Define ‘Anti-Zionism’

By Seth Mandel

Thursday, February 12, 2026

 

Recent Jewish intracommunal debates have focused on the lack of a common definition for “Zionism.” But what would be more useful at this point is for the adherents of “anti-Zionism” to define the term by which they self-identify.

 

A Jewish Federations of North America survey making waves this week contended that only a third of American Jews publicly categorize themselves as Zionists. When you dug into the poll questions, however, you saw quickly that 90 percent of U.S. Jews are Zionists—the gap is between them and the number who self-identify as such. Nine out of 10 respondents believe Israel has the right to exist as a Jewish state, and therefore are Zionists whether they are comfortable saying so or not. The rest either have a different definition of Zionism or are intimidated by peers into avoiding the word.

 

Zionism is a specific term that, at its core, revolves around one concept: Israel’s existence. It can conjure all sorts of other ideas, emotions and affiliations. So for many Jews, belief in Israel’s existence might be the necessary ingredient of Zionism but it isn’t sufficient to describe their own worldview.

 

As interesting as this discussion is, then, it doesn’t get into a much bigger quandary: Jewish anti-Zionism. Or, rather, Jewish “anti-Zionism.”

 

Zionism and anti-Zionism are not opposites. Anti-Zionism isn’t Zionism’s evil twin, even if it might be evil. The two terms aren’t even the same species: Zionism is a concept and anti-Zionism is an ideology.

 

This isn’t unusual. “Anti-Semitism” isn’t the opposite of “Semitism,” which isn’t really a thing outside of esoteric linguistic trivia. But it can be confusing. Any coherent definition of anti-Zionism died in 1948, because it only makes sense if the question of Jewish statehood has not yet been answered.

 

But it is undeniable that there are many people who call themselves anti-Zionists. So what do they actually believe? This is a lot less clear than what Zionists believe.

 

In the wake of the Jewish Federations survey cited above, JTA interviewed Robbie Gringras, who co-leads a project with Abi Dauber Sterne in which the two interview self-described Jewish anti-Zionists. “I have a feeling many more of these pieces are now going to come out,” Gringras said. Get ready for this discussion to take a central place in Jewish communal discourse, in other words.

 

Gringras and others, such as the social researcher Janet Aronson, talked about engagement with anti-Zionists in the context of two opposing sides of an argument. For her part, Araonson doesn’t think that’s likely to work.

 

“For these highly engaged anti-Zionists who have gone through serious Jewish education and involvement, they actually have already heard all of the arguments that mainstream Judaism has to present,” she said. “I think that’s one of the reasons why they say, ‘We don’t need to hear your side.’ Because they’ll say, ‘We have learned it. You’ve taught it to us and we reject it.’”

 

But that strikes me as a mistake. I don’t believe many anti-Zionists know what they believe.

 

For example, Gringras and Sterne sum up their surveys of Jewish anti-Zionists with the following: “Throughout all the answers to this question we heard an unmistakable theme: These people report that they reached their rejection of Israel in response to the behavior of Jewish Israelis and Jewish Americans.”

 

What does it mean to “reject” Israel? The overall “theme” of anti-Zionism, as the researchers describe it, is: I don’t like Zionists. That, in fact, is an accurate representation of the anti-Zionist belief system, whose adherents are against people and not ideas.

 

But if a non-Jew said “I reject Israel because I don’t like American Jews,” would we give them such legitimacy? Is that a rational response to the question of whether the Jewish state should exist? Are there other states in the world that we should judge harshly based solely on people who don’t live there?

 

As for “the behavior of Jewish Israelis”: What other peoples should have their self-determination revoked, and their homeland disbanded, for bad behavior?

 

Unless, of course, many of these anti-Zionists don’t actually believe Israel should be dismantled and erased from the earth. In which case, that’s not anti-Zionism, it’s criticism. For example, according to JTA, Gringras and Sterne’s work contains testimony of those who were “rebuked by rabbis for suggesting that post-Oct. 7 donations should be directed to Israeli healthcare services rather than the military.” What does this have to do with anti-Zionism? Nothing. It has nothing to do with anti-Zionism.

 

Jewish criticism of Israel doesn’t need its own special category—Israel is, after all, a country with millions of Jews who criticize Israel. The special category should be reserved for Jews who have joined a movement dedicated to Israel’s destruction. And there is no reason the organized Jewish community should treat such beliefs as legitimate. “Should there be a place at the table for anti-Zionist Jews” is a ridiculous question unless you think Israel’s existence should be up for debate.