What do you think?
Rate this book
Israel and Civilization: The Fate of the Jewish Nation and the Destiny of the West
A next-generation manifesto declaring that the fate of Western civilization depends on the security and thriving of the Jewish people and the Jewish State of Israel—that the Jewish people’s right to self-determination in their ancestral homeland demands a realist foreign policy, strong US-Israel relations, and a grand alliance of Jews who stand firm and Christians who recognize the centrality of Judaism to the West
Israel is the West's man on the spot—the tip of the spear in the battle against Islamist terrorism and secularist nihilism alike. But the old-guard voices advocating for the full support of Israel as a nation-state and as an idea are being drowned out from all sides—theistic, secularist, right, left, and everything in between. To combat the uproars of multiculturalism, postmodern relativism, tolerance, and Jew-hating social media, the time is now for voices from a new generation. We must address modern antisemitism and sound a call not just to accept, but to enthusiastically embrace the centrality of Judaism to the very character of Western civilization. We require a grand alliance: namely, Jews who stand firm and Christians who recognize the civilizational foundations they have built on.
In Israel and Civilization, acclaimed journalist, legal expert, and pundit Josh Hammer makes a righteous case that the key to the prosperity of the West is the flourishing of the Jewish people and the Jewish State of Israel. Hammer's uplifting offense is our best defense against the enemies of the Jewish people's right to self-determination in their ancestral homeland. And as Hammer makes clear, manifesting the promise of Israel requires action by the United States and its allies.
There can be no overstating the impact of the trauma of October 7, 2023, on the Jewish people. Yet the anti-Israel reactions the world over have been equally devastating. Rallies of hundreds of thousands explicitly or implicitly promoting Hamas violence; demonstrations of Ivy League professors celebrating the pogrom as awesome and exhilarating; so-called human rights organizations that refuse to unequivocally condemn the use of rape as a weapon of war; and a hydra of multiculturalism, postmodern relativism, and tolerance—it all threatens the physical and metaphysical survival of the West and our essential Jewish heritage.
Preserving the best of what's been thought and said throughout history and ensuring that there will be centuries more requires a West that is proud of its Jewish heritage. In other words, the continued existence of the Jewish people is inextricably tied to the endurance of Western civilization. Israel is the center of the battle, and Israel and Civilization explains why and how the Jewish state must win.
Israel is the West's man on the spot—the tip of the spear in the battle against Islamist terrorism and secularist nihilism alike. But the old-guard voices advocating for the full support of Israel as a nation-state and as an idea are being drowned out from all sides—theistic, secularist, right, left, and everything in between. To combat the uproars of multiculturalism, postmodern relativism, tolerance, and Jew-hating social media, the time is now for voices from a new generation. We must address modern antisemitism and sound a call not just to accept, but to enthusiastically embrace the centrality of Judaism to the very character of Western civilization. We require a grand alliance: namely, Jews who stand firm and Christians who recognize the civilizational foundations they have built on.
In Israel and Civilization, acclaimed journalist, legal expert, and pundit Josh Hammer makes a righteous case that the key to the prosperity of the West is the flourishing of the Jewish people and the Jewish State of Israel. Hammer's uplifting offense is our best defense against the enemies of the Jewish people's right to self-determination in their ancestral homeland. And as Hammer makes clear, manifesting the promise of Israel requires action by the United States and its allies.
There can be no overstating the impact of the trauma of October 7, 2023, on the Jewish people. Yet the anti-Israel reactions the world over have been equally devastating. Rallies of hundreds of thousands explicitly or implicitly promoting Hamas violence; demonstrations of Ivy League professors celebrating the pogrom as awesome and exhilarating; so-called human rights organizations that refuse to unequivocally condemn the use of rape as a weapon of war; and a hydra of multiculturalism, postmodern relativism, and tolerance—it all threatens the physical and metaphysical survival of the West and our essential Jewish heritage.
Preserving the best of what's been thought and said throughout history and ensuring that there will be centuries more requires a West that is proud of its Jewish heritage. In other words, the continued existence of the Jewish people is inextricably tied to the endurance of Western civilization. Israel is the center of the battle, and Israel and Civilization explains why and how the Jewish state must win.
371 pages, Kindle Edition
Published March 1, 2025
146 people are currently reading
388 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 22 of 22 reviews
April 30, 2025
An intellectual earthquake challenging both the sneering academic and the hesitant diplomat to recognize what's truly at stake: not just Israel's survival, but the West's very soul. A rousing, unapologetic defense of Israel as not merely a nation among nations, but as the keystone of Western civilization itself.
