Discussions within socialist movements about how to build effective Palestine solidarity campaigns often center on one key issue: the class nature of the Israeli state. Several historical documents and theoretical works continue to influence this debate, offering interpretations that situate Israel within broader global and regional struggles.

An introduction by John Leslie highlights the importance of examining Israel through the framework of settler colonialism. This concept is generally defined as a system of power in which settlers occupy land inhabited by indigenous populations, leading to long-term displacement, exploitation of resources, and overlapping forms of oppression, including racism and economic domination.

Within this framework, earlier socialist analyses have described Israel as a settler-colonial state linked to global imperial dynamics. A key example is the 1971 resolution adopted by the Socialist Workers Party, which framed Israel as a capitalist and expansionist state supported primarily by the United States and positioned in opposition to surrounding Arab populations.

According to the resolution, the creation of Israel resulted in the displacement and subjugation of Palestinians, who are described as both part of the broader Arab population and a distinct national group with their own history of resistance. The document highlights several uprisings during the early 20th century, including revolts in 1921, 1929, and the large-scale rebellion from 1936 to 1939, which included a prolonged general strike.

The resolution further argues that Palestinian national consciousness intensified significantly after the establishment of Israel in 1948 and again following the 1967 war, particularly among refugees and those living in occupied territories. It also points to the events of September 1970 in Jordan as another factor contributing to this development.

In outlining its political stance, the Socialist Workers Party expressed support for Palestinian self-determination and for the establishment of a democratic and secular state in historic Palestine. At the same time, the resolution emphasized the importance of guaranteeing full civil, cultural, and religious rights for all populations in the region, including Israeli Jews. It also explicitly rejected antisemitism, distinguishing opposition to Zionism and Israeli state policies from hostility toward Jewish people.

Another influential perspective comes from a 1969 text titled “The Class Character of Israel,” written by Israeli socialists Moshe Machover and Akiva Orr. Their analysis focuses on the structure of Israeli society and the role of its working class.

Machover and Orr argue that Israeli society differs from typical immigrant societies because it developed through a process of settlement in a land already inhabited by another population. This process, they contend, has shaped not only the political and economic structures of the state but also the consciousness of its working class. The ongoing conflict between settler society and displaced Palestinians is described as a central factor influencing Israeli social dynamics.

Their work suggests that this historical context complicates the development of an independent working-class political movement within Israel, as class relations are intertwined with the broader national conflict.

A third perspective is presented in “The Hidden History of Zionism” by Ralph Schoenman, which examines the ideological foundations of Zionism. Schoenman identifies several narratives that he argues have shaped public perceptions of the Israeli state and its origins.

One of these is the claim that Palestine was “a land without a people,” a phrase used historically to suggest that the territory was largely uninhabited prior to Jewish settlement. Critics argue that this narrative overlooks the longstanding presence and identity of the Palestinian population.

Another commonly cited narrative is the characterization of Israel as a democratic state in a region often described as lacking democratic governance. Schoenman challenges this view, arguing that rights and legal protections have historically differed based on ethnic and religious identity.

A third theme concerns the role of security in Israeli policy. According to this perspective, military strength is presented as a defensive necessity in response to external threats. Critics, however, argue that this framing can obscure broader geopolitical and strategic considerations.

Finally, Schoenman discusses the association of Zionism with the legacy of the Holocaust, describing it as a powerful and widely invoked justification for the establishment and policies of the Israeli state. He contends that this narrative plays a significant role in shaping international attitudes toward the conflict.

Together, these texts illustrate a particular strand of analysis within socialist and critical political thought that views the Israeli-Palestinian conflict through the lenses of colonialism, class relations, and global power structures. While these interpretations are not universally accepted, they continue to influence debates among activists and scholars concerned with questions of solidarity, justice, and political strategy in the region.

As discussions about Palestine solidarity evolve, the challenge for many movements lies in navigating these complex and often contested frameworks while addressing ongoing realities on the ground.