Martin Buber Contra Political Zionism: A Brief Dialogical Critique of (Jewish) Nationalism

Martin Buber Contra Political Zionism: A Brief Dialogical Critique of Nationalism

Martin Buber's engagement with Zionism remains one of the most morally nuanced and spiritually grounded critiques within 20th-century Jewish thought. Though a committed believer in a Jewish cultural renaissance in the land of Israel, Buber consistently opposed the dominant forms of political Zionism as they developed in the interwar and postwar periods. His critique was not a rejection of the Jewish return to the land of Israel, but rather a rejection of the statist, exclusivist, and ethno-nationalist ideology that increasingly defined Zionist leadership. Buber advocated instead for a spiritual or cultural Zionism rooted in ethical responsibility, prophetic tradition, and dialogical coexistence with the Arab population of Palestine.

Zionism Must Be Ethical, Not Nationalist

Buber warned that Zionism was in danger of becoming just another nationalism, a betrayal of the ethical distinctiveness of Judaism:

“I am an opponent of the nationalist conception of Judaism, because I see in it a false conception of the true essence of Israel.”
— Judaism and the Jews, 1939 (On Judaism, ed. Nahum Glatzer, p. 239)

He believed that the ethical mission of the Jewish people could not be fulfilled through statehood, especially not when achieved through violence or domination. His fear was that a Jewish state established without justice would violate the core values of Judaism itself.

Against Sovereignty and Statism

Buber’s alternative vision emphasized bi-nationalism, cooperation, and shared life and land with the Arab peoples. He was a founding member of Brit Shalom (1925) and Ihud (1942), both of which promoted a binational solution:

“A bi-national state with equal rights for both peoples is not a concession we make but the realization of what we believe to be just.”
— To the Arab Youth of Palestine, 1939 (A Land of Two Peoples, ed. Paul Mendes-Flohr, p. 156)

He feared that sovereignty and power would lead to a hardening of Jewish conscience and a betrayal of prophetic values.

Prophetic Judaism Versus the Idolatry of the State

For Buber, true Judaism was never about the glorification of military might or national sovereignty:

“We are most decidedly against a Jewish state with cannons, flags, and military decorations. Judaism is not a religion of might, and it must never become one.”
— Letter to Mahatma Gandhi, 1939 (A Land of Two Peoples, p. 180)

He often warned that nationalism could become a form of idolatry, replacing the relationship with all-beings and with the living God with the abstractions of power, land, and sovereignty.

Prophetic Calling Over Political Control

Buber emphasized the Jewish vocation as rooted in covenant, justice, and responsibility:

“The Jewish people has never been a people like others. It has always been a people set apart—not by virtue of superiority, but because of a task.”
— The Prophetic Faith, 1942 (Macmillan, p. 124)

That task, in Buber’s view, was to embody the prophetic call to justice, not to compete with other nations in power or territory.

Dialogue with Arabs as a Moral Imperative

Buber regarded the failure to build ethical relations with Arabs as the greatest danger to Judaism:

“The land is not ours against the other. The land will only be truly ours with the other.”
— Address to Ihud, 1947 (A Land of Two Peoples, p. 203)

This same reasoning applies to all manifestations of ethnic nationalism, and in the context of the middle east, it specifically challenges the ethnic nationalism of both the Jews and the Arabs. For Buber, the Jewish claim to the land could only be legitimate if it was exercised in full recognition of and partnership with its other inhabitants. Martin Buber’s stance contra political Zionism offers an enduring vision of a Jewish national revival anchored in ethical responsibility and prophetic dialogue. He envisioned a Jewish homeland not as a fortress-state but as a moral community open to shared life with its Arab neighbors. His spiritual Zionism—founded on justice, humility, and relationship—remains a counter-testimony to all forms of nationalism that seek legitimacy through exclusion and domination. Buber’s prophetic voice continues to challenge contemporary political theology, all forms of ethno-nationalism and Zionist thought to recover the dialogical and ethical heart of Jewish tradition.

“What matters is not the form of the state, but the spirit in which we live together in this land.”
— Israel and the World, 1948 (Syracuse University Press, p. 245)