Posted by Raskolnikov on December 28, 2025, 7:09 am
and David Slucki, the director of the Australian Centre for Jewish Civilisation at Monash University, where he leads the Monash Initiative for Rapid Research into Antisemitism. So not biased at all...
Lots of mealy mouthed "according to the Palestinians..." kind of framing to soften what are indisputable facts.
I liked this one "the Zionist project collided with the fact of a majority Palestinian Arab population, engaged in building its own national movement."
"engaged in building its own national movement" aka living in their own state as they had been for centuries.
The 14 December Bondi Beach attack targeting Jews at a Hanukah celebration has brought the issue of antisemitism into sharp national focus. In response, the New South Wales government announced measures to further curb hate speech and symbols, and, more controversially, new protest powers. This event and the government’s response have once again raised questions about the relationship between Jews, Israel, Zionism and anti-Zionism.
Zionism is a Jewish national movement that sought to create a Jewish state, then to secure and sustain it. But “Zionism” is also a contested label: for many Jews it signifies safety, continuity and belonging; for Palestinians – and for many others – it denotes dispossession and ongoing domination. It’s clear that for different people, the word Zionism means very different things, which leads to people talking past one another – with real-world consequences.
Originating in the late 19th century as a movement for Jewish national self-determination, Zionism was founded in response to the increase of a modern form of Jew-hatred grounded in pseudo-science and conspiracy theories, and the rise of European national movements seeking their independence. Early Zionists argued that the only solution for the precarious status of Jews as a perennially persecuted minority in Europe was through the establishment of a Jewish state.
From the beginning of mass Jewish migration from Europe to Ottoman and Mandate Palestine, the Zionist project collided with the fact of a majority Palestinian Arab population, engaged in building its own national movement. Zionism comprised a spectrum of political positions, including socialist, liberal, religious and militaristic and revisionist strands. Within these movements, there were internal arguments about the nature of the future state and the place of Arabs and Palestinians within it.
In the nearly 130 years since the founding of the Zionist movement, the meaning of the term has continually evolved. The Holocaust, the 1948 war that accompanied Israel’s establishment, and the mass displacement of Palestinians (known by Palestinians as the Nakba, or the Catastrophe) reshaped what “Zionism” meant in practice. Since 1967 Israel’s occupation of the West Bank and its control over Gaza, alongside ongoing settlement expansion in the Palestinian territories, have made the term even more contested.
Today many Jews see Zionism as a modern continuation of the centuries-old yearning for connection with the land of Israel, which is deeply rooted in Jewish history and liturgy. A commonly held view is that the state of Israel is necessary to protect Jews around the world from the possibility of ongoing persecution. This connection to Israel and support for Jewish self-determination are central to Zionist Jews’ sense of what it means to be Jewish.
There is no consensus though on what that self-determination ought to look like, and Zionism has always encompassed a spectrum of meanings. Many Zionists advocate for a democratic Jewish state to sit alongside a democratic Palestinian state. Many are deeply critical of, even hostile to, the current Israeli government. At the extreme end of the spectrum are ultranationalists – including members of the Israeli cabinet – who reject Palestinian statehood and who advocate for annexation of the Palestinian territories and to entrench permanent unequal rights between Jews and Palestinians.
For Palestinians and critics of Zionism the term signals displacement, inequality and the ongoing suffering of Palestinians since the establishment of the Israeli state. To them, the cost of Jewish statehood has been too great and the impact on Palestinians too devastating. Many describe it as settler colonialism; many as a system of oppression and unequal rights.
For Jews who oppose Zionism, the role of statehood runs counter to their self-understanding of what it means to be Jewish.
Many people arrive at their views from sincere commitments, whether to Jewish safety and continuity or to Palestinian freedom and equality. That does not mean all political programs are equally defensible, especially those that deny other peoples their basic rights. But it does highlight the problem with language that treats “Zionists” as collectively violent or subhuman, whether through labelling all Zionists as terrorists and genocidal maniacs, or claims that Australian Jews are legitimate targets because of their attachment to Israel. Similarly, we ought not dismiss all pro-Palestinian protesters as antisemites or Jew-haters.
Findings from the Gen17 Australian Jewish community survey – conducted in 2017 to be replicated in 2026 as the Gen26 survey – found that 69% of Australian Jews identified as Zionist, 22% did not and about 10% didn’t know or declined to answer. Among those who do not identify as Zionist, there are a growing number of Jewish bodies opposing Zionism and who are in tension with the more established Jewish community bodies.
