Skip to main content

The End of Zionism? Welcome to the Funeral Nobody Wants to Admit Is Overdue

 



Of course. Haaretz recently published an opinion piece by Ithamar Handelman-Smith titled Some Say It’s the End of Zionism, and I Say That’s All Right.” And what impeccable timing: as Israel carries out a near-two-year campaign of siege, famine, and bombardment in Gaza — slaughtering families, burying aid workers with their ambulances, and literally starving children to death — someone in Israel finally whispers the unspeakable: maybe Zionism, that 20th-century project of “Jewish salvation,” has outlived its moral shelf life.

Bravo. The house is burning, bodies are scattered in the street, and the philosopher shows up with a garden hose.



Zionism: Success Story or Crime Scene?

Handelman-Smith argues that Zionism achieved its success: a Jewish state, a safe haven, a fortress against the ghosts of Europe’s crimes. But like every “success storydrenched in other people’s blood, it didn’t age well. What began as refuge turned into domination; what was called “liberation” became occupation; what was dressed up as “survival” has curdled into apartheid, ethnic cleansing, and open genocide.



And here’s the bitter irony: the very thing that was supposed to protect Jews from barbarism now justifies their state in becoming the barbarian. Gaza is proof. The safe haven has mutated into a killing field.

The Rotten Core Exposed

The author politely calls it “the corruption of the original idea.” How civilized. As if expelling Palestinians in 1948, bulldozing their villages, and ensuring they never return wasn’t already corruption at inception. But now, 75 years later, the mask has slipped. Settlements expand. Palestinians live as rightless subjects under permanent military law. The “Jewish and democratic” fairytale reveals itself as an impossible contradiction. You cannot have both — unless your democracy ends at the barrel of a tank.



Handelman-Smith suggests that this obsession with Jewish demographic supremacy has finally poisoned the very state it built. How right he is — but how late. The poison was already in the well; only now are Israelis complaining about the taste.



Post-Zionism, or Too Little Too Late?

The article dreams of a “post-Zionist” Israel — one that is truly democratic, a state for all its citizens, where Jewishness can remain cultural but not hegemonic. Sounds lovely. Almost utopian. But as Gaza’s children are emaciated into skeletons, as hospitals become morgues under rubble, and as the world pretends not to see, the timing is grotesque.



We are told, “Don’t mourn the end of Zionism, embrace it.” But tell that to the family digging their child’s body out from concrete. Tell that to the mother boiling weeds to keep her children alive. For them, Zionism isn’t ending — it’s roaring above in an F-16, flattening their neighborhood.



A Funeral Without Tears

Maybe it is the end of Zionism. Not in the philosophical salons of Tel Aviv, but in the ashes of Gaza, in the shattered moral credibility of Israel before the world, and in the global protests where millions chant what once was unthinkable.



Zionism is dying, yes — but it’s not a noble death. It’s a grotesque suicide, written in the blood of Palestinians, carried out live on every screen, and excused with every flimsy press release.

And when the obituary is written, it won’t read like Handelman-Smith’s soft eulogy. It will read like a crime report.



Final Note

So yes, Ithamar, you’re right: the end of Zionism is “all right.” But don’t dress it up as evolution, as progress. It’s collapse, it’s disgrace, it’s the inevitable implosion of an ideology that mistook supremacy for survival.



And in Gaza, amid famine and fire, the world is witnessing the last act not of Jewish liberation, but of Jewish moral bankruptcy, played out on the bodies of those who were forced to pay the price from the very beginning.



Comments

Popular posts from this blog

A Rabbi Against the State: When Faith Refuses Power

In a world where identity is weaponized and religion is drafted into political armies, the sight of an ultra-Orthodox rabbi standing beside Palestinian flags unsettles nearly everyone. Yet there stands — black coat, beard, sidelocks — calmly declaring something that scrambles modern assumptions: “ Judaism is not Zionism.” For him, this is not rebellion . It is obedience . Affiliated with , a small and highly controversial Haredi sect, Rabbi Beck represents a theological current that predates modern nationalism. His argument is not secular. It is not progressive. It is not post-modern. It is ancient . And that is precisely the point. The Interview That Disturbs Categories In one widely circulated long-form interview, the exchange unfolds with almost disarming simplicity. Interviewer: Rabbi Beck, how can you oppose Israel as a Jewish rabbi? Rabbi Beck: Judaism and Zionism are two completely different things. Judaism is a religion. Zionism is a political movement founded little more ...

