have no other country. You’re told Jews have always been victimized. And particularly my generation grew with the fear of another Holocaust. And the combination of victimization and superiority or supremacy is a lethal mixture. We see, for instance, pictures of soldiers in Gaza, stealing, looting houses, making amazing meals in Palestinian homes, while other people are starving. Stealing women’s underwear and displaying them on their social media pages, and so on and so forth.

There’s a total sense of entitlement and dehumanization, which stems from a degree of fear, but also a degree of supremacy. We are entitled. I’ve written recently a paper about the sexual and gender aspect of it. There’s a sense of we are entitled to rape the Palestinian land. This is ours to take. Because we were brought up to take what we wanted, regardless of who or what is harmed in the way of it. Hence the Israeli rape culture, hence the pinkwashing, hence the whole approach of, “this is ours, magia li, I deserve it.” And that flows from the top leadership, from the way Netanyahu personally behaves, as if there’s no laws of humanity and decency, down to the lowest of soldiers, girl soldiers taking part with great pride, taking selfies against the demolished houses and streets of Gaza, it’s a war of an ideology of supremacy and entitlement against an ideology of resistance.

And basically, if we are anti-Zionist, we have to understand that resistance to that entitlement, that racialization, that dehumanization is absolutely normal. I mean, we are lauding the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising, it was an armed resistance as well, wasn’t it? You know, so the point is, we are not victims at the moment. We are not the victims. And this is very hard for many Zionists to accept. Because whatever you say, people will say to you, but Hamas. Because we are so inculcated and, persuaded by this narrative of victimhood and supremacy. So you’re right, it’s not just a state, it’s the people themselves. 

EMMAIA: So then here’s the question we always come to. What does it mean to not just be anti-Zionist, but to do anti-Zionism? What needs to happen in order to counteract Zionism, operating on all of these cultural and political fronts?

RONIT: Good question. I think anti-Zionism is, first of all, understanding what Zionism is. Understanding that it’s not a national liberation movement. Understanding it was a racial European project that aimed to construct a state outside of Europe and take another people’s land, and understanding it profoundly, reading the early Zionist writing. First of all understanding. Secondly: rejecting it, rejecting this idea. And thirdly, I think, is thinking about dismantling this state and constructing, instead of it, a different political entity.

And this different political entity should not be led by Jews, even by Jews who oppose Zionism. It should be led by Palestinians, because it is their land. They are the nation, the Native nation, and they should be entitled, with all their contradiction. Then they all don’t all think the same. I mean, some talk about a two-state solution, or Ghassan Kanafani said “we don’t coexist with our colonizers, we want to rule our own destiny.” Whatever the Palestinians come to some agreement, we anti-Zionists should support them in their deliberation, in their long road to create a new political entity. I’m not suggesting anybody should be thrown out or killed, but the decision ultimately is for the people who live there, all the people who live there. This is not going to be easy. Anti-Zionism through demonstrations and writing and social media expression, all the rest of it is easy. The harder part is a slow process of negotiation and the dismantling of the Zionist entity, political entity. Franz Fanon called decolonization “disorder,” not in the sense of it becomes chaotic, but in the sense of it disorders the order that exists. Also remember that in order to be a good anti-Zionist, you have to actually stop relying on Israeli and Jewish thinking, to actually look at what other people are saying and take on board the experience of other decolonized nations and peoples.

EMMAIA: And what about the way Zionism is driven forward by powers that are actually outside of this whole conversation, not invested in Jewishness or Israel particularly, but defense industrial companies, for instance, for whom Zionism is a platform, a market. How do we need to widen our vision to include those kinds of forces? 

RONIT: To do that, we have to enlarge the issue and talk about racial capitalism and talk about the capitalist interest that Israel is in fact fulfilling. Because Israel is not just, it’s not just an ideology, it’s necessary by its existence as a successful society, so-called, successful financially, successful militarily, successful technologically, to American interests. And Israel is part of an imperial project as much as it is a colonial project. And we have to remember that it would be hard to break this link, this imperial capitalist link, much more so than to break the cultural and the ideological link. Because there are interests here. And I think, I don’t see anytime soon the United States disintegrating despite the great chance that Trump will accede to the presidency again. In fact, I don’t see a chance of a world without capitalism. And I think we have to aspire to fight capitalism as much as we have to fight racism, you know?

