I thought it was an interesting article and interview. I agree that his self-definition is problematic - at best smug, at worst hypocritically prejudiced. BUT Lisa's post was not about Neslen but about Jill's article, and the beauty of the article was that it leaves that problematic very open. It neither criticizes nor endorses it, but leaves it on the page for the reader to begin to play with. She does praise aspects of the book, but pointedly without endorsing its author's agenda, which she in fact subtlely questions via the issue of Palestinian Israelis/ Israeli Arabs. (I too have problems with political Zionism, but I have a far bigger problem with someone who defines themselves as "anti-Zionist" - you can have issues with something without being "anti". But Bundist's were always a bit wack - just like the Zionists!) All in all, well done, Jill!