Herzl's political Zionist vision has been realized by the State of Israel, but the spiritual Zionist vision of Ahad Ha'Am – the creation of a fully developed modern Jewish culture - has not. Despite the desire of most Israeli Jews to maintain their cultural identity, many are “assimilating” to Western ways. To reverse this trend, the Zionist quest to create a Jewish spiritual center in Israel must be actively pursued in Israel by Israelis.



Has the State of Israel Achieved Its Goals?

It has been claimed that Zionism is close to achieving at least one of its critical goals, and in my opinion this claim is sufficiently proven. If we define Zionism as Herzl's political doctrine, the State of Israel did not achieve this goal at the time of its establishment, but it has achieved this goal, or is very close to achieving it, today.

Israel is already the largest Jewish center in the world, and within twenty years it will almost certainly be home to a majority of world Jewry. The following factors will bring this about:

Israel will take in immigrants from the countries of the former Soviet Union, and it may absorb immigrants from other places where Jews still meet with hardship.
Israel is demographically healthy. Although Jewish population growth is not keeping up with the Palestinian population growth, it nevertheless experiences natural increase, and the Israeli Jewish age pyramid is sound. It has a majority of young people and a minority of elderly people.
Among diaspora Jewry, the opposite holds true. Its population is rapidly dwindling because of assimilation through intermarriage, which in the United States has already surpassed the rate of fifty percent of current marriages. Furthermore, diaspora Jewry does not exhibit natural increase. Because diaspora families have few children, the age pyramid shows a majority of elderly Jews and minority young Jews.

Within twenty years, these trends of increasing Israeli Jewish population and dwindling diaspora Jewish population will make the State of Israel the largest, most consolidated, and most stable Jewish center in the world. This is an impressive achievement.

The peace process is leading to normal relations with the countries of the region. If the process is successful, the people who dwell in Zion will find themselves living in a sound political environment.
Because of these factors, among others, one may say that Herzl's political vision has been realized. Herzl's political vision for diaspora Jews has also been realized, for he believed that diaspora Jewry would, by virtue of the existence of a Jewish State, live under conditions of tolerance and safety similar to those prevailing in the diaspora today. Bear in mind that when the State of Israel was established, even American Jews were far from feeling secure and at home. Hence, from the political perspective, Zionism has met its goals.

Here, however, is the great irony: Whenever Jews attain political normalization, they face a different danger, one found at the root of the Zionist enterprise.

On this point we need to examine other conceptions of Zionism, especially the spiritual Zionism of Ahad Ha'Am. In the early twentieth century, Ahad Ha'Am analyzed two great issues. He called one the “question of the Jews,” and the other “the question of Judaism.” The “question of the Jews” was the distress caused by anti-Semitism: both the insults and humiliations suffered in Central and Western Europe, and the pogroms and economic privation suffered in Eastern Europe. The murderous hostility of anti-Semitism was the main motivation that propelled multitudes of Jews to leave Europe.

To a certain extent, Zionism was built on this outward propulsion. Ahad Ha'Am, however, believed that the land of Israel could not provide an answer to economic hardship. Telling starving Jews to come to Palestine, he said, was tantamount to offering them stones instead of bread. Truth to tell, conditions here were harsh in those years, and Ahad Ha'Am's argument was justifiable. Thus, he advised immigration to the United States as the only available solution.

Ahad Ha'Am considered the task of Zionism to be confronting “the question of Judaism,” not “the question of the Jews” – and the “question of Judaism” was assimilation. Assimilation originated in the phenomenally attractive power of modern culture. In other words, assimilation was caused by the positive attributes of the modern world. Ahad Ha'Am assumed that if Jews wished to continue as a culturally distinct nation, we would need a new culture that would maintain continuity with historical Judaism, but would be receptive to the best of modern culture. In particular, the new Jewish culture would assimilate modernity's scientific, technological, and humanitarian achievements. The need for a new culture, however, made statehood in the land of Israel necessary, because no new Jewish culture could be created in the diaspora. Every people needs a homeland and an autonomous framework within which it may develop a complete, full-fledged, self-standing culture that meets the needs of its national life. From this kernel, Ahad Ha'Am developed his Zionist doctrine, which championed the establishment of a “spiritual center” for the Jewish people in the land of Israel.

Our question, then, is whether the State of Israel has realized Ahad Ha'Am's vision, too? Has a new cultural identity taken shape? Has assimilation been arrested?

The answer is no. The syndrome of assimilation and loss of Jewish identity in the diaspora is abundantly evident. Assimilation, however, is also occurring in Israel. Not even an independent, sovereign state, where Jews can shape their own lives, provides a secure barrier against assimilation.

