Zionism framed land redemption as redemption from the East itself

Evidence

“Negation of exile” is therefore the negation of the land, its culture, and its history. Again it followed Christian-orientalist imagery in a way that demonstrated identification with the West that associated the “return” to the East, the place of origin. The “redemption of the land,” the term used to define the transfer of lands to Jews, was also its redemption from the East, and its reintegration into the West. … Jewish exilic tradition in general was perceived in Zionist writings as oriental, and as such rejected. — Ivan Davidson Kalmar, Derek Penslar, Orientalism and the Jews, 649

Categorization

• XREF: Echoes the earlier Orientalism material on how the West constructs ‘the East’ as something to be redeemed/conquered; also parallels postcolonial analyses of settler projects. — connects to: Land acquisition was framed as religious ‘redemption’ even in the pre-state secular era. — Nadim N. Rouhana and Nadera Shalhoub-Kevorkian, When Politics Are Sacralized:…, 500
• QUESTION: Worth chasing: how did this ‘redemption from the East’ framing interact with Zionism’s own claim to be a return to origins — a genuine paradox in the founding texts?