Drawing a straight line from Mount Sinai to Capitol Hill, Hammer argues that the Jewish people—through revelation, law, and moral clarity—built the ethical bedrock upon which the modern West rests. “The Jews,” he writes, “are the time-binding civilization,” a people who turned trauma into transcendence and commandments into constitutionalism.
In the face of a West besieged by Islamism and ideological decay, Israel emerges as a luminous outpost of moral realism and divine destiny. Through searing accounts—from the ashes of Treblinka to the haunted ruins of Kfar Aza after the October 7, 2023 massacre—Hammer reminds us that Jewish survival is not just about Jews. It is about the moral survival of humanity.
Within this fierce intellectual and emotional journey, Hammer gifts readers with gripping historical vignettes: the early Christian Hebraists of Britain who modeled governance on Mosaic law; Winston Churchill’s Zionist sympathies; the American Founding Fathers’ invocation of Israel as a moral archetype; Herzl’s prophetic vision; the Maccabean revolt as civilizational defiance; the expulsion of Jews from Spain followed by the Ottoman Empire’s refuge offer; the reestablishment of Hebrew as a spoken language; the first Zionist Congress in Basel; Entebbe’s miraculous rescue; the Nuremberg Trials’ grounding in biblical justice; and Israel’s Iron Dome saving civilian lives while enduring moral slander from the global elite.
Hammer stitches these stories into a tapestry where Israel is not merely reacting to terror but embodying an eternal mission: to be “a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.”
In the climactic final argument, Hammer’s pen becomes a sword, slicing through the hypocrisies of Western appeasement and academic cowardice. He insists: “Westerners who abandon Israel are not betraying a foreign ally—they are amputating their civilizational soul.”
To the sneering secularist and the dithering diplomat alike, Hammer offers a clarion challenge: embrace the covenant or face the chaos. While the conservative point of view did not align with my sentiment in many instances, I did appreciate the erudite, logical and intelligent way it was laid out.
This book is a love letter to the Jewish people, a manifesto for moral clarity, and a thunderous wake-up call to the West. Zionism, Hammer proclaims, is not a nationalist anomaly but a civilizational necessity. And in his unforgettable words: “If Jerusalem falls, the West is not next—it is already gone.”
Drawing a straight line from Mount Sinai to Capitol Hill, Hammer argues that the Jewish people—through revelation, law, and moral clarity—built the ethical bedrock upon which the modern West rests. “The Jews,” he writes, “are the time-binding civilization,” a people who turned trauma into transcendence and commandments into constitutionalism.
In the face of a West besieged by Islamism and ideological decay, Israel emerges as a luminous outpost of moral realism and divine destiny. Through searing accounts—from the ashes of Treblinka to the haunted ruins of Kfar Aza after the October 7, 2023 massacre—Hammer reminds us that Jewish survival is not just about Jews. It is about the moral survival of humanity.
Within this fierce intellectual and emotional journey, Hammer gifts readers with gripping historical vignettes: the early Christian Hebraists of Britain who modeled governance on Mosaic law; Winston Churchill’s Zionist sympathies; the American Founding Fathers’ invocation of Israel as a moral archetype; Herzl’s prophetic vision; the Maccabean revolt as civilizational defiance; the expulsion of Jews from Spain followed by the Ottoman Empire’s refuge offer; the reestablishment of Hebrew as a spoken language; the first Zionist Congress in Basel; Entebbe’s miraculous rescue; the Nuremberg Trials’ grounding in biblical justice; and Israel’s Iron Dome saving civilian lives while enduring moral slander from the global elite.
Hammer stitches these stories into a tapestry where Israel is not merely reacting to terror but embodying an eternal mission: to be “a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.”
In the climactic final argument, Hammer’s pen becomes a sword, slicing through the hypocrisies of Western appeasement and academic cowardice. He insists: “Westerners who abandon Israel are not betraying a foreign ally—they are amputating their civilizational soul.”
To the sneering secularist and the dithering diplomat alike, Hammer offers a clarion challenge: embrace the covenant or face the chaos. While the conservative point of view did not align with my sentiment in many instances, I did appreciate the erudite, logical and intelligent way it was laid out.
