Are We Moving Towards a Neo-Diasporism?

A potential outcome of the Millennial/GenZ Response to October 6

As often happens with major historical events, October 7 accelerated some ideological, political, and social trends that had been brewing for some time, whether openly or slightly below the surface. In addition to rising antisemitism and ongoing partisanship around Israel, these developments also include at least one potentially major and disruptive consequence for the nature of Jewish life outside of Israel in the near future.

With every report – seemingly weekly if not closer to daily – of Israeli military actions targeting handfuls of Hamas or Hizbollah militants that result in scores of deaths and injuries among the civilian Gazan and now Lebanese populations (so-called collateral damage), young American Jews increasingly turn away from allegiance towards the Jewish state and more significantly even reject the basic premises of Zionism. And while a knee-jerk reaction from the American Jewish establishment typically stamps these individuals and groups with the label of self-hating Jews or Jewish antisemites, this facile description misses the point entirely and further exacerbates the generation gap among otherwise committed Jews, particularly in the non-Orthodox world. (While many middle age and even older American Jews may also subscribe to this notion, the vast majority are found in our younger cohorts.)

During and immediately following the last significant flare-up in Gaza, back in 2014, activists from within the strongly identified Jewish community began organizing against Israeli violence – including the occupation beyond the Green Line – and referencing Jewish texts and Jewish values to back up their positions. (Again the premises were not new, but took on greater visibility and prominence at this time.)  A new trope emerged of rebelling against the American Jewish establishment – particularly among graduates of Jewish Day Schools and Jewish Summer Camps – for having raised their generation on a skewed narrative of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict. Organizations such as IfNotNow, JStreet (which was founded in 2008 but picked up steam in 2014) for the laity, and others like T’ruah and Rabbis for Human Rights became more vocal in criticism not only of Israeli policy but of American Jewry’s seeming passivity in challenging Israeli policy on both humanitarian and Jewish grounds. In the 2024 context, we see recent graduates and current students of the non-Orthodox rabbinical seminaries leaning increasingly left, and they see no conflict between their commitment to Jewish faith and traditions and their more radically critical position on Israel. And in Israel even some Orthodox Jewish authorities have argued that halacha demands ransoming hostages as a Jewish value over and above future military and security concerns – which would add fuel to the fire that the politics of Zionism and its emphasis on security above all, as implemented in the real world, are not entirely consistent with Jewish values.

In today’s environment, it is no longer accurate (though still too easy) to view these perspectives as either fringe or self-hating. The position is not entirely an extremist position for a couple of reasons. Increasingly, non-Orthodox American Jews, including self-described Liberal Zionists, are frustrated or even fed-up with the ever-rightward moving direction of Israeli politics (notwithstanding the brief interlude of a broader coalition under Bennett/Lapid) under Netanyahu, including of course the most recent iteration which brought far-right nationalist/racist representatives into the government. The position is not one born of self-hatred, as those younger Jews, including leaders in the rabbinate and other communal organizations, are deeply committed personally, professionally, and politically to the continuity and vibrancy of organized Jewish life – whether in the home with family and friends, or in the Synagogue or Temple with larger community. While some of us may strenuously disagree with their perspectives and their politics, we are deluding ourselves to dismiss them as simply misguided.

What this current moment is gestating, and may actually deliver, is a full-fledged ideologically motivated non-Zionist or even anti-Zionist Judaism, with a level of personal commitment to belief and practice far greater than past iterations within Classical Reform of the late 19^th and early 20^th centuries, and far more mainstream in American Jewish life than ultra-Orthodox non-Zionists such as the Satmar. Most importantly, perhaps, this movement is being catalyzed much more by events playing out in real time than by any sort of formal philosophy. There are of course ideological precursors: Pre-1948 non-political Zionists who advocated for Jewish renaissance in the Land of Israel, but eschewed sovereignty as inevitably resulting in a militarized state that would be forced to live in conflict with Jewish values – elements of this position can be found in the words of early cultural Zionists such as Ahad Ha-am, and more explicitly among mid-century bi-nationalists such as Martin Buber and Judah Magnes. But ideology is not really the point. Millennials and GenZers whom I would call neo-Diasporists, if they are driven by an ideology, have embraced an approach spawned by what they see (perspective becomes their reality) as the fruits of an ultra-nationalist ethos inherent in the Zionist project of reconstituting a Jewish polity. According to this telling, the Jewish reclamation of our ancient homeland, valid as those claims may have been, played out in real time as a commitment to political sovereignty and over-emphasis on security that led directly to behaviors in conflict with both Jewish and universalist values – from early policies of displacement in 1948, to occupation in 1967, and culminating in the decimation of Gaza in 2024.

For Neo-Diasporists, if one might attempt describing a formal ideology, the outlook might be framed as an affinity to the value of Jewish faith and tradition as essentially an exilic structure – born of the destruction of Zion and created purposely to serve the needs of a Diaspora nation. There is something historically compelling – for those who know their ancient history – about this notion. Judaism as we know it today – so-called Rabbinic Judaism – evolved, or perhaps was deliberately crafted – to meet the needs of an exiled people. A group that intentionally moved its dreams of national return to their homeland into the far-distant messianic future. A community of exiles who, when given the opportunity, did not return to their ancestors’ land but chose to remain and grow strong – economically, socially, and politically – by the waters of Babylon. The Jewish values embraced by today’s  Neo-Diasporists, more often than not, come from either later Biblical and subsequent Rabbinic texts rooted in exile, which often stand in some measure of conflict with the more militant and intolerant expressions of Temple-centered worship and the monarchic traditions of the kingdoms of Judah and Israel.  These values are then reinforced by Western universalism (which often prides itself, accurately, as evolving from Judeo-Christian traditions). But most importantly, we should note, despite the critique from their detractors around their anti-Israel or even anti-Zionist stance, they are firmly and deeply committed to both Jewish tradition and Jewish peoplehood – but reject the notion that Zionism or a Jewish State plays an indispensable role in preserving either.

Those of us connected more directly to the structures of organized Jewish life in America, who, more likely than not, disagree with our younger friends, family, colleagues, and community members, would be well advised to at least take this movement seriously, and better advised to engage with them directly on the basis of shared Jewish and American values. Particularly among the non-Orthodox but highly affiliated, we see the rising next generation of Jewish leadership – both professional and lay – increasingly moving in this direction.  The implications for Jewish communal integrity and future engagement are profound.