>> Nationalists demand loyalty from citizens. This is exactly the kind of language you heard from 19th century nationalists.
It appears from my perspective, at least, that you are not fully clear on the distinction between ethnic and civil nationalism. Sean and Annie did a good job in trying to walk you through it, but to no apparent avail.
Ethnic nationalism is premised on who the citizens are (based on race, language, religion, culture, etc.) whereas civic nationalism is premised on shared ideas the citizens believe in. The US is an example of civic nationalism. A better example is Switzerland — here we have. French, German and. Italian citizens all proudly boasting of their Swiss identity, this via shared Swiss values of limited central government, strong property rights, etc.
While Canada is for the most part a society based on civic nationalisn, there does exist a strain of ethnic nationalism in Quebec amongst the separatists. This is where I first got a taste of this philosophy. It is a nasty piece of work. The chant at the time was Le Quebec au Quebecois. As an Anglo, I knew they were not referring to me — I could have had roots back 200 years in the province but I would never be Quebecois, I would never belong there. Ethnic nationalism is profoundly alienating and illiberal.
Zionism is just another form of ethnic nationalism. There appears to be discomfort at this because of the implications. For example, it would be absurd to separate Quebec nationalism from the French language and concepts of pur laine kin folk. But to pursue a parallel analysis into Zionism is to expose yourself to accusations of anti-semitism.
I don’t know how one gets around this. I do know, however, that to deny the political genus that Zionism belongs to is to misread the beast at hand.