Shlomo Sand is an Israeli historian and Professor Emeritus of History at Tel Aviv University. Born in 1946 in a displaced persons camp in Linz, Austria, to Polish Holocaust survivors with communist political affiliations, he grew up in Israel and was active in the radical left-wing anti-Zionist group Matzpen during the late 1960s and early 1970s. He earned his doctorate at the École des hautes études en sciences sociales (EHESS) in Paris, specializing in French intellectual history and the writings of Georges Sorel.
Sand is best known for his trilogy examining modern Jewish nationalism and historiography:
- “The Invention of the Jewish People” (2008): Sand challenges traditional historiography regarding the Jewish diaspora, arguing that Jewish identity developed primarily as a shared religious culture rather than an unbroken biological lineage, and that modern Jewish nationhood was constructed by 19th-century historians to serve national movements.
- “The Invention of the Land of Israel” (2012): This volume analyzes how the geographical concept of the “Land of Israel” was transformed from a holy territory in religious tradition into a physical homeland myth for a secular national movement.
- “How I Stopped Being a Jew” (2013): In this essay, Sand explains his decision to renounce a Jewish ethnic identity, arguing that the term is used within Israel to maintain non-democratic privileges over non-Jewish residents.
Sand advocates for “non-Zionism” or “post-Zionism,” arguing that defining Israel as a “Jewish state” rather than a “state of all its citizens” creates structural inequality. He publicly opposes the occupation of the Palestinian territories and military operations in Gaza and the West Bank, asserting that democratic principles require equal civic and political rights for all individuals living under state jurisdiction, regardless of ethnic or religious background.
One-State Solution OR Two-State Solution
While he believes the state—whether it be a future Israel or Palestine—must shed its ethnic character and transform into a “state of all its citizens,” a vision that seemingly aligns with the ideals of a One-State Solution, his assessment of current realities leads him to dismiss such a proposal as “not serious” at this stage. He states bluntly that Israel has devolved into “one of the most racist societies in the Western world.” In his view, a society long steeped in narratives of nationalism and ethnic superiority is psychologically unprepared to share power with the oppressed. Consequently, he advocates for a Two-State Solution based on the 1967 borders, coupled with the withdrawal of most settlers, viewing this as the only viable path currently available.