> We need a specific word for Zionism

Are you aware that this is like saying "we" need a specific word for the word word, of for the word "Republicans" or ..I guess any example is dificult because it would create some relation.

"We" would need to define "Zionism" and than look if what is happening could be defined as "Zionism".
You easily will end up in the same mess "we" have with "socialism" a term with one and a million interpretations and associations.
Also you will have immediately a discussion about the fact that there are leftist Zionist who are against the manner the idea of a state called Isreal is and/or was implemented.

You will always have those who are not able to grasp the differences, who don't want to see the differences and who on purpose mix up the terms to hide their own atrocities behind the atrocities that happened in the past, mainly in Europe, to people of jewish origin, or hebrew origin, or effectively living the jewish religion, the jewish believes.

What you (we) are actually talking about is Zionist right extremists, that's like saying "Israeli Nazis", and once you come to that point, thx to Godwin's law, all hell breaks lose ..

In other words ..

Sry, can't see your point or where I put words in your mouth.

Gone read this again tomorrow to see if I find the "error" in this conversation (attempt).
Not trying to "shrug" anything.
Zionism is a word, has a meaning and a context.

What kind of meaning are you looking for?

Just wrote a one pager as a response with way more personal background observations, but firefox decided to crash and took it with it .. so there is that.
:(

Long answer short:
> increase the resentment towards said Jewish people by presenting an intentionally faulty binary worldview

This is done all the time, out of tons of reasons. Incapability, lack of information, virtue signaling and also, every once in a while, on purpose, because it fit's a strategy. Doesn't matter how many more specific terms we create to address this specific issue, or how many wikipedia links we post.

In my world view, also in this case it's plain simple:
There are no war crimes.
War is a crime.
full stop

It's an atrocity and a crime to create terms like "collateral damage" in the first place.

When ever someone considers that one human live is worth more than another, he's already pouring water on the mills of fascist, being them from the left, from the right, European, German, American, christian, jewish, buddist, atheists, from Israel or what ever.

As a German and used to German discussions on this topic I'm simply astonished about your astonishment on the matter. "Over there" (or for that matter in german) you can't even start to talk about this specific topic (Israel or Zionism as the idea of creating a cultural and religious state in a region where already exists a different established population) in terms of "discussion" or questioning anything without being addressed as antisemitic.

It's a useless task and nothing will change or happen if we do it or not.
All this happens and is decided in a political realm of western hegemony where any single anybody has access to.
And the pawns that pay the price are all the people that live in that region. All of them, no matter the citizenry or cultural background.

So ..
sorry ..
I can't agree.
We don't need another term.
Not for Zionism, nor for "the state of Israel", or "The actual government of that state" (in this case Israel), nor for Semite, or jewish, or heritage or what ever. And we wont solve anything by more discussion, or meetings, or calls for action or inaction or what ever.

I was about to write:
"There are economical power structures and ideological movements in play that wont allow any other outcome than a single region called "the state of Israel" where the term of a population addressed as "Palestinians" will be a historical reference no more."
But actually I consider that climate change wont leave enough time left to let that outcome be as certain as it looks right now.