It has come to my attention that my article in the Voice last month regarding Zionism and Israel was met with a large amount of criticism from Wooster students and faculty, specifically certain aspects of the Jewish community on campus, for its provocative nature. Before I clarify my stance on Israel and Zionism, I would like to state that the aforementioned piece was directly intended to be provocative, and that I stand by it entirely.

Beyond the often disturbing tactics of the state of Israel that I highlighted previously, the question of the moral defensibility of Zionism must be taken within the broader context of the inevitable failure of nationalism at certain stages of development. Nationalist movements cease to be morally defensible when three things happen: the expression of national improvement becomes detrimental to other groups, the nationalist group becomes the ruling class within a region while continuing to pursue policies and ideology rooted in previously legitimate claims of oppression and those involved with the nationalist program refuse to accept any criticism of it. As the Mussolini-era Italian political dissident Piero Giobetti once famously claimed, fascism is the result of a nation that will not tolerate heresy. I contend that once any nationalist movement passes these stages, it assumes an ideological trajectory towards fascism, whether it is applied to its own people or the groups that it persecutes.

Notable recent examples of what I, and many others, consider ideologically proto-fascist movements that share these attributes of reckless and misplaced nationalism are the far-right anti-immigrant movements that have become prominent in the United States and various European countries in the past decade. In these scenarios, anti-Latino and anti-Muslim sentiment by the white ruling class exemplifies this absurd phenomenon of a hegemonic group claiming to be under attack by a less powerful rising minority. In these cases, legislation such as the infamous SB1070 legislation in Arizona, an anti-illegal immigration law, and the ban on burqas in France shows how the ruling group’s quest to preserve a national identity that is not legitimately threatened infringes on the liberties of the seemingly “dangerous” minority group. This parallels the absurd assessment of many supporters of Israel that the state is under attack by Arab terrorism, while Israel actually possesses and displays regularly a nearly unstoppable military force, reflected by the wildly disproportionate levels of military retribution against largely civilian targets by the Israeli Army in incidents such as Operation Cast Lead.

The ideological roots of Jewish nationalism in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries were a morally necessary response to centuries of anti-Semitic oppression in Europe. But just as the French Revolution turned a once legitimate social critique into fascism when the revolting class came to power, the development of a sovereign Jewish state in Palestine has turned an ideology espousing liberation of the oppressed into one that is necessarily oppressive to others. In this case it is the indigenous Arab population that continues to suffer the torment of military occupation. I do not deny that anti-Semitism is a major problem in many parts of the world and that the Jewish people have survived multiple horrific existential threats, but the establishment of a successful and influential Jewish community in the United States and abroad makes the state of Israel unnecessary for the sustained existence of the Jewish people. Despite this, many Zionists aggressively defend Israel’s military occupation of Palestine as absolutely necessary for their continued existence.

In our lifetime, Zionism as an ideology has already begun to take the turns that I predict above. The increasing dogmatism of the right-wing factions such as the ruling Likud party, marked by actions such as requiring Israeli citizens to take loyalty oaths and the general refusal of Israel to concede almost any territorial gains or acknowledge the shocking barbarism of its military conquests past Israeli borders, shows the development of a proto-fascist ideology on the vanguard of Zionism.

As with any group involved in a nationalist project on this scale, the Jewish community cannot afford to reject all criticism of the increasingly intolerable nationalist project of Israel and its deeper cultural precedents by constantly claiming anti-Semitism. This dangerous progression of Zionist ideology and practice is not helping the Jewish nation, but rather dividing it and leading it down a path of morally unsustainable nationalism that only inflames anti-Semitism across the world. Just as it is the duty for all of mankind to halt any nationalist movement that becomes morally intolerable, Jews and gentiles alike must stand up and critique the cultural and political dogma of Zionism before it is too late.

Dan Hanson is a contributor to the Voice. He can be reached for comment at DHanson12@wooster.edu.