A common tactic among anti-Zionists is constantly shifting the justification for their conclusion. Theyâll begin with:
âIsrael is illegitimate because it committed genocide.â
When confronted with the fact that Arab populations have grown, they pivot:
âWell, even if itâs not genocide, itâs apartheid.â Point out that Arab citizens have full voting rights and representation, and they switch again:
âWell, even if itâs not apartheid, Zionism is still colonialism.â Yet this is the opposite of colonialism. Colonialism is when a foreign empire rules from afar, while Zionism is a people returning to their ancestral homeland. At that point, the fallback becomes:
âWell, even if not, the very idea of a Jewish state is racist.â But that collapses too, since dozens of nations define themselves by ethnicity, culture, or religion, and no one denies them legitimacy.
Notice whatâs happening: the reasons keep changing, but the conclusion never does. Thatâs not honest reasoning, itâs goalpost-shifting. The conclusion (Israel must not exist) is fixed from the start, and the arguments are just rotating excuses that fall apart one by one.