This book is a love letter to the Jewish people, a manifesto for moral clarity, and a thunderous wake-up call to the West. Zionism, Hammer proclaims, is not a nationalist anomaly but a civilizational necessity. And in his unforgettable words: “If Jerusalem falls, the West is not next—it is already gone.”
October 10, 2025
Trash… lies… brainwashing. Horrible person. Lies about Charlie Kirk to self-promote. Worst book I’ve ever read and I’ve read some shit books
October 26, 2025
Josh Hammer makes some good points regarding the Jewish connection to western civilization. I may not agree with al of them, but this books would lead to some great discussions.
June 6, 2025
A book that pretty much summarizes the plight of antisemitism on the Jewish people and how the world believes “a story” and not “the story”
August 15, 2025
Israel and Civilization by Josh Hammer serves a specific purpose. The book is not only attempting to combat reactions to the actions on October 7th 2023, but is also trying to place Israel as one of the major inspirations for the American Experiment. Josh Hammer uses his own personal experience and the call for a Jewish Christian alliance to promote a realistic foreign policy attempting to help Israel which would further help secure the fate of Western civilization.
Hammer’s book has many interesting and key ideas that play a dramatic part in shaping his importance for Israel to the Western world, but his ideas about the foundation of the US in connection with Israel seems to be a stretch at times, as he selectively omits historical evidence. The foundation of the American Experiment did not begin with the Constitution, but rather began much earlier with the ideas of the pilgrims.
Hammer is correct in comparing their travel and struggle with freedom of religious practices to that of the Exodus story, but they were foundationally not Jewish. The pilgrims observed the Sabbath, but believed in the sacraments of baptism and the Lord’s Supper. They left on the mayflower to create a model Christian society, and did not think of the Old Testament as strictly Jewish philosophy, but the path of Abraham’s heirs before Christ. Their commitment was to Christ, a nature that is not agreed upon in most Jewish circles. Furthering this, Hammer writes, “The Law of Moses would go on to become the undisputed bedrock of Western legal codes, Western ethics, and in many ways Western political theory” (Hammer, pg. 21). While Hammer is not fully wrong, he fails to include the full reasons as to why these laws were important to early Americans. Biblical literacy in this time was exceptionally high, and remained that way, not for strictly religious reasons, but due to the accessibility of the Bible. The document Hammer should have started with to make this point is the Declaration of Independence. Jefferson writes, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness” (DoI, Paragraph 2). Here Jefferson highlights the God-given nature of humanity. How we are endowed and loved by a single Creator, who has given us the nature to enjoy life here on Earth, not always necessarily to work. Furthermore, it is important to note what Jefferson means when he states “created equal”, Jefferson does not intend on equality of success or outcome, but rather the equality of opportunity. Equal chance is not equal prosperity, and furthermore is not a guarantee of the common good. These sound like great biblical ideals, until the next sentence. Jefferson continues, “That to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their powers from the consent of the Governed, that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these Ends, it is the right of the People to alter or abolish it” (DoI, Jefferson Paragraph 2). This is not the deep rich Jewish philosophy of the old testament, but mimics the cries of Thomas Paine in his pamphlet “Common Sense” and the fears of John Locke in his treatises. The Biblical aspect of the Declaration of Independence is not meant to promote a Jewish understanding of laws bringing people closer to their God, but rather emphasize the nature of having a divine spark meaning that one must make difficult decisions and separate themselves from governments that oppress or oppose this spark. In other words, the divine spark becomes the rational free will and free being of an individual, and suppressing this means to go against Nature’s intention as posed by Jefferson. The Declaration of Independence is a written list of complaints against King George the Third, a king who claims a divine right and position, thus by utilizing the European Enlightenment and the ideals of the individual, the Declaration of Independence served as a reminder of what all sought to achieve when it was released two years into the Revolution.
The next document that should have been shared is that of the Articles of Confederation. Using Hammer’s ideas of when a Nation “starts” or is “founded” this should have been the first document brought up that actually emphasizes the difference between Mercantilist colonies, and a new country involving united regions. The Articles of Confederation were largely written by Dickinson, who headed the committee at the time. The format was largely based upon that of Benjamin Franklin’s original “Constitutional” draft back in 1750 (See Bret Baier/Catherine Whitney “To Rescue the Constitution”). Dickinson was a Quaker, and his early drafts reflect this, putting forth ideals such as the basic rights of women, free release of all slaves in the territories, and protection for the native Indians (Bret Baier/Catherine Whitney). However, very few of his key ideals were actually adopted, and instead they were taken out in order to have a more baseline and less Quaker filled Constitution. The early Articles of Confederation, adopted in November of 1777, focused on the justice and friendship of states and their individual members. It promoted the powers of the states, and limited the powers of the centralized government, in accordance with late European enlightenment literature. It was not Biblical by any aspect, and instead wanted to hold the strict democratic and particular nature of the time.