The High Priest of “Serious” Wars Discovers Bibi

  There was a time when rode into every Middle Eastern catastrophe like a TED Talk with a press pass. If there was a war to explain, a regime to modernize, or a “vital message” to send with cruise missiles, Tom was there — sleeves rolled up, metaphors polished. Back when the invasion of was sold as a democratic software update, Friedman wasn’t exactly storming the barricades. He was midwifing “creative destruction.” The region would be shocked into sanity. History would bend toward market reform. Fast forward. Now he’s discovered that might be bending something else entirely. When an Ex–Prime Minister Uses the Words “Ethnic Cleansing” What jolts Friedman’s latest column is not campus rhetoric. Not activist slogans. Not fringe NGOs. It’s — a former Israeli prime minister — using language that once would have detonated diplomatic careers. Olmert wrote in Haaretz that: “A violent and criminal effort is underway to ethnically cleanse territories in the West Bank.” Let...

Sanctions, Selective Morality, and the War That Never Ends

  On Feb. 28, 2026, The Editorial Board of NYTimes  warned that President Trump’s latest strike on Iran was reckless, unconstitutional, and strategically undefined. The board expressed concern for “the many innocent Iranians who have long suffered.” Eleven days earlier, on Feb. 17, 2026, wrote something even more explosive: “ Israel’s far-right government, led by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, is spitting in America’s face and telling us it’s raining. It’s not raining. Bibi is playing both President Trump and American Jews for fools.” Friedman was not questioning Israel’s right to defend itself. He was questioning whether American power was being drawn into a strategy shaped less by U.S. national interest and more by Israel’s domestic political calculus. That distinction matters. Iran as the Permanent External Threat For over four decades, Iran has been under American sanctions. Since 1979, layers of financial, oil, trade, and banking restrictions have been impo...

Blood in the Car Park: Islamophobia and the Fear That Follows Us to Prayer

  On a cold February evening in 2026, 18-year-old Zeeshan Afzal was stabbed to death in the parking lot of Oldbury Jamia Masjid, near Birmingham. He had just prayed. He had just stood shoulder to shoulder with other worshippers in Ramadan — the month of mercy, of restraint, of forgiveness. Minutes later, he lay bleeding in the dark. Police have said the investigation is ongoing and that the killing is not currently being treated as religiously motivated. That is an important and responsible clarification. Motive must be established by evidence, not emotion. And yet. Across Muslim communities in Britain and Europe, the question whispers through homes and WhatsApp groups alike: Are we safe? Even at the mosque? The Atmosphere We Cannot Ignore Even when a specific case is not officially labeled a hate crime, it unfolds within a larger social climate. And that climate matters. Across Europe, reports of anti-Muslim hate crimes have surged in recent years. Mosques vandalized....

When a Journalist Becomes a “Hybrid Threat”

  The Administrative Erasure of Hüseyin Doğru Europe prides itself on being the global capital of press freedom. And yet, in 2025, the Council of the European Union placed a German journalist under sanctions using a legal regime originally designed to counter Russian destabilisation. The journalist: The legal instrument used against him: Council Regulation (EU) 2024/2642 Concerning restrictive measures in view of Russia’s destabilising activities CELEX: 32024R2642 Council Decision (CFSP) 2024/2643 Restrictive measures framework (Common Foreign and Security Policy) CELEX: 32024D2643 Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/2021 (3 October 2025 – listing amendment including Doğru) CELEX: 32025R2021 These are not criminal statutes. They are foreign-policy instruments. And under them, a journalist inside the European Union was designated as supporting destabilising activities. What the Official Listing Says According to the Official Journal entry (Annex t...