There is an interesting paradox that is emerging – a collision of two schools of thought within the Jewish sphere – two groups are competing with one another in the court of public opinion on matters pertaining to political zionism, ideological zionism, and Jewish identity. Those in defence of Zionism believe it advocates for a homeland for the Jewish people in the land of Israel (formerly known as Palestine), and Jews in opposition to Zionism see it as exclusionary and racist because of the doctrine itself. I will briefly give an overview of Zionism and its founders, and also why I support the belief that said movement poses a threat to Jewish people around the world.
Zionism is an ethnocentric and Jewish nationalist movement that emerged in the late 19th-century. Its founders, Theodore Herzl and Vladimir Jabotinsky spearheaded the organisation and sought to establish a Jewish homeland through the colonisation of Palestine. Paraphrasing from the Jabotinsky Institute, “Herzl, considered the founder of political Zionism, focused on diplomatic efforts and establishing a Jewish homeland through political means. Jabotinsky, while influenced by Herzl, developed Revisionist Zionism, which emphasised military strength and a more aggressive approach to achieving a Jewish state.” Herzl believed that a Jewish state for a self-determined Jewish people was the answer to widespread antisemitism across Europe. Fast-forward to May 14th 1948 and the modern state of Israel is born through political and military means. Many wept when Ben Gurion, the first Prime Minister of Israel declared her an independent Jewish state, especially the native population, i.e., the Palestinian people who were forcibly removed (the Nakba), some 750,000 expelled without consideration. Others were brutalised and subsequently murdered, and seventy-seven years later, we find ourselves on the precipice of World War III – a consequence of Israel’s ongoing colonialism.
Unfortunately, it seems that 21st-century social media culture and society is slipping down a slippery post-truth slope, where feelings and ‘personal beliefs’ take precedence over truth, facts, and historical evidence. Here are seven facts to keep in mind: 1) Palestinians are a colonised people (seventy-seven years and ongoing), 2) Jews suffered unimaginable horrors during WWII (Holocaust), 3) Jews were persecuted throughout Europe before the rise of Nazi Germany, 4) Palestinians in Gaza are experiencing an engineered famine which is a war crime (IDF siege and total blockade), 5) Palestinian men, women, and children – their culture, heritage, and identity – are being systematically destroyed by Israeli forces, 6) Palestinians as an ethnic group are being carpet bombed, sniped, droned, and fired upon daily in Gaza, ergo, erased, i.e., a Genocide, and 7) The illegal occupation of the West Bank by Israel is in contravention of the Fourth Geneva Convention, according to International Law.
Now, with all of the above in mind, I want to focus on media-culture today, specifically the online realm as real and hyper-real spaces that create an almost ‘participatory’ environment between the human being (content consumer) and that which he/she is consuming. Information and content are becoming an extension of the psyche/mind of the content consumer, i.e., the space between the human being and an event (viewed online) is becoming “slimmer.” I am not making the claim that fiction and reality lines are becoming blurred, I am stating that people are becoming more immersed by the materials they view online – whether real, manipulated, or hyper-real. And unlike our predecessors, many people today are experiencing a kind of “main character syndrome”, i.e., an exaggerated sense of self-importance because of social media. Everything is faster and more intense. Almost personalised.
For example, in the 90s, the consumer was a passive observer far removed from the context of a narrative – a space reserved only for media personnel, political figures, and even film stars. Today, however, the human being (content consumer) can insert himself/herself at the centre of an event as creator, lead, publisher, and so on. Since we are witnessing a minute-by-minute update of world events in real time on our screens, politicians, media pundits, and even presidents are being scrutinised and dissected like never before. And this information filters into the real or hyper-real environment of the content consumer. At some point, because of this ‘participatory’ environment, the content consumer will see it as his/her business to get involved and change affairs, in whatever capacity. This may manifest in the form of protests, riots, and even taking the law in their own hands.
Since October the 7th, Zionism has been in the spotlight, even though its entire existence is highly dependent upon secrecy and obscurity. Knowledge of the history of Palestine and the Palestinian people is better understood now by the masses than ever before (from Gen X to Gen Z). Pandora’s box is officially open. My opinion is that social media has handed power back to the people in means and ways that Zionism is not prepared for. However, one of the negative aspects of this environment is misinformation – which will always seek to undermine institutions dedicated to the truth because it is dependent upon clicks and clout for survival.
There has been a paradigm shift in terms of how we consume information. Right now, every ugly and unhinged stereotype about the Jewish people is playing out online, and this, in my opinion, is a consequence of political Zionism in the 21st-century. Political Zionism’s success was built on the tears, blood, and bones of a subjugated nation – and with individuals like Benjamin Netanyahu pandering to far-right Zionists in Europe and America to forge alliances for his own political survival, actual neo-Nazis may seize an opportunity to repackage their political agendas to the detriment of ordinary Jews. It is my view that because the ‘content consumer’ is always at the centre of an event rather than a mere spectator, the repercussions today will be severe – especially for Zionists who choose to stand by idly and not effect change in Israel, i.e., vote to end all hostilities, disband the Likud party, and establish an actual democracy for all people, similar to South Africa after the fall of apartheid.