When we arrive at the Constitution the backdrop of the country is set on the European Enlightenment, advances in modern political theory, and the deep distaste for the British Monarchy and their economic advances, not so much Jewish philosophy. While certain Biblical aspects were present, it is important to note that they were more often than not thought of as Christian philosophy, or ancient laws commonly known due to the popularity and large scale printing of the Bible. As most of the founding fathers were Deists they did not have a deep religious affiliation in the modern sense of the word, and instead wanted to posit that God had created all beings, then left us to our own devices. Hammer cannot use this fact because denouncing the religious importance of the founding would denounce the religious aspect and Jewish importance of today. Hammer is over-emphasizing the Jewish nature of the Constitution and American Experiment so much so that his audience is willing to say that they would still be important things to consider today. It was not a single unified philosophy that outnumbered the rest, but rather the American Experiment is defined by the multitude and combination of many different peoples and ideas. In the Capital building, made to reflect the Greco-Roman ideal, there exist 23 marble portraits of the great law givers. Moses is present, but so is Hammurapi, Justinian, Innocent III, and Edward I. All vastly different people accredited to helping with the establishment of the nation as well as the formation and editing of the Constitution of the United States. Yet, no books are written discussing the importance of early Babylonian writings that discuss the punishments for faulty house-builders in the colonies. The American Constitution draws on human history and human nature to make a document that is willing to test the limits and expose our weaknesses as a species. Overemphasizing one culture in its creation misses the point, that it is an all encompassing document meant to form a new nation and new group of people. The Western World is connected to Israel, and will forever be, but our founding was not based on Jewish philosophy as Hammer wants it to be seen. It was made by Quakers, Puritans, natives, the Spaniards, and the effects of mercantilism. It was such a complex and detailed foundation that by leaving out the documents predating the Constitution creates a limited worldview which goes with Hammer's claims of Jewish philosophy being against the European Enlightenment. However, the broader story is a lot more complex, with most of the founding fathers affirming the individualist ideals of the European Enlightenment, Hammer seems to be inadvertently affirming Jewish philosophy against the founding ideals not explicitly stated by him. America is biblically based, but by many different people groups and beliefs meaning that while all use the word “Creator” or “God”, all are affirming differing dogmas. Hammer is a brilliant writer, and it clearly shows in his work. I recommend this book, but also pose that no one single book should ever serve as a basis for all beliefs. Reading this in conjunction with differing opinions, such as Sari Nusseibeh's work or even Ari Shavit, brings the fuller picture to the Western audience. His ideas are not a common belief in Israel itself and should be considered when reading this. Well written, but keep in mind the influences/political ideas, as well as comparing it to other works.
Hammer’s book has many interesting and key ideas that play a dramatic part in shaping his importance for Israel to the Western world, but his ideas about the foundation of the US in connection with Israel seems to be a stretch at times, as he selectively omits historical evidence. The foundation of the American Experiment did not begin with the Constitution, but rather began much earlier with the ideas of the pilgrims.
