The Doctrine of Discovery and Zionism: A Comparative Analysis

When October 7th happened, I like many didn't speak for quite a while. I didn't feel informed. I didn't feel knowledgeable enough. I was grappling with the demise of the cult I was a part of for my formative years. A cult that motivated me to fast every Tuesday for the promises of Israel and for the initiation of the phases of what I thought were the events that led up to the second coming of Christ. I went on several intercessory missionary trips to Israel, thinking that sharing the gospel of Jesus in those places would somehow warm the hearts of rightfully disinterested people.

It wasn't until October 7th that I learned about what happened. I went silent and started to learn more about what happened and how I may have never have been given access to the narrative if I had stayed in white Christianity. It didn't take me very long to understand the striking comparison between Zionism and the doctrine of discovery.

The doctrine of discovery, as outlined in Mark Charles and Soong-Chan Rah’s Unsettling Truths,(one of my favorite books) has significantly influenced various global contexts, including the development of Zionism and the establishment of the state of Israel.

This doctrine, originating from a series of 15th-century papal bulls, granted Christian explorers the right to claim lands inhabited by non-Christians, deeming them subhuman and their territories available for appropriation. The ideologies were based on papal supremacy and gave birth to protestant supremacy that claimed a manifest destiny. The logic of both has manifested in the Zionist movement, reflecting similar patterns of land acquisition, displacement, and legal justification.

Zionism, emerging in the late 19th century as a nationalist movement, sought to establish a Jewish homeland in response to centuries of anti-Semitic persecution in Europe. This movement was driven by historical, religious, and political motivations, culminating in the establishment of Israel in 1948.

Much like European settlers in the Americas, Zionist settlers viewed Palestine as a land to be “redeemed” and developed. The early Zionist slogan “A land without a people for a people without a land” echoes the colonial mindset of terra nullius, the belief that unoccupied or “underutilized” land was available for taking. This notion disregarded the presence and rights of the indigenous Arab population in Palestine, paralleling the doctrine of discovery’s disregard for indigenous peoples.

Legal and political justifications for Zionist settlement in Palestine further reflect the influence of the doctrine of discovery. The Balfour Declaration of 1917, issued by the British government, supported the establishment of a “national home for the Jewish people” in Palestine. This declaration can be seen as a modern parallel to the doctrine of discovery, involving a powerful foreign entity legitimizing the settlement and political control over a land inhabited by another people. This external validation of colonial ambitions mirrors the papal bulls sanctioning European conquest and colonization.

The establishment of the state of Israel involved significant displacement of Palestinian Arabs, akin to the displacement of Native Americans during European colonization. The 1948 Arab-Israeli War, known as the Nakba (Catastrophe) to Palestinians, resulted in the expulsion of approximately 750,000 Palestinians from their homes. This event reflects the broader colonial practice of expropriating land and resources from indigenous populations, a practice justified under the principles of the doctrine of discovery. Charles and Rah note that such displacement is a direct outcome of viewing indigenous inhabitants as obstacles to be removed for the advancement of settler-colonial projects.

The ongoing Israeli-Palestinian conflict remains a contentious issue, with disputes over land, sovereignty, and rights. Israeli settlements in the West Bank are often compared to colonial outposts, further complicating the peace process and perpetuating tensions between Israelis and Palestinians. The principles of self-determination and indigenous rights, which have gained prominence in international law, challenge the legitimacy of actions based on the doctrine of discovery. The United Nations and various human rights organizations have criticized Israeli policies and practices that result in the continued occupation and settlement of Palestinian territories, highlighting the enduring impact of colonial ideologies.

Palestinians, their kin and allies, frame their struggle in terms of anti-colonial resistance, drawing parallels to the resistance of indigenous peoples in the Americas and other colonized regions. Just as indigenous peoples have fought for their rights and sovereignty, Palestinians seek to reclaim their land and assert their national identity. This narrative of resistance underscores the ethical and moral considerations surrounding historical injustices, reparations, and the right to self-determination. Charles and Rah emphasize that acknowledging and addressing these historical wrongs is essential for achieving a just and equitable resolution to such conflicts.

Basically, the principles underlying the doctrine of discovery are manifest in Zionism right before our eyes and we have some choices to make.

Understanding these parallels provides insight into the inability of America to listen to the outcry against what is happening--as this would be a condemnation of our own logic and ways of being in the geopolitical landscape. It would force a long overdue reckoning and revolutionary shift in society as we know it.