Theodor Herzl and his Effect on Jewish Culture in Central Europe - Essay Example

Your 22 May The Effect of Theodor Herzl on Jewish Culture in Central Europe Dr. Theodor Herzl is known around the world for being the one who proposed Zionism on the basis that the Jewish people will never integrate or assimilate into any culture fully. Hence, there was the need for some kind of homeland for the Jewish people. This paper examines the effects of Theodor Herzls philosophy and writings on the culture of the Jewish people in Central Europe. Background of Central Europe Central Europe was made up of different groups that formed various communities and states. The Franks were a major group surrounded by German speaking groups in the East and further south East towards the Baltic region, there were Austrians, Hungarians and other groups. Austria-Hungary was united under the Habsburg royal family. This included a group of different ethnic and national groups that lived together under a Habsburg regime. The dominance of Napoleon Bonaparte in the early 1800s led to the creation of a civil law code which Napoleon exported to different parts of Europe that he conquered (Viault 209). These civil laws protected the right to freedom of religion and this allowed Jews to practice their religions safely in the territories that Napoleon ruled in 1807. Since Napoleon ruled most of Central Europe directly or through allies, these laws spread throughout the continent and Jews were recognized as a distinct group of people in Central Europe. The main area that the liberalization of religion and other elements of ethnic distinction was in Austria-Hungary, where the foreign minister and prime minister, Prince Klemens von Metternich maintained very strict rules against liberalism and nationalism (Viault 210). This is because the Austria-Hungary empire was polarized and it included different groups like Croats, Austrians, Czechs, Magyars and others who had different identities. In July 1848, a revolution was launched and a new constitution came into force which promised some degree of liberalism and nationalism for the Slavic groups in the empire (Wistrich 94). Jews were therefore put on a path to assimilation into the mainstream society of Central Europe. This is because they were marginalized and isolated in the ghettos as a policy that can be traced back to the Middle Ages. Jews in this era appeared to be content with living in the rural and isolated setting where they could carry out their religious obligations without interferences from the mainstream society. Assimilation of the Jews In 1871, the German constitution removed restrictions on the Jews in public and civil matters (Pegelow 196) . This means that the Jews were no more banned from taking part in public affairs and other trades. Thus, the Jews got a reason to move from their isolated lives in the ghettos towards a more streamlined lifestyle. According to Pegelow “German Jews decisively contributed to the countrys advances in cultural, social, political and economic life...” (196). This shows clearly that the Jewish population grew rapidly and integrated into the mainstream society at a very fast pace. Jewish thinkers like Jellinek who pioneered the formation of Reformed Judaism argued that the Jews are a light to the nations and hence, there was the need for the Jewish people to assimilate into the mainstream European society (Wistrich 94). In the view of Jellinek, the Jewish people had to remain in Europe and retain their unique identity and origins. Hence, he encouraged the inclusion of Jews in social and economic affairs in Europe. The Reformed Jews therefore reacted by removing prayers that related to Jerusalem from their prayer books in favor of deep integration into the mainstream European society. The Jews continued to assimilate into the mainstream European society until Judaism was modified to a Mosaic Faith which preserved some elements of Judaism and took up a form similar to the European Christian practices (Kornberg(b) 169). The Austro-German liberals joined to protect the rights of Jews in Germany and Austria. These people relied on their links and connections to intervene in matters and situations that affected Jews. However, in spite of this, there was still evidence of Anti-Semitism in most countries in Europe. Theodor Herzl was one of the skeptics who believed that this system will not work. Hence, he developed a viewpoint that was somewhat different from the optimistic idea that the liberalized European nations will protect Jews. Herzl argued that assimilation will not work because Anti-semitism was inspired by a legacy from the middle Ages (Friedman 147). Hence, the nations of the world will not be able to accommodate and accept Jews as they were. This position was supported by the Dreyfus Affair which involved a middle-ranked Jewish officer in the French Army