What no theory does to a person smh.

Bad Empanada is a reactionary chud and Piker is a massive lib. The fact that they are your only point of reference lets me know you are probably still a child. You basically fell for capitalist antisemitism and don't understand basic material analysis, so you will continue to repeat the mistakes of history. Next you'll tell me that your grandfather bravely fought against the invading Russians . . . in 1944.

You would be well served to open a history book or two and maybe engage with materialism while you are at it. Funny telling me to educate myself when you clearly have no sense of anything that happened prior to your own lifetime and the context in which current events are taking place. Your original comment was that the empire could not colonize Palestine without Zionist Jews, even though they simultaneously colonized every single other West Asian country in parallel with their colonization of Palestine without them and could easily do so in Palestine without them too.

I know it is painful to be criticized from your left when you have probably deluded yourself into thinking you are as left as they come, but it's time to grow up and move on from fake leftist children like BE.

Sincerely, M

completely leaving out the Zionist Jews willingly allying with all of these powers to further their own Zionist cause

Literally the opposite of what I wrote. My whole point was that the Jewish Zionist movement would have been completely dead-on-arrival without the backing of the Christian Zionist empires. But because they hit the sweet spot of what those powers already wanted, they found themselves flushed with the full power of those non-Jewish but fanatically Zionist empires.

Of course, you linked a literal reactionary who has been rejected by the left in your last comment, so I guess your reading comprehension is non-existent and you likely harbor some deep-seated reactionary views yourself. Seriously, why are you trying to let the US and Europeans off the hook for this? When Joe Biden says "if there wasn't an Israel, we would have to create one" why don't you take him at his word? Because you want to clean your own guilty conscience?

Once again Jews didn’t magically appear in Palestinian houses because Christian Zionists prayed for it.

No, Zionist Jews "appeared" in Palestine as a place to establish a "Jewish State" because powerful European governments made it happen. First the British, then even the German Nazis themselves (read what Adolf Eichmann said about his own collaboration with the Zionists and not only getting them into Palestine but also arming and training them). And the Jewish Zionist shared the antisemitism of those Christian Zionists and were great tools to destroy traditional Jewish institutions and replace them with Zionists ones. The project is so nearly complete now that basically all main-stream Jewish institutions in Palestine, Europe, and the Americas are simply Zionist institutions and partners in the project.

But you are being extremely naive to think that any of this is possible whatsoever without the full backing of the major Christian Zionist powers who wanted Jews to make this move (into Zionism all along). And not just their "prayers" but the full military and economic might of their countries. Or that it could be either accomplished or sustained without constant and total material support from the Christian Zionist powers. At this point they don't even try to hide the fact that over 80% of all military spending in the colony is provided by the US tax payers. Zionists are the mercenaries, but the Anglo-American empire is the colonial power.

I think you need to take a deep breath and read my comments again and whatever it is you are trying to say. Are you saying powerful Jews control western governments? I think you might just be disoriented because someone criticized you from your left. I'm not saying that Zionists have not essentially overtaken essentially all Jewish institutions and politics within Jewish communities, particularly in the US and the Zionist State. I'm not disputing anything in OP's post in that regard. What I am saying is that they are able to have the successful they have only because they happen to be serving what Western Christian powers perceive as their own self interest and are happy to use Jewish bodies to accomplish.

Jewish is not an ethnicity. Saying it is is just Zionist propaganda. And "Ethnostate" is a term that I don't like ("Nation-State" is right there). That's why, as I said below, the Israeli state will accept Christian converts to Judaism and not people who were born Jews but are anti-Zionist. You can't convert to a new ethnicity, but you can convert to being Jewish and accepted as an "Israeli" citizen.

The first major Christian Zionists lineages grew out of Calvinism, which spread through Europe. The Christian Zionists at that time had amassed a lot of political power in many western governments. So there was a lot of political will in the UK to adopt the Palestine plan when they got the chance after taking over Ottoman lands a solution to the "Jewish Question." It's something lots of people in England had believed for 400 years at that point.