Hammer is correct in comparing their travel and struggle with freedom of religious practices to that of the Exodus story, but they were foundationally not Jewish. The pilgrims observed the Sabbath, but believed in the sacraments of baptism and the Lord’s Supper. They left on the mayflower to create a model Christian society, and did not think of the Old Testament as strictly Jewish philosophy, but the path of Abraham’s heirs before Christ. Their commitment was to Christ, a nature that is not agreed upon in most Jewish circles. Furthering this, Hammer writes, “The Law of Moses would go on to become the undisputed bedrock of Western legal codes, Western ethics, and in many ways Western political theory” (Hammer, pg. 21). While Hammer is not fully wrong, he fails to include the full reasons as to why these laws were important to early Americans. Biblical literacy in this time was exceptionally high, and remained that way, not for strictly religious reasons, but due to the accessibility of the Bible. The document Hammer should have started with to make this point is the Declaration of Independence. Jefferson writes, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness” (DoI, Paragraph 2). Here Jefferson highlights the God-given nature of humanity. How we are endowed and loved by a single Creator, who has given us the nature to enjoy life here on Earth, not always necessarily to work. Furthermore, it is important to note what Jefferson means when he states “created equal”, Jefferson does not intend on equality of success or outcome, but rather the equality of opportunity. Equal chance is not equal prosperity, and furthermore is not a guarantee of the common good. These sound like great biblical ideals, until the next sentence. Jefferson continues, “That to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their powers from the consent of the Governed, that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these Ends, it is the right of the People to alter or abolish it” (DoI, Jefferson Paragraph 2). This is not the deep rich Jewish philosophy of the old testament, but mimics the cries of Thomas Paine in his pamphlet “Common Sense” and the fears of John Locke in his treatises. The Biblical aspect of the Declaration of Independence is not meant to promote a Jewish understanding of laws bringing people closer to their God, but rather emphasize the nature of having a divine spark meaning that one must make difficult decisions and separate themselves from governments that oppress or oppose this spark. In other words, the divine spark becomes the rational free will and free being of an individual, and suppressing this means to go against Nature’s intention as posed by Jefferson. The Declaration of Independence is a written list of complaints against King George the Third, a king who claims a divine right and position, thus by utilizing the European Enlightenment and the ideals of the individual, the Declaration of Independence served as a reminder of what all sought to achieve when it was released two years into the Revolution.
The next document that should have been shared is that of the Articles of Confederation. Using Hammer’s ideas of when a Nation “starts” or is “founded” this should have been the first document brought up that actually emphasizes the difference between Mercantilist colonies, and a new country involving united regions. The Articles of Confederation were largely written by Dickinson, who headed the committee at the time. The format was largely based upon that of Benjamin Franklin’s original “Constitutional” draft back in 1750 (See Bret Baier/Catherine Whitney “To Rescue the Constitution”). Dickinson was a Quaker, and his early drafts reflect this, putting forth ideals such as the basic rights of women, free release of all slaves in the territories, and protection for the native Indians (Bret Baier/Catherine Whitney). However, very few of his key ideals were actually adopted, and instead they were taken out in order to have a more baseline and less Quaker filled Constitution. The early Articles of Confederation, adopted in November of 1777, focused on the justice and friendship of states and their individual members. It promoted the powers of the states, and limited the powers of the centralized government, in accordance with late European enlightenment literature. It was not Biblical by any aspect, and instead wanted to hold the strict democratic and particular nature of the time.
When we arrive at the Constitution the backdrop of the country is set on the European Enlightenment, advances in modern political theory, and the deep distaste for the British Monarchy and their economic advances, not so much Jewish philosophy. While certain Biblical aspects were present, it is important to note that they were more often than not thought of as Christian philosophy, or ancient laws commonly known due to the popularity and large scale printing of the Bible. As most of the founding fathers were Deists they did not have a deep religious affiliation in the modern sense of the word, and instead wanted to posit that God had created all beings, then left us to our own devices. Hammer cannot use this fact because denouncing the religious importance of the founding would denounce the religious aspect and Jewish importance of today. Hammer is over-emphasizing the Jewish nature of the Constitution and American Experiment so much so that his audience is willing to say that they would still be important things to consider today. It was not a single unified philosophy that outnumbered the rest, but rather the American Experiment is defined by the multitude and combination of many different peoples and ideas. In the Capital building, made to reflect the Greco-Roman ideal, there exist 23 marble portraits of the great law givers. Moses is present, but so is Hammurapi, Justinian, Innocent III, and Edward I. All vastly different people accredited to helping with the establishment of the nation as well as the formation and editing of the Constitution of the United States. Yet, no books are written discussing the importance of early Babylonian writings that discuss the punishments for faulty house-builders in the colonies. The American Constitution draws on human history and human nature to make a document that is willing to test the limits and expose our weaknesses as a species. Overemphasizing one culture in its creation misses the point, that it is an all encompassing document meant to form a new nation and new group of people. The Western World is connected to Israel, and will forever be, but our founding was not based on Jewish philosophy as Hammer wants it to be seen. It was made by Quakers, Puritans, natives, the Spaniards, and the effects of mercantilism. It was such a complex and detailed foundation that by leaving out the documents predating the Constitution creates a limited worldview which goes with Hammer's claims of Jewish philosophy being against the European Enlightenment. However, the broader story is a lot more complex, with most of the founding fathers affirming the individualist ideals of the European Enlightenment, Hammer seems to be inadvertently affirming Jewish philosophy against the founding ideals not explicitly stated by him. America is biblically based, but by many different people groups and beliefs meaning that while all use the word “Creator” or “God”, all are affirming differing dogmas. Hammer is a brilliant writer, and it clearly shows in his work. I recommend this book, but also pose that no one single book should ever serve as a basis for all beliefs. Reading this in conjunction with differing opinions, such as Sari Nusseibeh's work or even Ari Shavit, brings the fuller picture to the Western audience. His ideas are not a common belief in Israel itself and should be considered when reading this. Well written, but keep in mind the influences/political ideas, as well as comparing it to other works.
