on dual loyalties
So I need to write a short (1-2 page) response paper on the book I chose (Zionist Culture and West European Jewry Before the First World War by Michael Berkowitz). The paper's due in exactly 2 1/2 hours and I figured getting my thoughts out here might help me articulate my response. The assignment was: "What is one question you are left with after reading this book?"
The book, as its title suggests, explores the relevance of early Zionism to a key audience: the (mostly assimilated) Jews of Western and Central Europe. While settlement of Palestine was expected to be taken up mostly by the poor, persecuted Jews of Eastern Europe, it was on their western, "enlightened" brethren that the movement depended both for financial and intellectual support. Berkowitz asks how the early Zionists in fact succeeded in formulating a unified Zionist vision that, while addressing the immediate concerns of the suffering Jews of the East, also spoke to the relatively comfortable Jews west of the Pale of Settlement. In his preface to the book, Berkowitz answers the question briefly: "the movement created a form of nationalist thought and participation that drew on aspects of the European nationalisms acceptable to Jews; it was a product of a specific subculture of assimilated Jewry; and it incorporated aspects and symbols of traditional Judaism providing a common core of mythology for the movement."
Much of the book is devoted, then, to examining the role of western influences in early Zionism as it manifested itself in Zionist philosophy, art, popular culture and the question of a national language.
Early on in the book, Berkowitz informs us that one of the key concerns of Western Jews was that allegiance to the Zionist cause would compromise, or at least be perceived as compromising allegiance to one's "host country" (ie: Austria, Germany, etc). While Berkowitz states that Zionism sought to allay such fairs by insisting that the dual loyalties could coexist, he doesn't explain how the early Zionists in fact addressed the issue.
Certainly one could feel a certain degree of loyalty to more than one country, but for the Jew--whose chief concern was to be accepted as a full citizen as valuable and loyal as his gentile neighbor, the implications of such dual allegiance would seem cause for concern. How, then, did Zionism manage to assuage fears that such dual loyalties would sow seeds of mistrust among the gentiles, and perhaps even fears of antisemitic retribution for divided loyalties?
That Zionism incorporated much of Western European culture--its emphasis on intellectual enlightenment and physical prowess, on "tolerance" and liberalism, might have indeed gone a long way in drawing the "enlightened" Jew to the Zionist phenomenon. But how did Zionism address the question of dual loyalties and possible backlash?
So, that's my question. Now to write my paper . .
The book, as its title suggests, explores the relevance of early Zionism to a key audience: the (mostly assimilated) Jews of Western and Central Europe. While settlement of Palestine was expected to be taken up mostly by the poor, persecuted Jews of Eastern Europe, it was on their western, "enlightened" brethren that the movement depended both for financial and intellectual support. Berkowitz asks how the early Zionists in fact succeeded in formulating a unified Zionist vision that, while addressing the immediate concerns of the suffering Jews of the East, also spoke to the relatively comfortable Jews west of the Pale of Settlement. In his preface to the book, Berkowitz answers the question briefly: "the movement created a form of nationalist thought and participation that drew on aspects of the European nationalisms acceptable to Jews; it was a product of a specific subculture of assimilated Jewry; and it incorporated aspects and symbols of traditional Judaism providing a common core of mythology for the movement."
Much of the book is devoted, then, to examining the role of western influences in early Zionism as it manifested itself in Zionist philosophy, art, popular culture and the question of a national language.
Early on in the book, Berkowitz informs us that one of the key concerns of Western Jews was that allegiance to the Zionist cause would compromise, or at least be perceived as compromising allegiance to one's "host country" (ie: Austria, Germany, etc). While Berkowitz states that Zionism sought to allay such fairs by insisting that the dual loyalties could coexist, he doesn't explain how the early Zionists in fact addressed the issue.
Certainly one could feel a certain degree of loyalty to more than one country, but for the Jew--whose chief concern was to be accepted as a full citizen as valuable and loyal as his gentile neighbor, the implications of such dual allegiance would seem cause for concern. How, then, did Zionism manage to assuage fears that such dual loyalties would sow seeds of mistrust among the gentiles, and perhaps even fears of antisemitic retribution for divided loyalties?
That Zionism incorporated much of Western European culture--its emphasis on intellectual enlightenment and physical prowess, on "tolerance" and liberalism, might have indeed gone a long way in drawing the "enlightened" Jew to the Zionist phenomenon. But how did Zionism address the question of dual loyalties and possible backlash?
So, that's my question. Now to write my paper . .
posted by shoshana at 12:10 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home