The Palestinian question is a conflict between Western imperialism and indigenous sovereignty (Ayyash 3). Visions of the future vary depending on who one believes should have control of the land. On one hand, we have a two-state solution where Palestine and Israel exist simultaneously within apartheid conditions, dispossessing the Arab populations of humanity. On the other hand, we have a unified Palestine where both Arabs and settler migrants live side by side, vote, and interact as equal humans. By viewing settler colonialism within a decolonial and feminist framework, we understand that only a one-state solution dismantles structures of Western-imposed settler colonialism and patriarchal militarism (Go 282) (douglas 12). The dismantling of the settler occupation creates the conditions for justice and shared liberation (Fanon, n.p.). To set one on the correct line, this question needs to be historically analyzed (Shrimp, n.p.). In this paper, I will explore the changing population, historicalize Jewish experience in Europe, critique the patriarchy within Zionist culture, and examine the conditions of a one-state solution and a two-state solution.
To conduct a political analysis in Palestine, we must have an accurate understanding of the people who live there, specifically of the historical changes in demographics. When studying demographics, we study the human population in terms of size, composition, and distribution, along with the reasons for these characteristics and the consequences that they produce (McFalls 2007: n.p.). McFalls praises demography because “the history of a place cannot be truly known without knowing who lived there.” We will start our journey during the Ottoman period. During this period, the Ottomans ruled from 1515/1516 to 1917. Palestine’s population during this period was predominantly Arab; however, due to the census-tracking policy, many groups in the area did not register, namely the Bedouin, a nomadic people throughout the Arabian Peninsula, the Levant, and North Africa (McCarthy 1998). McCarthy attributes the lack of a total population count to individuals avoiding taxation. There were other issues surrounding the Ottomans’ census numbers, including (1) the borders of the Palestinian peoples’ territories have been ever-changing due to acrimonious negotiation of the ruling class (Marlowe 1959); and (2) the centrality of the Levant between Europe and Africa (Dube 2019; Marlowe 1959). The lack of accurate records hinders the precise determination of the number of migrants at the time (Mandel 1976; McCarthy 1998). However, European colonialism subjected the inhabitants of Palestine to violence in tandem with a more accepted system of counting the population.
After Ottoman rule, British mandate took control of Palestine. During this period, two censuses were performed; the largest groups during the mandate were Arab Christians and Muslims. Because the British did not understand the cultures of the inhabitants, who all spoke Arabic, they stratified the population by religious group rather than by way of life or culture (Tibawi 1977). However, looking back on oral traditions, the population at the time can be split into three groups: (1) Bedouin, a nomadic people; (2) Fellahein, the agricultural peasantry; and (3) Belladeen, those living in the city owning freestanding homes (Tibawi 1977). The next largest group recorded by the British was the Jews. Jews have always lived in the holy land along with Christians and Muslims. Prior to 1880, they migrated to Palestine primarily for religious and scholarly endeavors, among other push-and-pull factors (Tibawi 1977). For brevity, I will not be going into depth about the smaller minority groups, including the Druze, Baha’is, and Samaritans. From then on, all of Palestine’s population continued to drop relative to the rate of European Jewish migration. Censuses of Palestine, thus, are best understood as instruments wielded by the political elite to understand and maintain control of the land.
The increase of European Jewish migration to Palestine in the late 19th and early 20th centuries laid the groundwork for the establishment of the Zionist state (McCarthy 1998; Lubbad 2007; Porath 1974). The Jewish migration did not appear without cause; it was a part of a broader exodus from Europe (Porath 1974; Sachar 1958). The Jewish population in their homeland experienced unprecedented feminization (Maor 2021; Imhoff 2016). The Jewish people faced being scapegoated for economic issues, the division of their labor along ethnic lines (similar to the division of labor along gendered lines), and the lack of humanity bestowed to the group (Wyrwa 2011). Zionism emerged as a masculine reaction to the Jewish question, seeking to establish the group’s humanity by asserting itself as human through colonialism (Dworkin 1978). In Europe, Jews were excluded from the land and political power, operating as a feminized, sinful population who betrayed Christ (Dworkin 1978). Zionism seeks to overturn the stereotype of the Jewish population through conquest, patriarchy, and militarism, under the guise of democracy and inclusivity.
