An interesting thing is to search the Net for the definition of Zionism.
There are PLENTY of different definitions. Is it an ideology ? a political movement ? a religious movement, a colonial movement ? a mixture of these things ?
If the definition you like falls within one of these categories, then, you soon find other people (who also fall within the same category) who will still give a different definition from yours.
Some dictionaries say that Zionism was a movement… It belongs to the past. Others consider that it is still alive. Who is right ?
At this point, one will ask about the borders within which Zionism wil receive Jews from all around the world. The State of Israel has no defined borders. It has no Constitution either. Therefore, is it still Zionism to move to a place, outside of Israel, which is militarily controlled by Israel ? Or is it colonialism ?
Also, this situation brings the question of the geographical limitations of Zionism (on the receiving end). Are these limits politicaly defined by International Law ? By the Holy Book ? (mainly gen. 15: 18 to 21 & Gen 17: 8). Or by what ?
If I consider fine for Jews to move to Israel (1947 or 1967 borders), and if I consider that moving to WestBank is not OK (because it is against International Law AND because, within its Declaration of Independance, Israel declared that it will follow the UN rules), THEN, am I an Anti-Zionist ?
With the new IHRA definition of Antisemitism (which imply, through the examples, that Anti-Zionism = Anti-Semitism), I am an antisemite… Would you believe it ?!
