He supported Labor Zionism. Like other Labor Zionists, he opposed the right wing of Zionism. Also, like other so-called cultural Zionists, he was more concerned with establishing a homeland where Jews could express their culture, but was less concerned with having a sovereign state. Indeed at that time, the land was a "mandate" under British rule, neither Jewish nor Arab. (In those days, many lands were ruled by European empires. The notion that each non-European nation needed its own state only solidified later, partially under Israel's example.)

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2009/12/how-eins...

Interesting that his views on race in America are now mainstream, while his views on Zionism are rarely voiced outside the far left or far right. It seems to me that his views are based on a consistent application of principals, while American politics isn't.

Most mainstream Americans' political principles are variations on "defend your side at all costs." An ideology without a (real) problem to solve is a very dangerous thing.

Viewing the US from the outside, it really is puzzling that in that land of freedom - where the ability of the individual to express themself is prized above all others - happens to be a place where people are pigeonholed by which one of two political parties they vote for, and it's frequently considered to be all you need to know to know everything about a person's opinions. "Well he would say that, he's a Democrat" kind of thing.

What? He was a Zionist according to the classical "definition" and principles of the time. The varying uses of the word "Zionist" are confusing, yet nonetheless Einstein supported self-determination of the Jews in Mandatory Palestine.