According to the story, Herzl was a journalist following the Dreyfus affair and was convinced of Western European style nationalism. He was immersed in the wild west of modern nationalism and its discourse and must certainly have picked up ideas from the other Jewish and non-Jewish journalists and people he was hanging around with at that time. So he would have likely have been in conversation with many people who already were Zionists (I actually want to do more looking into that).

Hertzl's movement didn't have any real relation to the Jewish religion, so it easily picked up the Calvinist version of "chosenness" as chauvinism and selected Palestine as a place it was meant to conquor as Crusader Warriors. The Christian Zionists loved this because it proved them 100% correct and was also their end-times bible fantasy. And unlike many of their earlier settler colonial escapades, this time they had the "real Jews" and they were taking over the "real Promised Land."

It was addressed to Lord Rothschild because Rothschild was the British Foreign Secretary at that time. And by 1917, there was certainly significant collaboration between British and the rich Zionist Jews. But the political project of Zionist had been a major force in British Protestantism for several hundred years before being taken up in earnest by Jewish Zionists in the 1890s, particularly following the Dreyfus Affair. You can see the evolution in these two nato-pedia articles (sorry for using nato-pedia):

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_Zionism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zionism

Jewish Zionism was built on the foundations of major Christian movements based on converting Jews into dispensational millenarians, which was much easier to do following the Dreyfus affair and the rise of nationalism in Europe. Then a gory process of culling and power took place, where Western Europeans allied with the Zionists (who had adopted their goal) and the Zionist helped cull the non-Zionist Jewish population by collaborating with the Nazis and others. Then both collaborated with each other to simultaneously block Jewish emigration to most countries following the Holocaust and making the only landing spot available Palestine, where they would be used as the front line of the colonial project.

And remember, if it is a settler-colonial state (which it is), it is a "colony" which implies that is serves a colonial empire (in this case, the Anglo-American empire)

Your history is not quite accurate here. British political Evangelical Zionism predates Jewish Zionism as major political movement by a couple of generations. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church%27s_Ministry_Among_Jewish_People

Jewish political Zionism was instituted by western, rich, assimlitaed Jews who allied themselves with Christian Zionists beginning in the 1880s and 1890s, not the other way around. The Balfour Declaration bears the name of its virulently antisemtic author who wanted to solve the Jewish Question through deportation of English Jews to Palestine, and passed the declaration over the objection of the only Jewish member of the cabinet. It also aligned nicely with the colonial regime being instituted in the former Ottoman territories where the British and French installed loyal minorities (and often alien) as the rulers of the new states, with Zionist Jews serving that role in Palestine.

The Jewish-supremacist state that has evolved out of that project has certainly done all of the terrible things you say (and then some). And the current laws of the state limit those who can colonize Palestine to those it deems to be "Jews" (which includes most Christian converts and does not include anti-Zionist Jews).

I think where you and I differ is about who is ultimately in control. The idea that the settler colonial project could last a week without total support from the non-Jewish Zionist states is not correct. It only has the power to do what it does to the extent its Sponsor (the Anglo-American Empire in this case) sees supporting it is in the Sponsor's best interest. The military and political leadership of the US has long said that "if there wasn't an Israel in the Middle East, we would have to create one" because of the interests of the US, not the Jews. It's a "permanent air craft carrier" in the Middle East, which must be controlled because of the world's petroleum-based economy and dollar system.

I think why I'm harping on it is because the Zionist Jews are the tip of the spear for the project, just like the convicts in Australia, the non-Anglican Protestants (and all of their enslaved Africans) in what became the 13 US colonies, and, most recently, the "migrants" in North Africa being sent into Spanish territory. But focusing on the tip of the spear can make one lose focus of the thrower of the spear, which will happily make a new spear and a new tip once the old one is used up.

Israel is only a "Jewish Ethnostate" because it was supported in that sense by the non-Jewish Zionist west, particularly The UK and US, which are dominated by Christian Zionists. The UK and US had no problem colonizing other places without Zionist Jews, including all surrounding colonial states and they could colonize Palestine without them too if they wanted to (but they don't want to because they are Zionists).

why not?