>Israel is the product of a whole set of historical acts, decisions and
>persons made in this century, not the only possible realization of the
>wideranging set of aspirations that came under the term Zionism, or that
>come under the term "nationalism" in any context.
>
>All forms of nationalism have an exclusionary element by their very nature
>that in state form may be realized, but that is true for almost every
>nation, including Arab nationalism and the whole sub-set of religious and
>ethnic hierarchies that exist around the world. But that is a general
>phenomena that, unless we are going to condemn all nationalisms in all
>senses, should confine human rights campaigns to its manifestations in
>particular states and leave the ethnic collective guilt to one side.
I think Mat is right, that it's political Zionism that's the issue. But you may have noticed that I'm not fond of nationalism in any form - precisely because it's exclusionary. (As I understand it, Zionism arose along with a lot of other romantic and very often reactionary nationalisms in the 19th century.) That exclusionary aspect of nationalism has a lot to do with why so many nationalist revolutions went bad despite their originally progressive intention; one of the reasons I like Hardt & Negri's Empire is that they're trying to theorize a progressive internationalism that rejects nationalism as backward-looking, though lots of flesh needs to be put on those bare bones.
I'll also say that anti-Zionism does often serve to give cover to anti-Semitism, which is a dreadful evil, and I don't want to encourage that.
Doug