katalog-overlapping voices - Ritesinstitute

the history of
Zionism
anita shapira
Richard lichtheim, one of the early historians of Zionism,
defined it as “europe’s gift to the Jewish people”.
this statement, which locates Zionism in time
and place, is subject to dispute. for example, a religious
Jew would probably assert that Zionism has
been part of the Jewish faith since the destruction
of the temple and the Jewish people’s exile from
their land. Jews pray daily for their return to Jerusalem
and the restoration of the majesty of the kingdom
of David. the dichotomy of exile and redemption
has been a major symbol in Judaism. exile
represents all that is negative in Jewish existence,
as well as in the cosmic state. Redemption represents
the establishment of the kingdom of justice
on earth and the coming of the messiah. the return
of the Jews to their ancient homeland has also been
considered part of this mystic process.
Yet lichtheim’s assessment stands the test of history.
if it were not for the Jewish interaction with european
culture, Jewish nationalism, of which Zionism
is a quintessential expression, would never
have evolved. Paradoxically, Jews had to abandon
their messianic faith before they could embrace
Zionism. as long as they awaited the help of the
heavens and accepted their fate with docility as a
national-religious minority among majority nations,
Zionism could not emerge. the prerequisites for the
emergence of Zionism were the Jews’ openness to
processes taking place in european society at large
and their release from religious constraints.
the story begins with the french Revolution, when
the states of europe began to grant Jews equal
rights. for the first time in history, Jews could integrate
into christian society as equal citizens
without having to convert. this emancipation led
to secularization, as well as to the Jews’ growing
integration into european society. By the second
half of the 19th century, a Jewish educated class
had come into existence in western and central
europe, desiring to integrate into their home countries.
in eastern europe, however, where millions
of Jews lived, emancipation was still a remote aspiration.
But there as well, a modern educated Jewish
class emerged, susceptible to the trends and
ideas then influencing europe.
the 19th century was the century of european nationalism.
the nation states that crystallized after
the french Revolution and the napoleonic wars
generated a new secular civil identity that replaced
traditional religious, tribal and local identities.
small nations, which for hundreds of years had not
known self-rule, now rose up to fight for their freedom.
greece, italy, Poland, czechoslovakia and
germany were transformed from mere geographical
concepts into symbols of nationalism fighting
for a place in the sun. Jews were conscious of this
process as well. this was true of marx’s companion,
the german socialist philosopher moses
hess, who was inspired by the unification of italy,
and believed that the reconstruction of Jerusalem
by the Jews should follow the liberation of Rome.
it was also true of the serbian mystic Rabbi Yeduda
alkalai, who was influenced by the national
struggles for freedom that took place in the Balkans
and wanted the Jews to do the same. By the
mid-19th century, these and other thinkers were
writing in support of the Jewish people’s implementation
of concepts of freedom and self-determination
in their historical homeland.
the Jewish people’s adoption of the nationalist idea
conflicted with their wish to integrate into their home
societies. the process of emancipation, which was
the dominant trend at the time, was based on the
premise that Jews were willing to relinquish the national
components of their identity. “to the Jews
as individuals – everything; as a nation – nothing”,
declared clermont-tonnerre during the french Revolution.
as long as there was no distinction
between a Jew’s civil identity and religious identity,
the issue of whether the Jews were a religion
or a nation never came up. and, until the 19th century,
Jews did not distinguish between their national
and religious identities. however, while they did not
use the terminology of modern nationalism (which
had yet to be created), Jews did fit anthony smith’s
definition of ethnicity, which constituted the foundation
of nationalism. the essential components
of this ethnic identity were the sharing of a common
past – the connection to Zion, the use of
hebrew as the holy language, and the dream of
the return to the land of Yisrael.
in order to receive equal rights, Jews were now required
to relinquish these components, and they
did so enthusiastically. equal rights were regarded
by many as the new messiah, which would redeem
Jews from the estrangement of exile. thus, two
trends characterized Jewish history in the second
half of the 19th century – the trend of relinquishing
national Jewish identity in exchange for an entry
ticket into european society, and the trend of adopting
a version of european nationalism and applying
it to the contemporary Jewish condition. the
former was still predominant, but the latter was
gaining ground.
Did Zionism emerge as a response to modern antisemitism,
or was it a movement of national renaissance?
this question bothered the founders of the
Zionist movement. there was something humiliating
about the idea that perhaps the Jewish national
movement was not the result of immanent processes,
rather the outcome of non-Jewish attitudes
towards Jews. actually, it can be argued that all
national movements were aroused by internal and
external factors alike. would spanish nationalism
have emerged without napoleon’s invasion? would
czech nationalism have emerged without german
discrimination? would germany have crystallized
into one united state if it had not been for the challenge
posed by the french? european history is
rich with examples of external pressure, discrimination
and conquest serving as the catalyst for the
evolution of nationalist movements. Jews were no
different from the people among whom they dwel-
51