Ahead of Israel’s October 27 elections, Israel’s Young Democrats, the youth wing of the newly formed Democrats party, are seeking foreign allies. They recently announced a joint campaign with the Young Greens of Austria to support “progressive voices on the ground and work with them towards a sustainable peace”. Meanwhile, another youth group described as “leftist”, Hamahanot Haolim (the Ascending Camps), is exploring plans to build a new kibbutz in the occupied West Bank, near Jericho.
When questioned about the impact on the Palestinian population, the group’s director, Ilan Gazit, explained that since Israeli settlements are being built regardless, “the left” should make sure it is Israeli “leftists”, not far-right settlers, who populate them. These two youth movements and their foreign sympathisers appear to treat “leftist Zionism” as a coherent political identity. But can a party, a movement, or an individual be both leftist and Zionist?
The short answer, from a Palestinian and anti‑colonial perspective, is no. So why is it touted in Israel and beyond as a legitimate ideological belief? Because it is a political technology designed to shield Zionism from any critique while preserving the structures of oppression.
The question about the viability of “leftist Zionism” is not new. Zionism emerged as an organised Jewish nationalist movement in Europe in the 19th century. At its core was the aim of establishing a Jewish national home, an idea shaped by European nationalism, European anti-Semitism, and colonial expansion.
Its early political architects advanced two connected projects: redefining Judaism as a national identity and colonising Palestine. Theodor Herzl, a Hungarian Jewish journalist who is seen as the founder of Zionism, was motivated not by religious zeal, as he espoused secularism, but by the growing anti-Semitism in Europe. After Herzl’s death in 1904, leftist ideas entered the movement as various socialist factions rose to dominance within the World Zionist Organization and in early settler communities in Palestine itself.
But these leftist elements were not driven by a genuine commitment to class-based struggle and internationalism. Rather, they used a socialist vocabulary to justify a settler-colonial nation-building project, carried out through kibbutzim, labour unions, and diplomacy. Whatever position early Zionists staked out on the political spectrum, what the movement ultimately produced — the state of Israel — was in direct contradiction with the anti-colonial, anti-racist politics the left was supposed to stand for.
Extract — continue reading at the source.
