Hyper-Zionism

David Brooks, in an op-ed column in the New York Times writes of groups that reject the globalized culture who are "driven". He then sets out some examples. Like these:-

Islamic extremists reject the modern cultures of Europe, and have created a hyperaggressive fantasy version of traditional Islamic purity. In a much different and less violent way, some American Jews have moved to Hebron and become hyper-Zionists.

As it happens, Jews, from all over the world, and for centuries, have been returning to Hebron. In the 1929 riots, a half dozen American boys, from New York, Chicago and other places were among those murdered there. To live in Hebron as in Safed, Jerusalem and Tiberias over the centuries was not "hyper", but the most normal act a Jew could do. This was not a hyper-reaction but a fulfillment of the thousands year-old command and instruction to go and live in the homeland of the Jewish people.

Is it "hyper" because Brooks presumes that Hebron is "Arab territory" and that Jews shouldn't be there even if they do actually "belong" there? Why is accomplishing one of the most basic of Jewish acts, just like "next year in Jerusalem", to be thought of as 'weird', 'outlandish' and 'hyper'?