What is the focus of your project (i.e. the question you are asking or exploring)?

My research explores the theoretical dimensions of Jewish self-determination through the political philosophy of Ahad Ha'am. More specifically, I ask whether Ha'am presents Zionism as a historical necessity, a prudential political response, or an ethical claim about the rights of nations. By reconstructing the philosophical assumptions underlying his account of history, reason, and nationality, I hope to better understand what, if anything, can justify the political claims made on behalf of a historical people.

How did you become interested in this topic?

Like many American Jews, I came of age in an environment where Zionism was often discussed through the language of contemporary politics. It seemed impossible to escape debates over Israel and Palestine without first inheriting someone else's vocabulary, moral intuitions, or historical narrative. The more I read, however, the more I realized that these disputes were not unique. Similar questions continue to shape the war in Ukraine, the aspirations of stateless peoples, and struggles for national recognition across the world. Underneath these conflicts lies a common philosophical problem: what makes a people a people, and when, if ever, does that fact give rise to political rights? I became interested less in defending a particular answer than in understanding how one of Zionism's most influential thinkers attempted to formulate the question.

Please also discuss the purpose or significance of your research. In other words, why should other people, both within and outside of your field, be interested or excited by your research?

Political conflicts often appear to concern borders, security, or competing interests, but beneath them lie deeper disagreements about history, identity, and obligation. Before nations negotiate with one another, they must first understand what a nation is and why it matters. My project argues that these assumptions are often left unstated, even by the philosophers who rely upon them most heavily. Recovering those assumptions does more than clarify the history of Zionism. It illuminates a broader feature of modern political thought: that history has increasingly become the language through which communities explain who they are and why they believe they deserve to endure. The stories peoples tell about themselves shape constitutions, borders, education, diplomacy, and war. If philosophy can clarify even a small part of those stories, it contributes not only to intellectual history, but to the conversations through which human beings continue to decide how they will live together.

Finally, consider the leadership portions of your training, and how they informed your research this summer, or possibly your plans for next summer.

This summer required me to stretch the boundaries of my own understanding of identity and political community. Many of the assumptions I had inherited about nationality, peoplehood, and historical belonging proved less stable than I had imagined, and the research often involved unlearning familiar categories before reconstructing them with greater care. The leadership training reinforced that intellectual humility. It reminded me that serious leadership begins with the willingness to question one's own framework before asking others to reconsider theirs. At the same time, the project gave me a deeper appreciation for the condition of statelessness and for the profound significance that national recognition holds for communities whose political existence remains uncertain. Looking ahead, I hope to move beyond studying these questions in the abstract by becoming involved with organizations that work to preserve the rights and dignity of nations and peoples whose claims to political recognition remain contested.