BS. Herzl’s thought was influenced directly by the Dreyfus Trial. They didn’t call any country an ethnostate back then, but that’s what establishment France in the late 19th century aspired to be. The idea gained more support after the Kishinev Pogrom of 1903, perpetrated by what were in essence Russian ultra-nationalists.
The actual state of Israel was finally founded because another aspiring ethnostate removed citizenship from millions of Jews as a prelude to killing them.
The original Zionist idea is not based in the idea of Israel as a homeland only for Jews, but as a nation-state where Jews in particular (and not just observant ones) would be welcome as citizens in full no matter what.
Over the years due to a mix of reasons (some legitimate, some not), that attitude has changed into the current twisted ethnostate concept promoted by Likud, its ultra-nationalist and religious fundie allies, and their American Xtianist friends into what we see today. It’s shameful.
Because they’ve been living under an endless state of hot and cold war with their Arab neighbours and with groups like Hamas and Hezbollah since 1948, and a colonial mentality during the British Mandate period.
Non-Jewish citizens in Israel are granted the same rights as Jewish ones, de jure if not de facto.
I never said they did. Depending on the circumstances, they often find other targets for the hate, which is a sine qua non of the ethnostate (South Africa being a good example). Anti-Semitism is something that sooner or later accompanies right-wing populist regimes.
Ironically, modern Israel sometimes engages in its own form of anti-Semitism. The religious fundies there often talk about instituting tests based on how devout a Jew is before he can become a citizen. You can imagine how well this goes over with secular and atheist Jews in the West.
