LYCOS RETRIEVER 
Zionism: Arab Palestinians
built 644 days ago
For Israel and for Zionism there are two kinds of requirements that come with acknowledging infringement of Palestinian rights as part of Israel�s history. One is to make restitution to the Palestinians; for example, by paying reparations to Palestinian refugees, perhaps by means of grants to a Palestinian state. The other requirement is for Israeli Jews to engage in public acts, using the results of recent historical studies to overcome forgetting. These would be acts of national self-examination, but they would ... have great significance for Palestinians, including Palestinian Israeli citizens. They include teaching in Israeli schools the truth about the destruction of Arab villages in Israel after its War of Independence
Source:
Zionism is not Racism. Jews come in every race and ethnicity. Zionism is not an apartheid State: While Jews are the Majority in Israel, Arabs vote and are represented in the Israeli government.
Source:
When did Zionism begin? Is Zionism "Messianic?" Is Zionism expansionist? Is Zionism imperialistic? Is Zionism racism? Did Zionism plot to dispossess Arabs? Does Zionism run the American government? Is Zionism right wing?
Source:
If the first two arguments against Zionism fail, then the idea of a morally defensible Jewish national liberation movement is conceivable. From the standpoint of a more realistic (even if not from a purely impartial) morality, people are entitled to form states to defend a particular culture or �way of life,� and if Jews experience themselves as sharing a way of life and are willing to sacrifice to achieve self-determination, their aspirations to national libera�tion must be respected as much as those of any other people. The final criticism of Zionism concedes all this but argues that though there is nothing inherently wrong with the idea of Jewish nationalism, Zionism, by definition, infringes the rights of Palestinians. Another way of putting the criticism is to say that if Zionism were fully represented by its first principle, that �Jews have a moral right to self-determi�na�tion or a Jewish state somewhere in the world,� it would be defensi�ble. But since Zionism did not choose a so-called �land without people,� since it claims for Jews (under its second principle) �a moral right to self-determination or a Jewish state some�where in Palestine,� it necessarily infringes the moral rights of the indigenous people in the area and is for that reason morally indefensi�ble.
Source:
Zionism in Israel - Zionism brought water to a thirsty country. The Israel national water carrier pumps more water in a day than was consumed in all of Palestine in 1948. Thanks to Zionism, glass and steel towers rose from sand dunes; the forgotten and disease ridden armpit of the Ottoman Empire became the most technologically advanced society in the Middle East, where both Arabs and Jews enjoy a higher standard of living than anywhere else in the Middle East, except the petroleum sheikhdoms, the highest literacy rates in the Middle East, and the lowest infant mortality. Zionism benefited Jews and Arabs. The average Israeli Arab enjoys a higher standard of living than the average citizen of oil-rich Saudi Arabia.
Source:
If the moral defense of Zionism succeeds, it does so on the grounds that moral rights are not absolute and that what is at stake for Jews and Jewish culture outweighs the Palestinian rights that must be compromised. But just as it is reasonable to reject an absolutist view of rights and to be open to the possi�bility that rights infringements sometimes may be justified, another extreme view of rights ... seems unacceptable. This is the view that when rights are overridden by morally more compel�ling consider�ations (such as other rights or avoiding truly disastrous conse�quences), in these cases rights lose all their moral force. This view would claim not only that it is morally right to experiment on a person against her will in order to save the rest of the world but would deny that the person experiment�ed on was in any way wronged or that any failure to respect a right even occurred. On this view, when it is necessary to override a moral right, there is nothing to regret and the person who acted is immune from moral criticism because she �did the right thing,� all things considered.
Source:
MORE ABOUT
Arab Palestinians