OK, so hear me out: anyone who is for a Two State Solution can legitimately call themselves a zionist, because one of those two states is going to be Israel.
a political movement that was originally begun in order to establish an independent state for Jewish people, and now supports the development and protection of the state of Israel
In current parlance, “zionism” has come be equated with kahanism and its variations, but that is wildly inaccurate. This is to say that Netanyahu’s and his allies’ brand of zionism is an extremist variant that threatens to subsume the whole.
But there are other brands of zionism that are peaceful and pro-palestinian. Namely: the zionism of Fatah and the PLO, who have accepted the 2 state solution.
I would even go so far as to claim that any One State Solution that envisions a pluralistic and democratic country shared in freedom and liberty between Jews, Muslims, Christians and others is also a zionist vision, as it assumes that this state would also be for the Jewish people (similar to how Canada is supposed to be also for the Quebecois people).
So, I am not sure why “zionism” should be a dirty word. Call the extremist zionists what they are: kahanists, reclaim the basic idea that zionism means that Jews also have the right to be safe in the lands of Israel-Palestine, and let’s have some peace and reconciliation.