Assimilation in Israel differs from assimilation in its classic form, which is a process experienced by a minority that lives amidst a majority. The minority is swallowed up by the majority society; the minority knowingly and voluntarily obfuscates the indicators that distinguish it from the majority. And the minority disappears. According to this classic form, Israeli Jews – as long as they live in their own State and speak its vernacular – cannot assimilate. However, in post-modern culture, a post-modern form of assimilation takes place. The emigration of young Israelis – yeridah – and the way they fit into American culture illustrates this new process. Israeli emigres preserve only a limited Jewish cultural identity; they feel at home in an American cultural environment. They are already attuned to American culture, meaning that even in Israel their Jewish roots were weak, and that a strong commitment to Jewish history, Jewish sources, and a Jewish way of life was lacking. Even in Israel a contemporary culture exists that is based directly on American culture. Anyone who so desires can stroll at leisure through foreign cultural landscapes in Israel and can find assimilation in political, ethical, creative, spiritual, and even linguistic realms.

Nonetheless, I believe that most Israeli Jews are still traditional or national in orientation. Most are firmly rooted in the heritage of the Jewish people and do not wish to disengage from it. Most still value national life, national identity, national values, and a national culture. Nevertheless, the dynamics of assimilation have had a strong impact. Most disturbing is the impact on family and school life, because assimilation in these settings prevents national and traditional culture from being preserved and developed.


The Major Goal of Zionism Today: To Build the Spiritual Center

What must be done in order to build Israel as a Jewish spiritual center?

First and foremost is the struggle for the Jewish identity of the State. The question is whether Israel will continue to be a Jewish and democratic state as set forth in the Declaration of Independence. That is, will Israel continue to be defined as the State of the Jewish people as a whole?

This definition is given a basis in the Law of Return. The significance of this law is that all Jews are deemed to be potential citizens of Israel, and are considered as repatriates. As soon as Jews arrive in Israel, they exercise the privilege to be citizens in their own country. Beyond the Law of Return, a covenant was ordained between the Jewish Agency, as the legally recognized representative of the interests of Israeli Jewry in Israel, and the World Zionist Organization. The covenant states:

The State of Israel considers itself a creation of the entire Jewish people, and its gates are kept open, in keeping with its laws, to every Jew who wishes to immigrate thereto... The goal of the ingathering of the exiles, a central fixture in the tasks of the State of Israel and the Zionist movement in our days, requires constant efforts by the Jewish people in the diaspora, and therefore the State of Israel expects all Jews, singly and collectively, to participate in building the State and facilitating mass immigration of Jews thereto and believes it necessary to unify all Jewish groupings behind this goal.

This law, which gives the World Zionist Organization its status in Israel, makes Israel a Zionist State, that is, the State of the entire Jewish people.

The same conception is evident in the passage of the Yad Vashem Law. According to this statute, the role of Yad Vashem is to extend a “citizenship of remembrance” in Israel to all those annihilated in the Holocaust. In other words, the State of Israel regards itself as the State of Jewish victims of the Holocaust. They are its citizens. In this law, the State of Israel plays the symbolic role of the redeemer of Jewish history and historical memory. Such an action expresses profound affiliation and identification with the Jewish heritage.

At the root of these laws is the State's commitment to and responsibility for all Jews, both by virtue of the State being the place where Jewish collective identity is manifested, and through the State's ongoing connection with the Jewish people's origins. The Declaration of Independence notes the prophets' vision of Israel as a source for basic social, national, and democratic perspectives. Israel is democratic not because of exogenous idea, but because of its association with the prophetic principles of justice and peace.

This hands us a monumental Zionist task: to ensure that Israel remains a Jewish State in the forgoing senses and that it implements its commitment to Judaism in its educational, creative, and spiritual processes.

Since the establishment of the State of Israel, the Zionist movement has communicated only with Jews in the diaspora, not with those of us in Israel. Here it is just a bureaucracy. Furthermore, we do not elect the leaders of and delegates to the institutions of the Zionist movement; we merely appoint them through the mechanism of Knesset elections. As a movement that provides education and cultural activity and raises donations for its aims, there is no Zionist movement in Israel.

It is time for Israeli Jews to realize that today we are no poorer, and may even be richer, than much of diaspora Jewry. It is time for us, too, to contribute to Jewish educational and cultural endeavors through a Zionist fundraising appeal.

The central message in a year dedicated to Zionism should be as follows: The mission of Zionism, which we have hardly begun to pursue, is the creation of a Jewish spiritual center that will fashion the educational and cultural tools necessary for the sustenance of the Jewish nation.


Questions for Discussion

1. Schweid claims that “no new Jewish culture can be created in the Diaspora.” Argue for and against this statement.

2. Do you agree that Israel is the State of the entire Jewish people? If so, what rights and responsibilities accrue to Jews living outside of Israel? How are you personally involved with the State of Israel? How might you become more so? To what extent do you feel the State indeed belongs to you?

3. Schweid points out that Israel's democracy is based on “prophetic principles of justice and peace” and not on an “exogenous (i.e., external) idea.” In what ways might such principles differ from those of Western democracies?”