Expanding the Label of “Liberal Zionism” is Unhelpful
In a recent debate Youtuber Deculturation claimed that "Sam Seder is a Liberal Zionist”. Upon reflection, after initial shock and outrage at a fringe take* from a relatively small creator, I have come to the conclusion he may be technically correct. Sam Seder has in fact said “I think Israel has a right to exist” as Deculturation cited. He is left of liberal in American terms, but not in a global context. Under a liberal definition of Zionism, Sam Seder is in fact a Liberal Zionist. This realization has finally granted me the clarity to articulate why I have become increasingly uncomfortable with what I have seen as over-application of the term “Liberal Zionist” over the last several months. Please bare with me.
Until fairly recently “Liberal Zionist” was a term reserved for people who were both Liberal and Zionist in a much stricter sense. Chuck Schumer being the poster boy. It became common to call Bernie Sander and then Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez a LZ, when they advocated for more weapons for Israel, even after the barbarity of the genocide was perfectly clear to all. However, even with their refusal to block weapon shipments to Israel, they are much softer on Palestine than most US politicians, at least in rhetoric and I wasn’t sure the term really fit. I became a bit skeptical of the application of the same term to describe them and Zionist hardliners like Schumer and felt it obfuscated a delineation that was at least sometimes relevant. But the shoe did fit, they certainly were Liberals doing a Zionism. Recently, I have seen it applied increasingly widely and IMO, frivolously, to an increasingly wide range of positions. Deculturation being comfortable calling Seder a LZ, and none of the 3 other people in the discussion pushing back was the breaking point for me. I am concerned that if the colloquial definition of “[Liberal] Zionism” comes to include any one who thinks or at least states “Israel has a right to exist”, it would encompass a vast majority of global Jews and many others who otherwise support at least some form of Palestinian liberation. “Zionism” has always been an ambiguous term, but I think there is a general consensus on what it means in a contemporary context, especially in relation to support of the state of Israel and the genocide it is currently orchestrating. If that common definition of “Zionism” also becomes overly encompassing it would muddy the waters between people doing important work to end or at least mitigate a genocide and the forces of colonialism using progressive language as cover for said genocide. Obviously, this would undermine Jewish anti-Zionist efforts. I also generally think the further correlation of Jews with Zionism invites antisemitism, but I think that is of lesser immediate concern compared to the active genocide and do not want to distract from it at this time.
Sam Seder is arguably the most important anti-Zionist voice within the American Jewish community (whether he owns it or not). The Majority Report is one of the most effective organizations in refuting Zionism internally and exposing the truth about the genocide to Jews over the age of 40. If Sam Seder is widely jacketed as a "Zionist”, and his credibility is marred or his reach undercut, it would be a net loss to the collective effort to liberate Palestine. The same could be said for many others actively resisting Israel’s expansion efforts.
When the this broadening definition is combined with the increasing trend to use the term “Liberal Zionism” to call out and delegitimize more subtle forms of support or apologia for the ongoing genocide, often correctly, it becomes an unpragmatic over-correction to a real phenomenon. An overly wide definition loses focus on priority issues.
Most Jews have been fed Zionist propaganda their entire lives. All of us carry the generational trauma of the Holocaust, and for many it has been exploited. For some denouncing the State of Israel or even failure to affirm it would mean alienation or disownment. I personally don’t think the state of Israel has a right to exist, but I wouldn’t say that in front of my older family members. “Denounce Israel or your a [Liberal] Zionist”, which seems to me to be the logical conclusion of Deculturation’s definition of “[Liberal] Zionism" is a counter-productive dichotomy. I personally know at least three Jewish activists who have volunteered for life threatening aid work in Gaza and have complicated opinions about the state of Israel. There are many Jewish activists, Sam Seder, for example, who have stated “Israel has a right to exist” and defended the slogan “From the river to the sea”. Differing and even conflicting perspectives can and have existed in productive coalition. There is an argument to be made that the sentiment “Israel has a right to exist” must be abolished for Palestine to be fully liberated. That may be the case. Either way I feel it is a comparatively semantic discussion for the foreseeable future and not worth risking division in the anti-zionist movement over, especially at this time.
To be fair to Deculturation, there is valid criticism that can and should be made of the internalized Zionism of the many of Jewish people, regardless of their advocacy. “Sam Seder holds Liberal Zionist tendencies, they may be informing his perspective” is fair and constructive criticism. “Unpacking The Internalized Zionism Of The Majority Report; Insidious Zionism Among Leftist Jews” is a video essay I could see myself rewatching several times and maybe sending to my friends. “To what extent is it possible to be anti-Zionist without denouncing Israel in totality” is a conversion that I have privately more than once, and my mind has been changed by it. Maybe it is a conversion that should be had publicly more often.
It is constructive, even imperative, to call out Zionism wherever it appears, especially in people and organizations that are generally aligned with the goals of creating a democratic multi-ethnic single state in Palestine. However, we must consider the broader implications of these labels on collective advocacy. I am not advocating abolition of the term “Liberal Zionism”. It is a useful term that describes a real and dangerous phenomenon that needs to be called out, but words lose power if they become too vague or appropriated.
To end on a solution, I will submit a few term I think better describes various gradients on the Zionist spectrum. I think the term “Pogressive Zionist” much better describes Jews like Bernie Sanders, who espouse sympathy for Palestinian people, yet are still to some extent complicit in their mass murder. As Sam Seder, and myself, who adamantly opposed the Israel’s occupation and genocide in Gaza, but still hold complicated stances on Jewish sovereignty in general “Internalized Zionist” is probably a better term.
*Sam Seder runs the indy news outlet The Majority Report and has been a Jewish voice heavily critical of the Israeli occupation and genocide in Gaza and espouses support for a multi-ethnic and democratic single state in Palestine.
youtube.com/watch?v=0nR9Fcrp1yg
I would like to note, I think Deculturation made some other really good points here and generally seems like a pretty cool, if sometimes slightly hyperbolic creator. I am mostly going hard on his statement because it illustrates a broader point. Also, like I said, he is not wrong. I will be checking out his other work in the future. I was thinking a lot about the concept of Jewish/White savior while I wrote this.
Obviously this has centered a Jewish perspective, my perspective is Jewish. If you had time to read this, you also have time to find at least two Palestine voices too. Go do that.