CITIZENSHIP STUDIES 271 is exactly this approach that indigenous scholars (in Canada, Palestine, Hawaii and elsewhere) have been consistently arguing against. The call for the politics of rejection and refusal of mechanisms of incorporation, inclusion and recognition of the settler state, with citizenship standing as perhaps the most effective method of the state, is a consistent feature of such literature (Coulthard 2014; Simpson 2014). Accordingly, even radical moves ‘within’ citizenship or ‘on’ citizenship are thus incompatible as a framework for anticolonial struggle against the settler state. It thus can be determined that ‘acts of citizenship’ cannot be reconciled with the inherent violence of settler citizenship, and the settler state itself, and with the reality of the anticolonial struggle. How, then, can we think about resistance practices of the anticolonial settler-citizen and their capacity to contribute to a radical transformation of the settler state? The anti-zionist settler-citizen The practices of resistance exercised by anti-Zionist Jewish Israelis have been extensively chronicled.11 They include a variety of ‘acts’: direct actions; demonstrations; conscious­ ness-raising activities; dissemination of reports; publications in local media; support and encouragement of boycott, divestment and sanctions against Israeli institutions; and many others. These are primarily designed to show solidarity with existing Palestinian struggles, to answer a call to participate and protect Palestinians who suffer from continuous threats by West Bank settler communities or harassment by the state’s security apparatuses. They strive to expose the violence that is integral to Israel’s colonisation and exercise of brute force towards Palestinians and to undermine the broad acceptance of state violence among Israelis. Yet, while struggling for the same cause alongside and in support of the Palestinians – that of dismantling the settler state – the colonial lines of difference are ever present. As Jewish citizens of the Israeli state, they occupy a position of power, ‘both legally enshrined and socially embedded, relative to Palestinians and other non-Jews in Israel/ Palestine [. . .] and have historically been, and continue to be, privileged by the Israeli settler-colonial project’. (Wright 2018, 5). The paradox of ‘refusal’ (in Memmi’s sense)12 from within surfaces. For these anticolonial Jewish Israelis resistance is a means to cope with an unresolvable and inherent crisis of existence, wherein members of the settler society who want to refuse the privileges that define them, in fact have no structural way of doing so. Even if they leave the colony as Memmi’s solution to Algeria’s French settlers suggests (not a realistic option as most Israeli-Jews born in Israel have nowhere else to go), it will not resolve the problem or empty Palestine of settlers, nor is it what Palestinians necessarily have asked them to do. These anti-colonial settlers try to live the present through attempts at manifesting their desire for a common future with the Palestinians – as a consciousness, practice of friend­ ship and solidarity and political act. Amongst anti-Zionist Jewish Israelis this has mani­ fested in a range of political platforms – the most radical of which currently on the ‘table’ is the ‘one state solution’ to the conflict. These proposals are often presented as an alternative to the problematic and failed ‘two states for two peoples’ logic that frames the mainstream discourse on Israel/Palestine. The ‘one state’ solution has spawned separate discussions and formulations by groups of Palestinians and Israelis that have steadily gained ground in political discourse in the past decade (Bashir and Busbridge 2019; Hussein 2015; Todorova