Historical Alliance

A Comparative Essay on National Ideology, Land, and Divine Mandate

Throughout history, national movements have often been fueled by deeply rooted ideologies that blend political ambition with religious or moral justifications. Two such ideologies—Zionism and Manifest Destiny—emerged in vastly different contexts but share striking thematic parallels. Each movement sought to justify the acquisition and occupation of land through a perceived divine or historical mandate. Both have shaped not only the geopolitics of their respective regions but also the global discourse on nationalism, colonialism, and indigeneity.

Foundational Beliefs: Divine Right and Historical Mission

At the heart of both Zionism and Manifest Destiny is the idea of a people destined—by God, by history, or by moral superiority—to occupy and civilize a particular land. Manifest Destiny, a 19th-century doctrine in the United States, held that Americans were fated to expand westward across North America, bringing with them democracy, capitalism, and Protestant morality. Similarly, Zionism—the Jewish nationalist movement that emerged in the late 19th century—was driven by the belief that Jews had an ancestral and divine right to return to and reclaim the land of Israel.

In both cases, the land in question was not vacant; it was inhabited by indigenous peoples. For American settlers, westward expansion meant the displacement and, often, the destruction of Native American communities. In the case of Zionism, the establishment of a Jewish state in Palestine meant the displacement and disenfranchisement of large numbers of Palestinian Arabs. Both movements, therefore, depended on a powerful ideological narrative that framed the existing inhabitants either as obstacles to progress or as temporary stewards of land destined for another people.

Civilizing Missions and National Identity

The moral language used to justify both movements is remarkably similar. American Manifest Destiny cast the United States as a beacon of liberty and civilization, charged with the duty to spread its values across the continent. Zionism similarly framed the return of Jews to Palestine as not just a fulfillment of prophecy but as a mission to revive and modernize a barren, neglected land. Both ideologies portrayed their movements as redemptive—bringing life, progress, and order to territories portrayed as underdeveloped or chaotic.

Importantly, these civilizing narratives also helped forge a strong national identity. American expansion created a mythos of the rugged, pioneering settler, while Zionism constructed a narrative of the "New Jew"—a figure transformed from the diasporic, persecuted outsider into the strong, self-sufficient Israeli citizen reclaiming ancient soil. In both, land was not only the stage of national destiny but also its forge.

Displacement, Resistance, and the Problem of the ‘Other’

Neither ideology adequately accounted for the rights or agency of the people already living on the land. The "Indian problem" in American discourse mirrored the "Arab question" in early Zionist debates. In both cases, violence, legal maneuvering, and military force were used to resolve these "problems" in favor of the dominant nationalist group. The resulting narratives downplayed or erased the suffering and displacement of indigenous populations, instead emphasizing heroism, survival, and national rebirth.

This erasure was often facilitated by portraying the indigenous populations as either primitive or transient. For American settlers, Native Americans were frequently seen as savage, doomed to vanish in the face of civilization. In Zionist discourse, many early settlers described Palestine as “a land without a people for a people without a land,” ignoring the Arab population that already existed there. These frameworks justified the sidelining of indigenous claims while painting the colonizers as righteous and victimized.

Enduring Legacies and Global Implications

Both Manifest Destiny and Zionism have left legacies that extend beyond their immediate geographical contexts. The U.S. expansion westward established patterns of racial hierarchy and settler colonialism that persist in American life and policy today. Zionism, in its realization through the State of Israel, has led to one of the most protracted and intractable conflicts in modern history—the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. In both cases, the narrative of divine or moral right continues to be contested by those who suffered its consequences.

Moreover, both ideologies have faced internal dissent. Not all Americans supported Manifest Destiny; some saw it as imperialist and unjust. Likewise, not all Jews supported Zionism; many were wary of nationalism, while others opposed the dispossession of Palestinians. These internal debates complicate the narrative and remind us that ideological movements are never monolithic.

While separated by time, geography, and culture, Zionism and Manifest Destiny share foundational concepts that merit close comparison. Both ideologies claim a sacred or historical right to land, rely on moral justifications for displacement, and construct a national identity rooted in pioneering and struggle. They have produced narratives that inspire as well as devastate, building nations while displacing others. Understanding their parallels helps illuminate the ways in which land, faith, and identity intertwine—and the human cost that often accompanies the realization of national dreams.

References

1. Anders Stephanson. Manifest Destiny: American Expansion and the Empire of Right. Hill and Wang, 1995.

2. Benny Morris. 1948: A History of the First Arab-Israeli War. Yale University Press, 2008.

3. Theodor Herzl. The Jewish State (Der Judenstaat), 1896.

4. Lorenzo Veracini. Settler Colonialism: A Theoretical Overview. Palgrave Macmillan, 2010.

5. Roxanne Dunbar-Ortiz. An Indigenous Peoples' History of the United States. Beacon Press, 2014.

6. Norman Finkelstein. Image and Reality of the Israel-Palestine Conflict. Verso Books, 2003.