who was falsely accused by the French authorities with forged evidence which showed that he had handed over some sensitive information to the Germans (Korberg (b) 249). This showed that the Jewish people will always face discrimination in every situation and in every direction they pursued. Theodor Herzls central argument was that “assimilation had failed since in any sense, it could be effected only by intermarriage...” (Friedman 147). The first Zionist Conference of 1897 attracted the Austrian-Hungarian minister to Berne who reported directly to the foreign minister (Friendman 147). This meant that the demand for a unified Jewish nation in Palestine, which was then a vassal state of the Ottoman empire was in sight. This encouraged Herzl to create a different ideological wave which influenced the society heavily. Zionism and the Jewry It must be pointed out that at the time that Zionism gained roots, there were two distinct groups of Jews. The first group was the liberal and rich upper class Jews living in cities like Vienna and the German cities. These were top class professionals and business owners who were prone to the idea of assimilation. They supported the ideas of Reformed Judaism which supported the position that Jews are to abandon the concept of going back to Palestine. Rather, they sought to practice a liberal form of Judaism in which members of the community will abandon hopes on returning to any nation other than their nation of birth. There was yet another group of Jews, particularly those of Orthodox groups who did not want to compromise on the practices of Judaism. These groups sought to go back to Israel and build a life there. This group first embraced the ideas of Zionism presented by Herzl. Herzl ran different campaigns that taught that the Jew will never be accepted in any European nation. This became more and more radical and louder. Natan Sharansky writes that “in Herzls view, any Jew who chose not to be part of the Jewish national liberation was in effect declaring profound allegiance to his host nation than to a Jewish one” (1). This implies that Jews were given a choice to either remain in their country of birth or join in the effort to create an ideal homeland that would be for the Jewish people. With the benefit of hindsight, Sharansky writes that “he [Herzl] was, in fact the only Jewish leader of his time who understood the calamity that was about to befall the European Jewry” (1). This, it was his campaign and message to the Jews of his time. This was meant to help the Jews to prepare themselves for results through the creation of a nation that will embrace the best elements of nations in Europe that will also honor the most important elements of Judaism like making Shabat a hallowed day. At the first Zionist Congress, Rabbi Aharon Marcus was presented as “the most important personality” (Shanes 116a). This is because he was “a committed Hassid and an active player in the early Zionist movement until his withdrawal in late 1900” (Shanes 116a). This important Rabbi developed a form of Jewish identity which combined Hasidism with Zionism. This paved the way for the Orthodox Jews who were opposed to Assimilation to get an assurance of the creation of a nation that will absorb them as a unique group which will allow them to practice their religious obligations. The nation that the Zionists were promising was one where there was the integration of modern systems and structures of the Western nations (Kornberg 252b). Thus, the Zionist movement sought to connect with political groups to attain the status of a charter company that will get the right to colonize and control a nation that will enable Jews to get a life and an identity. Theodor Herzls arguments were totally and absolutely against the assimilated Jews in Central Europe. He outlined the failures of the emancipation and assimilation and stated that a time will come where Jews will be targeted by the Europeans (Pegelow196). Thus, the Jews were encouraged by the Zionists to retain their unique identity in anticipation of the move back to a new homeland that will be created for them . “The manifold Jewish Renaissance” referred to the new trend of Jews assimilating and trying to live like their Christian counterparts in Europe (Brenner 22). This came under significant attack by Herzl and the other Zionists. This is because the ideal of assimilating was seen as something that was in question and there was strong evidence that this will encounter so much challenges and difficulties if persecution and hatred came up. Effects of Theodor Herzl on the Jews of Central Europe The Jews of Central Europe saw Yiddish as the best language fitting for a Jewish nation (Shanes 178b). This is because without a nation, Yiddish could be seen as a language spoken by a set of minorities around the world. The quest for the use of Yiddish as a language