Because Zionism carries multiple and often conflicting interpretations, recognising this diversity is essential to fostering informed dialogue, empathy and intellectual honesty. Understanding Jewish intergenerational trauma and the trauma Palestinians carry from decades of occupation would make the conversation harder to weaponise and easier to humanise. And recognising the historical, religious and cultural significance of the land to both Jews and Palestinians will help us to have a more robust public conversation.
Recognising this diversity of thought and the humanity of those who hold those beliefs, we ought to draw a clear distinction between debating the merits of Zionism as an idea and harassing, doxxing or physically attacking those who identify as Zionist. In Australian public debate, “Zionist” is often used as a political descriptor. But it is also sometimes used as a stand‑in for “Jew”, which is where political argument turns into antisemitic targeting.
It is possible for critics of Israel to argue that Jewish statehood has caused profound harm to Palestinians, while still recognising that targeting people because they are Jewish, or because of their political or cultural attachments, crosses a line from legitimate political disagreement into bigotry. The reverse is also true: defending the right of Jews to hold Zionist beliefs does not require endorsing every action or government of the Israeli state. The corporate media are complicit in the Gaza genocide. Never forget what they did. Never forgive them for it.
Re: Zionism...it's complicated according to the fraud
You want to throw up again ? 3 types of antisemitism according to Australian academic .
There are three kinds of antisemitism – each needs to be dealt with differently
OPINION There are three kinds of antisemitism – each needs to be dealt with differently Kylie Moore-Gilbert Political scientist and writer December 28, 2025 — 5.00am Save
Each day that passes since the unimaginable terror of the events in Bondi seems to bring with it fresh announcements from various levels of government. The understandable rage felt within the Jewish community that they have been let down by police, the intelligence agencies and even the prime minister himself, combined with the inevitable reality that opposition parties would smell political advantage. Albanese, who had floundered at first, clearly sensed that the political winds had begun to shift against him. Thoughts, prayers and wishy-washy statements about Australian values would no longer cut it (if they ever had). So, after a pause, we now have a raft of new federal measures designed to crack down on antisemitism, incorporating everything from gun reform to new vilification and hate speech offences.  A man mourns during a menorah lighting ceremony at the floral memorial for victims of the Bondi Beach attack. CREDIT: AP These can be added to those already tabled in the NSW parliament by the swifter-acting Premier Chris Minns, not to be outdone by a five-point plan announced on Monday by Victorian Premier Jacinta Allan. In the mix too is the 20-page report by Antisemitism Envoy Jillian Segal, which contains 13 recommendations and 49 key actions. There is a fear that governments are scrambling to propose solutions without properly evaluating the problem. If this is the case, there is a real risk of knee-jerk overreach, particularly when it comes to curtailing important civil liberties, including freedom of speech and assembly.
As the situation stands, there appears to be no singular, monolithic antisemitism festering in Australia but rather multiple different mutations of this ancient virus. The two most outwardly and unashamedly antisemitic groups are the Islamist extremists and the far-right neo-Nazis. They are similar in that they exist on the fringes of society and are actively engaged in recruiting for their cause. Both largely target disaffected young men and both use online spaces to spread their hateful ideologies as well as connect with, and import ideas from, like-minded groups overseas. We should, however, avoid lumping them together when crafting our response.
Loading Of the two, the Islamist extremists have demonstrated a greater capacity for deadly violence this century, particularly against Jews. The Bondi terror attack was but the latest antisemitic atrocity carried out by fanatical Islamists, remarkable only in that it so shockingly tore apart our illusion of a peaceful and safe Australia. Of course, it was the Islamist terror group Hamas’ massacre of 1200 mostly civilians in Israel that triggered the current spike in antisemitic rhetoric and violence, popularising it in quarters far removed from radical Islamist ideology. However uncomfortable it may be to admit, Islamist antisemitism draws on Islamic scripture, though those texts need not be interpreted that way. Islamist extremist movements reach for Koranic passages and episodes from early Islamic history, particularly the complex, sometimes conflictual relationships between the early Muslim community and Jewish tribes in 7th‑century Medina, and present them as timeless proof of an eternal struggle. Verses that address particular disputes in a particular time and place are recast as instructions for all Muslims everywhere against all Jews everywhere. This is how global jihadist groups such as ISIS and Al-Qaeda have sought to provide a theological alibi for violence against Jews.