In reality, the Zionists reproduce the same conditions their people once lived through for the indigenous groups in Palestine: ethnic cleansing and apartheid. The Zionist occupation utilizes “feminism” within the Israeli Occupation Force and Knesset (the regime’s apartheid bourgeois parliament) to mask the ongoing gendered domination of the Arab and Jewish population (IDF 2013). This takes many forms, from the rape of Palestinian hostages and workers crossing through apartheid walls to the rape of IOF soldiers on their own bases. Israel’s colonial project performs masculinity through domination, turning historical Jewish vulnerability into genocidal aggression when using a decolonial feminist framework.
There is a lack of agreement on a solution for the Israeli occupation of Palestine; however, there are two main lines of thought: the one-state and two-state solutions. Proponents of the two-state solution argue it represents pragmatic coexistence–preserving Jewish sovereignty while granting Palestinians autonomy. This solution, backed by the West and the UN, promises stability but effectively entrenches the Palestinians in bantustans. However, the one-state solution rejects this colonial partition. Rooted in anti-apartheid and decolonial thought, I call for a single democratic and secular state ensuring equality and the right of return (the right for Palestinians to return to the land and homes that many still have the keys to). This vision reframes the question from “how to divide the land” to “how to decolonize it and make everyone equal.” My decolonial feminist analysis reveals that settler colonial states cannot be reformed through partition, as the native population will never normalize living in their current condition; they must be dismantled and reimagined. The one-state solution addresses both colonial and patriarchal violence, dismantling borders that segregate and militarize life. Like South Africa’s anti-apartheid struggle, liberation in Palestine demands inclusive governance grounded in shared humanity.
Ultimately, justice requires more than coexistence – it requires a rebalancing of power. The path forward lies not in two nations divided by fear but in one polity committed to dismantling settler colonialism and patriarchal militarism alike.
Works Cited
Ayyash, Muhannad. “The Western imperial order on display in Gaza: Palestine as an ideological fault line in the international arena.” Third World Quarterly, vol. 1, no. 18, 2025. T and F Online, https://doi.org/10.1080/01436597.2025.2465522.
douglas, carol anne. “Scapegoat: The Jews, Israel, and Women’s Liberation.” Off Our Backs, vol. 30, no. 10, 2000, pp. 12–12. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/20836727. Accessed 10 Nov. 2025.
Dworkin, Andrea. Right-wing women. (Political science). 1978. ISBN 0-399-50671-3
Dube, Z., 2019, ‘Jesus – The immigrant Egyptian Jews in Matthew’s Sondergut: A migration perspective’, HTS Teologiese Studies/Theological Studies 75(4), a5256. https://doi.org/ 10.4102/hts.v75i4.5256
Fanon, Frantz. The Wretched of the Earth. Grove Press, 1963
Go, Julian. “Thinking against empire: Anticolonial thought as social theory.” The British Journal of Sociology, vol. 74, no. 3, 2023, pp. 279–293, https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-4446.12993.
Imhoff, Sarah, “The Myth of American Jewish Feminization,” Jewish Social Studies: History, Culture, Society 2016 n.s. 21, no. 3 (Spring/Summer 2016): 126–152 doi:10.2979/jewisoci-stud.21.3.05
Israeli Defense Force, “IDF Leads the Way in Gender Integration.” Israeli Defense Force, 2013
Lubbad, Ismail. 2007. Demographic Profile of Palestinian Migration. Paper Prepared for the Migration and Refugee Movements in the Middle East and North Africa, The Forced Migration & Refugee Studies Program. Cairo: The American University.
Lucas, D. & Meyer, P. (pnyt.). 1980. Beginning Population Studies. Canberra: Australian National University.
Maor NR, Roguin A, Roguin N. Medieval Roots of the Myth of Jewish Male Menstruation. Rambam Maimonides Med J. 2021 Oct 25;12(4):e0033. doi: 10.5041/RMMJ.10454. PMID: 34709170; PMCID: PMC8549838.
McCarthy, J. 1998. The Population of Palestine: Population Statistics of the Late Ottoman Period and the Mandate.
McFalls Jr., J. A. 2007. Population: A lively introduction. Population Bulletin. Jil. 62. No.1.
Shimp, Kaleb (2009) “The Validity of Karl Marx’s Theory of Historical Materialism,” Major Themes in Economics, 11, 35-56.
Smith, C. D. 2001. Palestine and the Arab-Israeli Conflict: A History with Documents. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s.
Wyrwa, U. (2011). Anti-semitism in Europe (1879-1914): Lines of inquiry, conception and objectives of the research seminar at the center for anti-semitism research. Annals of the University of Bucharest / Political science series, 13(1), 3-17. https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:0168-ssoar-377395
My name is Garrett Washington 