I created the Zionism template on Wikipedia, and it was rather easy to do: everything placed inside was linked in some way to Zionism’s development as an ideology, from the Revisionist to the Anti- to the Post- to Kahanism, etc. I then "revived" on Sunday the Religious Zionism template as well, and that went well.

But in light of the recent air raid on Gaza which everyone’s going nuts over, I was thinking about creating an anti-Zionism template, and started by using the articles in the anti-Zionism category. Then I stopped, and realized that this was not going anywhere.

Like many, I’m not sure about how to exactly delineate between Anti-Zionism (against the state of Israel’s existence), anti-Judaism (against the religion’s existence) and anti-Semitism (against the ethnicity’s existence), or at least other editors, including those who added the Anti-Zionism category, are just as lacking in such details. Anti-Zionism is usually seen as a little-removed extension of anti-Semitism, an ideology that is hardly evolved far from such roots; unless you’re listening to someone of Jewish religious ancestry, expressions of anti-Semitism by the right-wing are usually accompanied by expressions of anti-Zionism, while expressions of anti-Zionism by the left-wing are often accompanied by smidgens of anti-Semitism.

The fact that anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism are both conflated with each other (with the occasional conflation with anti-Judaism) by the opposing groups (a "self-fulfilling proof", as I call it) makes the delineation difficult to surmise outside of the Jewish circle; if one only accounts for the anti-Zionism that is exhibited by Jewish and/or Israeli groups (both religious and secular), then it is probably more easy to separate and examine anti-Zionism further from anti-Semitism.

To complicate matters, I think that out of anti-Zionism has arisen yet another "anti-" ideology: "anti-Israelism". It may already exist in that you can possibly have criticisms of the Israeli state’s actions which only judge Israel as just another nation-state, not as a "Zionist entity" as it is called by supremacists like Ahmadinejad, Nasrallah, and Haniyeh who:

• simply judge the state as a fledgling exercise of Zionism-as-an-ideology and not as a fully-realized nation-state that was simply born from that ideology
• simply judge the people as mere Jews and not as native Israelis (or "Sabras", if you will) who, like it or not, were born and raised in the state
• simply judge the religion as an imported, foreign religion and not as an entrenched cultural trait of the state and the demographic majority.

If anti-Israelism is defined as being against or denying the effect of actions and structure of the Israeli government’s instruments (i.e., the military, the Chief Rabbinate, etc.), then I think that Israel’s Religious Zionists and settlers may already be on such a path, as they are flatly aligned against the pragmatist goals of the Israeli government (the unilateral pullout was a watershed moment for them) and are in favor of gaining the entirety of the West Bank and Jerusalem (which I think will happen within the next four decades); they also regularly come into conflict with the Israeli secularists who would not want any recent reinstitutionalization of a modern Sanhedrin (which I think is intended to replace the Knesset).

Anti-Israelism from non-Israelis and/or non-Jews, on the other hand, can be easily seen and construed as anti-Zionism, anti-Judaism and anti-Semitism. But it, I think, is the more predominant "in"-ideology among the anti-authoritarians and anarchists; for that same reason, it may also be the more potent worry of Israel’s national government, which tends to view anti-authoritarians and anarchists as merely vulnerable patsies of anti-Zionists, anti-Judaists and anti-Semites. 

At least, that’s what I took of the explanation of Israel’s 2004 expulsion of British journalist and human rights activist Ewa Jasiewicz, who talked to a CNN journalist in Hong Kong last night concerning the effects of the Gaza incursion. She was put out due to accusations that her journalism was biased towards coverage of Palestinian victims of bombings in comparison to Israeli victims of bombings, and that she was vulnerable to influence and exploitation by pro-Palestinian groups due to her convictions; she protested this accusation, but she is probably an example of the Israeli state’s mistrust of individuals who may not be particularly or openly fawning over any state, ethnicity, or religion (even their own) that may be for or against Israel’s existence, but are merely anti-repression and anti-violence to a fault.

In other words, they don’t like bleeding-heart anarchists.