The claim that ZIonism is Settler Colonialism

The claim that ZIonism is Settler Colonialism

Zionism is settler colonialism, but the thing is, not all forms of settler colonialism is bad.

When the Europeans settled in North America, they intended to purge the Native Americans and establish their colony.

But when the Zionists settled in, firstly they did not care about purging the Muhammadian population there, but only wanted to maintain control of the land. And secondly, this was only an opportunistic decision that came about after the World War I, when the Ottoman Empire Khilaafat collapsed and Britain decided to colonize the territory. If Britain did not, the Arabs would take it anyways, even though it was a Turkish empire.

Up until then, whenever Muhammadians ruled over Jews, they would collect a tax called Jizyah from them, as a form of humiliation to their superior religion, which was a fundamental element of Muhammadianity.

In the Ottoman Empire the "jizya" was abolished in 1856. It was replaced with a new tax, which non-Muslims paid in lieu of military service. It was called "baddal-askari" (Arab. Military substitution), a tax exempting Jews and Christians from military service.

So while it would seem weird by Enlightenment Age morals to go ahead and colonize another group of people, it should be noted that this is exactly what Muhammadians had been doing until the 20th century, and it was only during this timeframe that Zionism began. By Muhammadian standards, the only reason this would not be a crime is because it does it is not a war in the cause of Muhammadianity, but is one against Muhammadians.

Now, as mentioned above, Jews did not even take the first move to expel the Muhammadians, as that was not part of their goal. They took up the partition plan, and at that time, it was the Muhammadians who waged a war against them. Waging war in such a manner to retain territories, with no regards to the life of the people of their own community, is a pillar of Muhammadianity, because the life of this world is not of value. At the same time, oddly, the religion is all about an afterlife in which all the forbidden activities of this world will be legal, in addition to promises of further unseen pleasures.

When dealing with people who hold such attitudes, one cannot deal with them in the same manner in which they deal with other, more relatable people.

Also, Zionism is not just relevant to the religion, but is also important to its survival, because if a Jew is not in the land of Judea, what is the motive behind following his religion? Why would anyone be holding on to a religion that says their true homeland is in a place far away, and now belongs to someone else, because God took it from them for their sins, and God will give it back to them one day, expelling their current population? If someone holds such views, they will be deemed as delusional and also as evil for believing that a God will destroy a group of people who've inhabited the land for centuries and give it to them.

Turns out this was exactly how Jews were seen in Europe, a group of people with crazy views that differed from the norms of Christian Europe. And this is what led to antisemitism, and the solution to this was Zionism, or conversion to a local faith such as Christianity or Muhammadianity. If one chose to keep their original heritage, Zionism was the only path forward.

I believe that Jews who reject the right of Jews to live in their original homeland under the claim that Jews lost the land due to their idolatry are just a group of them who have converted to Christianity, and call themselves Messianic Jews. Most of those people who call themselves Torah Jews, simply choose to live by the moral code of the Torah, and overlook the rest of the scripture that deals with the maintenance of the Temple of God at Jerusalem.

If one is to say that Jews have been kicked out of Judea by God, they are, by modern standards, simply living in a Diaspora hoping that one day God will come and grant them their homeland. This goes against the idea of God acting through humanity, and holds the position of God as an intervening God, which is a position that is strange by modern standards, as well as goes against the philosophy of the perfect plan of God, one in which he would not need to intervene by hand.

TLDR: A Jew who didn't return to Zion would be a crazy person no one would want to be associated with. That is, in a manner different from Christianity or Muhammadianity, in that they believe in the divine genocide of all humans, while Jews would've believed in the genocide of a specific group of people, a position which would lead to social hostilities.