for communication in a future state made the concept of Zionism spread beyond Central Europe to the Russian Jewry as well. Simon Dubnow developed theories of autonomisim in the Russian-Jewish Journal called Voskhod. This linked up the idea of Zionism and the quest for a defined nationhood and culture. The potential of getting a nation where Yiddish will be a national language caused some kind of connection and joy amongst Jews in Austria-Hungary and different parts of Central Europe (Shane 181b). Thus, different people and different Jewish groups, particularly those not assimilated embraced Zionism throughout Europe. Zionism became an automatic banner under which those opposed to assimilation gathered. Also, those assimilated Jews who were not accepted saw Zionism as a way of coming together to soothe the effects of Antisemitism (Hacohen 148). In explaining this point further, Sharansky identifies that in a nation like the Soviet Union where the Communists almost destroyed the roots of Judaism, the people of Jewish origins were treated with disdain and hated even though the new generation of Jews born under Soviet rule did not know what their real identity was. These Jews therefore had to find a banner under which they could stand up against the attacks and demands of their enemies and oppressors. This made Zionism an appealing concept to the assimilated and reformed Jews alongside the religious Jews who refused to assimilate. Conclusion The 19th Century began with promises of reforms and acceptance of people from different racial and cultural origins in Europe. This trend started with the Napoleonic Code and was enhanced by the Revolutions of 1848 and the 1871 liberalization of the German constitution which accepted Jews. Jews therefore moved onto the path of assimilation as equal rights were promised to them. Many Jews in Central Europe, under the aegis of these promises assimilated to the secular European systems. This assimilation was popular with the urban dwelling Jews in Central Europe. However, the Orthodox and the highly observant Jews refused to assimilate. Theodor Herzls central influence in the Jewry of Central Europe hinges on the fact that he was a significant skeptic who believed that there is no way that constitutions can guarantee the right of Jews in Europe. This is because there were long-held traditions of discriminating against Jews and Jews did not intermarry. Hence, it was not possible for Jews to live in Europe. Hence, Herzl led a campaign against assimilation and the creation of a distinct nation where Jews could have their identity. The effect of Herzls campaign was that Jews in Central Europe took a more critical look at their culture which was fast evolving to one similar to the people of Europe. Herzl provided an alternative view to this fast pace of assimilation. This led to the creation of a permanent solution to the problem of Antisemitism which he believed will not be solved. The solution was to create a different nation where Jews could live in and have their own government. This caused the Orthodox Jews and observant ones who did not want to assimilate to retain their distinct identity and views. Also, those that were assimilated saw the Zionist movement as a system where they could come together to protect their interests. Thus, Zionism halted the pace of assimilation which was pervasive amongst Central European Jews. Works Cited Brenner, Michael. The Renaissance of Jewish Culture in Weimar Germany CT: New Haven. 1996. Print. Friedman, Isaiah. "Theodor Herzl: Political Activity and Achievements." Israel Studies 3rd ser. 9 (2004): 46-79. Indiana University Press. Journal. Hacohen, Malachi Haim. “Dilemmas of Cosmopolitanism: Karl Popper, Jewish Identity, and Central European Culture” The Journal of Modern History Vol 71 (1) pp105 – 149. 1999. Journal. Kornberg, Jacques. (a) “Theodore Herzl: A Reevaluation” The Journal of Modern History 52 (2) pp226 – 252. 1980. Journal. Kornberg, Jacques. (b) “Vienna in the 1890s, Jews in the Eyes of their Defenders” Central European History 28 (2) pp153 – 173. 1995. Journal. Pegelow Thomas. “German Jews, National Jews, Jewish Volk or Racial Jews” The Constitution of Jewishness in Newspapers of Nazi Germany, 1933 – 1938” Central European History Vol 35 (2). 2002. Journal. Shanes, Joshua (a). "Ahron Marcus: Portrait of a Zionist Hasid." Jewish Social Studies 3rd ser. 16 (2010): 116-60. Indiana University Press. Journal. Shanes, Joshua (b). “Yiddish and Jewish Diaspora Nationalism” Montasscheffe Vol 9092) Summer 1998 pp178 – 188. 1990. Journal. Sharansky Nathan. “The Political Legacy of Theodor Herzl” Azure Online. Retrieved . 2005. Web. Viault, Birdsall. Modern European History San Francisco: McGraw Hill. 1990. Print. Wistrich Robert. “Zionism and its Religious Critics in fin-de-siede Vienna” Jewish History 10(1) pp93 – 111. 1996. Journal. Read More