Petra Marquardt-Bigman has written a useful article about the “progressive” anti-Zionists. Defining oneself as “progressive” has that parallel sense of unreality that the words “Democratic Republic of X” always used to convey.
Marquardt-Bigman points to articles that attempt to justify “the quest for “solutions” that would put an end to Israel as a Jewish state with the argument that the peace process has failed to achieve a two-state solution that would provide for a Palestinian state alongside Israel. Implicit in this reasoning is the notion that the fact that Israel is one of the few successful states established in modern times is irrelevant. Instead, Israel is held responsible for creating a Palestinian state, and Israel’s failure to do so is apparently thought to justify the notion that the Jewish state has forfeited its right to exist.
Supposedly, this line of reasoning reflects a “progressive” political orientation, and its proponents would naturally object to any suggestion that their stance is precariously similar to the views of anti-Semitic and reactionary political forces like Hamas, Hizbullah, Iran’s regime and Syria. But of course all of these forces want exactly the same thing as the anti-Zionist “progressives”: to get rid of Israel as a Jewish state.
It is arguably also quite revealing that the “progressive” anti-Zionist reasoning is never applied to states other than Israel.”