Loading Yet there is also a large body of Islamic teaching that points in a different direction. The Koran refers to Jews and Christians as ahl al-kitab – “people of the book” – who are close to Muslims and may not need to convert to Islam to ascend to heaven. Mohammad himself married a Jewish woman, and the Koran speaks at length of Bani Isra’el, the children of Israel (known similarly as Bnei Yisra’el in Hebrew), retelling many stories from the Torah including those of the prophets Abraham, Moses, David and Solomon. Deradicalisation programs overseas have shown that Islam itself can be an effective tool to steer radicals away from extremism when a credible religious counter-argument is presented. Alongside policing and intelligence work, there is value in supporting approaches that strengthen contextual religious literacy, including teaching about the Jewish roots and references within Islamic scripture and history, and in expanding meaningful contact between Muslim and Jewish Australians. Politically speaking, cracking down on neo-Nazis would be a much simpler affair, particularly for Labor-led federal and state governments, which rely on large Muslim constituencies in a number of crucial seats. Neo-Nazi antisemitism has its roots in the blood libels of medieval Europe, witness to centuries of state and church-sanctioned pogroms against Jews justified by Christian scripture, papal edicts, hateful conspiracies and old-fashioned economic opportunism. It is from this Eurocentric ideology that many familiar antisemitic tropes have sprung, including white supremacist ideas about Jews sullying European racial and cultural purity. The Islamist threat may be predominant, but the dangers posed by neo-Nazi ideology should not be underestimated. We can’t forget what happened when the antecedents of the current neo-Nazi movement held power in Europe. Neo-Nazi groups have brazenly asserted their presence in recent years in a series of violent protests including on the steps of both the Victorian and NSW parliaments. There is talk of a neo-Nazi political party running at the next election. Allowing neo-Nazi ideology to spread poses not only a danger to Australia’s Jewish community but also to our migrant communities and other groups including Indigenous and queer Australians.
Loading A third grouping also exists that is far more ideologically nebulous and tricky to delineate. These are individuals whose extreme anti-Israel views have crossed the line into anti-Jewish sentiment, and for whom any distinction between diaspora Jews living in countries such as Australia and the actions of the Israeli government has long since disappeared. The vast majority of pro-Palestine protesters do not fall into this camp. Most are rightly horrified at the deplorable situation in Gaza, including the slaughter of tens of thousands of innocent women and children. There is nothing antisemitic about opposing Israel’s conduct of the war or Israeli government policy. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s clumsy attempts to blame Australia’s recognition of a Palestinian state for the Bondi terror attack undermined the position of Australia’s Jews, who have long decried efforts by an antisemitic fringe within the protest movement to label all Jews as “Zios” who are somehow complicit in Israel’s war, or even its very existence.
Loading This slippery iteration of antisemitism, located on the outer edge of the progressive left, borrows from both Islamist and neo-Nazi tropes and adds them to a smorgasbord of far-left grievance: A preoccupation with settler-colonialism, wonky parallels with Indigenous suffering, shallow moral frameworks of oppressor and oppressed. The result is a fluid and combustible ideology that has proven devilishly hard to police. Australians would be forgiven for being totally bamboozled by the sheer volume of policy and legislation being thrown at antisemitism all at once from various levels of government. There is no one-size-fits-all solution. What we need is keyhole surgery, not the kitchen sink. Governments must go after the specific groups that threaten the safety of Jews or have worked to bring antisemitism into the mainstream. We should not be afraid to identify them openly. Kylie Moore-Gilbert is an academic, author and a regular columnist. The Opinion newsletter is a weekly wrap of views that will challenge, champion and inform your own. Sign up here.
Save Log in, register or subscribe to save articles for later. License this article • Antisemitism Opinion For subscribers Bondi shooting Israeli-Palestinian conflict Kylie Moore-Gilbert is an academic in Middle Eastern political science at Macquarie University and is the author of memoir The Uncaged Sky: My 804 Days in an Iranian Prison. MOST VIEWED IN NATIONAL
The Age • Twitter Facebook Instagram RSS
"five-point plan announced by Victorian Premier Jacinta Allan"
Especially if they're English Lit dullards with 2:2s.The last working-class hero in England. Clio the cat, ? July 1997 - 1 May 2016 Kira the cat, ? ? 2010 - 3 August 2018 Jasper the Ruffian cat ??? - 4 November 2021 Georgina the cat ???-4 December 2025
Kylie Moore-Gilbert ffs...just looked her up...ticks every box (nm)
on December 28, 2025, 7:09 am