How Zionism and the State of Israel changed the meaning of Halacha.
Religion, State, and Utilitarianism.
The fact that an identifiable Jewish nation is still around 1900 years after our second commonwealth was destroyed by the Roman Empire may be the best proof for the truth of the Torah and its law. What it is an even better indicator of is the effectiveness of Halacha and Jewish ritual as means of cultural barrier between Jew and non-Jew. So even in periods of time where we were not forced into “Jewish Quarters” and "Shtetls," attending synagogue, the laws of Kosher, and the Shabbat were very effective anti-assimilation tools. Remember, for most of history, being a citizen of a nation meant being part of that nation’s religion with few exceptions; we were the exceptions.
It appears that Halacha, after the destruction of the second commonwealth, played a two-part role, one religious and one utilitarian. Beyond the religious reason to keep Halacha, there was also a strong utilitarian reason. Jews were not accepted into society for most of our exile, and it was frowned upon by the non-Jews to marry with us. This created a secondary reasoning to keep Halacha; there was no other game in town. Being born a Jew meant you had no option not to keep the community standards of Halachic observance.
Being Jewish for most of history also meant being part of an official government-sanctioned religious community. If you are a student of 19th-century German Jewish history, you will remember this as one of the main struggles that R’ Samson Raphael Hirsch took up against the Reform. He tried to lobby the government to not accept the Reformists as an authentic Jewish community and instead exclusively view the Orthodox as the rightful heirs of the German Jewish community. For the most part though, the government-sanctioned communities and chief Rabbis of Europe were Halacha observant, meaning that if you were a Jew living in 17th-century Poland, you were in a sense bound by civil law to keep Halacha.
As we know, this all changes with the rise of the Enlightenment and the so-called “Age of Reason." By the late 19th century, the church had been ripped from the state, and religion became untethered from government. The external cultural barriers between Jew and non-Jew evaporated, and many Jews either outright dropped their Judaism or joined a Reform-style movement. The Orthodox that emerged tried valiantly to keep the ghetto walls up but struggled against the tide of Communism, Zionism, Socialism, and the Reform movement.
In the end, after the dust of WWII and the Holocaust settled, many were of the opinion that Orthodoxy would not survive, or it would be relegated to the fringes of Hassidism. At that time, as well as in the 50s and 60s, most thought that it was a fight between the Reform and Conservative movements for which group would be the majority of Jews. In the end, we now know it was neither, as most Jews do not identify with any sect. Either way, that opinion has been shown to be wrong, with the strong rise of the Yeshiva movement both in the US and Israel showing that Orthodox Judaism will indeed endure. Both the Reform and Conservative movements have been hemorrhaging people for at least two generations. This would seem to prove that keeping a strict view of Halacha and Torah is the only way to have a prosperous future for the Jewish Nation.
It is my contention that Zionism and the subsequent creation of the state of Israel in 1948 have proven this wrong. As of this writing, most Jews living in the state of Israel do not follow an Orthodox interpretation of Jewish law. Yet, no matter the level of religiosity, Israel’s rate of intermarriage is extremely low (about 5%). This may be due to the fact that civil marriage law in Israel is controlled by the rabbinate (making it not quite liberal and closer to a theocracy). No matter the actual reason, this is a tremendous statement. No other movement that strayed from Halacha has been able to continue as a cohesive Jewish unit.
In my understanding, this means that Zionism and only Zionism was successful in dispelling the “utilitarian reason” for keeping halacha. No longer is Halacha a necessary means to the end of safeguarding Jewish identity. In Israel, keeping Halacha is a purely religious question. It is entirely a matter of belief and personal choice, whereas in other countries (including the U.S.), keeping Halacha is an existential question, one that will most likely impact whether your grandchildren are Jewish at all. In Israel, the odds are even if you are an atheist, your great-grandkids will still be Halachically Jewish. This is the great triumph of Zionism. Even in a city like Tel Aviv, your kids will marry Jewish.
This breakdown of the utilitarian purpose of Halacha seems to me a logical step towards removing the trappings of Exilic rust that has built up over the centuries of Jewish wanderings through foreign countries. Furthermore, I think it is more natural that religious belief and law be placed in the realm of personal choice and not be a civil or communal imposition. For whatever reason, this is one of the lesser talked-about benefits of having a Jewish state, and I think whatever side of the aisle you are on religiously, it is clearly a net positive to the Jewish nation.
Some might argue that by placing too much emphasis on the utilitarian aspects of Halacha, you’re simultaneously downplaying its religious significance.
And on a historical note, the increasing secularization in Israel presents a long-term challenge to your article; will our current low intermarriage rates remain consistent over more time?
A day may come where secular Israelis find the rabbinical law unjust/ illiberal, similar to many countries with secular constituents and rather theocratic law. What happens then?
While you present a solid argument, history has only proven one thing; that Halacha has kept Jewish identity alive.
You are using "utilitarian" in a funny sense, what is utilitarian about keeping a sense of Jewish identity over assimilating with the goyim? There was a second game in town, it was called conversion and assimilation. We were mostly accepted into society if we converted, and why not convert if you are anyways not interested in the Torah. And indeed countless Jews did just that. Who cares if your kids marry Jewish if you have no interest in the Torah? The people who care only care because they care a bit about the Torah, usually those people are more likely to keep a trace amount of Torah, like going to their (Reform/conservative) synagogue, not eating pig, lighting candles on Shabbat, etc.
I think you are confusing utilitarianism with nationalism, you assign a value to secular Jewish nationalism apart from the Torah, and you do not appear to assign much value to the Torah itself, so you think a secular Jewish state is a great benefit.