Just a moment...
www.jns.org

At the center of the debate are key changes in the language used to describe Zionism, the movement that called for the establishment of a Jewish homeland in what is now Israel.

The 2023 version of the page framed Zionism as a nationalist movement born in the 19th century that sought to secure Jewish self-determination.

In contrast, the 2024 version of the entry introduces more charged terminology, describing Zionism as an “ethno-cultural nationalist” movement that engaged in “colonization of a land outside of Europe,” with a heightened focus on the resulting conflicts with Palestinian Arabs.

“Zionists wanted to create a Jewish state in Palestine with as much land, as many Jews, and as few Palestinian Arabs as possible,” it reads.

  • GarbageShootAlt2@lemmy.ml
    0·
    1 day ago

    The claim the other person was making was very, very obviously not the absurdity you represent it as.

    The residents of Palestine were peacefully coexisting Jews, Arabs, and Muslim descendants of the bronze-age indigenous people before the inception of Zionism by the British Empire in the early 1900s.

    Nowhere does this say “were peacefully coexisting since the bronze age,” it says “these populations that descended from groups there since the bronze age were, during some period of time prior to zionism, peacefully coexisting.”

    There are other problems with what you said, e.g. I wouldn’t blame the indigenous Christian inhabitants for the Crusades, but I don’t really want to get into this, I just want to point out that you wildly misrepresented your interlocutor.

    • Lets_Eat_Grandma@lemm.eeEnglish
      0·
      1 day ago

      Okay, so then i’ll focus on the specific claim of right during/before the early 1900s everyone was peacefully coexisting.

      Sure, near the end of the ottoman empire there was a very brief period where there was some coexistence. Very brief.