The Balfour declaration and the whole concept of Zionism was a completely warped attempt to try and instil some bizarre Biblical notion that a certain set of people should have the right to set up camp in somebody else's land. I think it took the British govt until 2017 to recognise that the declaration should have called for the protection of the Palestinian Arabs' political rights.
Only partially correct.
Zionism is a direct by-product of a thousand years of state and church sponsored anti-Semitism peculiar to Europe. If you read the works and speeches of the early Zionist leaders, their first and foremost goal was to get the Jews out of Europe to avoid any further persecution (of course many argue that had they succeeded earlier, millions would have been spared the gas chambers).
Most of the early founders of Zionism were avidly anti-religious and regarded the bible as nonsense. Herzl himself had his three children converted to Christianity.
This was why in the first few congresses, locations such as Uganda, Madagascar and even Texas were discussed as possible options for the solution to the 'Jewish question'. It was only the Russian delegation (the largest bloc and probably those who has suffered the worst share of the persecution under the Czars) walking out in protest that brought Palestine firmly onto the agenda.
Religious overtures of course existed within the Zionist camp - particularly among the Polish delegates. But it manifested at non Jewish govt due to the spread of evangelism during the Victorian era. Lloyd-George and Salisbury were both strongly evangelical, although it isn't clear if Balfour himself was.
It isn't really a bizarre biblical notion. The bible is pretty clear and the Jews without question once lived in and ruled that area.
What was bizarre is how, out of nowhere, it all suddenly became relevant again 1800 years later.
Madagascar would've been a cool option. You could have built a lemur zoo next to your water park.
Last edited:
