Ilan Wagner, hillel.org, November 2006

There are many who claim that Zionism today no longer has meaning. Historically it was a political movement, fulfilling its aim with the creation of the State of Israel in 1948. Once it did, it lost its revolutionary passion and vision and merged quickly with the mainstream Jewish support of Israel. Some saw this as success, terminating Zionism's marginal and fringe status within the Jewish world and anchoring support for Israel as a core component of nearly every Jewish community and entity in the Diaspora. For others, the inability to distinguish Zionism from support of Israel highlights a deeper and pervasive problem.

For the classical Zionists, the polemic over the necessity of immigration to Israel (Aliyah) became the central motif distinguishing Zionists from Israel supporters. These classical Zionists argued that Diaspora communities, however vital they may appear, are destined to disappear, either from the external scourge of anti-Semitism or from the internal temptation of assimilation, and that only resettlement in Israel can guarantee the Jewish future. While Aliyah for distressed Jewry gained consensus status, the polemic about the necessity and desirability of Aliyah from the West continues to ignite brush fires until this day. The insistence by Diaspora leadership that one can remain a Zionist without immigration, coupled with the decision by Israeli and Zionist leaders to forge institutional partnerships with world Jewish groups, the latter explicitly championing the vitality of Jewish Diaspora life, has led most Zionists to reject the earlier equivalency between Aliyah and Zionism. Aliyah is a positive and desirable result of individual choice these Zionists say, but an ideological movement anchored on the negation of the Diaspora leads Zionism into an empty and lonely corner.

At the same time, Zionism has come under attack in Israel as well. Generations of young Israelis have grown up, seeing Israel as their native home, owing allegiance to the sovereign State of Israel. Waves of immigration have succeeded in reminding many Israeli that their roots are elsewhere, but in the here and now, the role of Diaspora Jews is limited to philanthropy, advocacy and political support for something which is not theirs. Israel is on the stage, as Amos Oz has argued, while Diaspora Jews can buy tickets and clap at dramatic moments. From this vantage point, Zionism has no meaning for Israelis- it is an anachronistic echo of a era long gone, a slogan devoid of real meaning and content.

And yet there is great discontent with this state of affairs. How can a real connection to Israel be sustained for the millions of Diaspora Jews who have not embraced the option of Aliyah? Why should generations of Jews continue to support what they increasingly feel is not theirs? On the Israeli side, does Israeli society have the power to overcome its external threats, its internal pressures and the pervasive influence of globalization without a sense of connection to something beyond immediate political sovereignty? Can the State of Israel flourish without receiving any kind of inspiration and vision for the future from its founding ideological movement? In short, although I would agree that classical Zioniism has run its course, an Israel and a Diaspora without any kind of Zionism are in danger of running their course as well. We need a new Zionism.

Over the last several years, dynamics within Israeli society and within Diaspora Jewry have laid the building blocks for what I believe can be a new Zionism. This is a Zionism which can not only sustain the connection between Israel and the Diaspora, but which can also excite and engage a generation. In my next blog, I will begin to sketch the foundations for a new 21st Century Zionism: the hands-on Zionist partnership between Diaspora Jews and Israelis to revitalize Israeli society.