So, it’s a complex issue, and I think what we’re seeing at the moment with the mobilization of so many people in civil society for Palestine, I think Palestine has become a breaking point. It’s become a turning point for lots of people. Not yet for states, although for some states — I think Ireland is moving, Norway is moving, Spain is moving. But I think civil society is definitely moving. We see more and more people and more and more young people understanding this cannot go on as it does.

Now to what extent we can disaggregate that from putting the Jews apart, the Jews, the putative group called Jews, is very hard. But I think we have to be slightly optimistic at the Jewish solidarity and huge mobilization of civil society in favor of Palestine. I would like to be able to be slightly optimistic and hopeful about that. My Palestinian friends tell me I’ve no right to be pessimistic, and I think they’re right, but I myself have very little optimism that things will change within the next. Because I can see that, okay, Netanyahu will fall at some stage. He also will not live forever. He is in the seventies, et cetera, but he’s not the issue and the specific politicians, even the right-wing politicians and religious politicians in Israel are not the issue. The issue is Israel fulfills capitalist imperial need within the Middle East. It’s beyond the ability of civil society groups and organizations demonstrating and shouting from the river to the sea Palestine will be free, even though these shouts are being heard more and more. They’re being heard. 

EMMAIA: Thank you so much for all of these insights and this history, Ronit. To close us out, just give us your takeaway. What is it that we need to understand about Zionism and anti-Zionism, and how can this understanding help us respond now to genocide?

RONIT: I think we must remember that genocide, a notion that’s so rejected by so many Israelis. and so many Zionist supporters, ultimately is about race and about dehumanization. Genocide is the ultimate aim of race, of racial extermination, of racial elimination of native people, of negatively racialized people, of Black people, people who are non-European. And ultimately, what we are seeing now, in fact, to me demonstrates the centrality of race to understanding Zionism. And when we understand that, when we start thinking in terms of, this is a racial project, we can undo race as Judith Butler called to undo gender. I think with gender it’s been to a degree more successful because there’s more fluidity. I think people are more ready to accept gender fluidity, they not yet ready to accept racial fluidity. Even though the reality is very, is very fluid. But race is still a much more rigid category than is gender. And we have to aspire to undo race. And then other things may become more possible. And if we understand that as anti-Zionists, not only anti-Zionist Jews, but anti-Zionists in general, we can move a bit forward in that, in that struggle, because we have a huge struggle ahead of us. I don’t know that I will see it in my lifetime. You might see it in your lifetime. Overcoming Zionism is, is definitely an aim or goal worth fighting for. 

I wanted to say that, everything I speak about is spoken as an Israeli Jew who was born in Palestine because I’m older than Israel. But I call myself not anymore an Israeli Jew, but a former Israeli Jew, because I really don’t want to be Israeli anymore. But I have an Israeli passport and Israeli citizenship, but I also have an Irish citizenship, and I’m no more Irish or Australian or Israeli. I’m nothing. I’m just a person flying a ruse in the air, you know? So I kind of have rejected my Israeli belonging in a way. Because I just cannot take it anymore. I cannot go there anymore. So many of my old friends, all liberal Zionists on the left, so-called, live as if Palestine is on the moon.

***

EMMAIA: Thanks so much for joining Ronit Lentin and me, Emmaia Gelman, to talk through Zionism and anti-Zionism as keywords for critical Zionism studies. In the show notes, you can find the link to Dr. Lentin’s book, Traces of Racial Exception: Racializing Israeli Settler Colonialism. Another reminder to look for our other episode on these same keywords with Miriam Osman of Palestinian Youth Movement, and on lots of other keywords that help us understand how Zionism is working. Till next time, solidarity from the Institute for the Critical Study of Zionism.