May 31, 2025
My main question throughout this book was - who is this book for. For jews, it sure is a great motivational talk. But otherwise, I’m not sure any other reader would really be interested in the theological lane Hammer takes throughout major parts of this book. The point is, he’s really articulating in details the real religious reasons behind the claim that Israel is in fact the front line of the west, and the keeper of the judo-christian shared values. Why is that strange to me? Because I’m not optimistic about how much the haters and wokers even barely care. Who are you going to convince?
Interestingly enough, the opening chapter connecting Treblinka to the massacre of October 7th is exactly the connection I personally made with my recent reading list. And so I totally know the place where Hammer is coming from.
Refreshingly, this book was written after the outcomes of October 7th, and even after the outcome of two Iranian attacks on Israel, the fall of Assad, the eliminating of nasrallah, the pager operation, etc. but there are two flaws in this book I’ve noticed.
One - writing about inner politics of Israel (judicial reform protests, etc), well, just don’t go there. and also, don’t quote one of the most controversial person among Israelis, Yair Netanyahu. I get the macro pov of an American jew, and in fact I support it and I think this is what more Israelis should adopt these days, but for most Israelis this is just beyond weird, for explosive domestic reasons which are almost unexplainable to people who don’t live the daily Israeli political tension on the day to day basis.
Two - trump. Hammer is in favor for trump, describing him as the ultimate pro Israel president that we’ve had in recent decades. he has good reasons to believe that, regarding the Abraham accords. But, these days in his second term, blinded by Qatar’s gold, I’m not sure trump has written his own final verdict in his pages of the history of the jews. As much as this book is impressively updated, Hammer just couldn’t possibly predict trump’s recent very worrying trip to the Middle East and Qatar, the recent strange cold diplomatic shoulder to Israel, and the talks with Iran which might just end up with a deal not very different from Obama’s ministration, the same deal Hammer condemn. We shall have to wait and see, and I very much hope I’m wrong.
In fact, Netanyahu’s doctrine that that Abraham accords will bring peace first from the outside of Israel and only after from the inside with the palestinian conflict, might have proven completely wrong regarding the October 7th massacre. This problem is here, and it’s here to stay.
Interestingly enough, the opening chapter connecting Treblinka to the massacre of October 7th is exactly the connection I personally made with my recent reading list. And so I totally know the place where Hammer is coming from.
Refreshingly, this book was written after the outcomes of October 7th, and even after the outcome of two Iranian attacks on Israel, the fall of Assad, the eliminating of nasrallah, the pager operation, etc. but there are two flaws in this book I’ve noticed.
One - writing about inner politics of Israel (judicial reform protests, etc), well, just don’t go there. and also, don’t quote one of the most controversial person among Israelis, Yair Netanyahu. I get the macro pov of an American jew, and in fact I support it and I think this is what more Israelis should adopt these days, but for most Israelis this is just beyond weird, for explosive domestic reasons which are almost unexplainable to people who don’t live the daily Israeli political tension on the day to day basis.
Two - trump. Hammer is in favor for trump, describing him as the ultimate pro Israel president that we’ve had in recent decades. he has good reasons to believe that, regarding the Abraham accords. But, these days in his second term, blinded by Qatar’s gold, I’m not sure trump has written his own final verdict in his pages of the history of the jews. As much as this book is impressively updated, Hammer just couldn’t possibly predict trump’s recent very worrying trip to the Middle East and Qatar, the recent strange cold diplomatic shoulder to Israel, and the talks with Iran which might just end up with a deal not very different from Obama’s ministration, the same deal Hammer condemn. We shall have to wait and see, and I very much hope I’m wrong.
In fact, Netanyahu’s doctrine that that Abraham accords will bring peace first from the outside of Israel and only after from the inside with the palestinian conflict, might have proven completely wrong regarding the October 7th massacre. This problem is here, and it’s here to stay.
August 14, 2025
Perspective. Provocative. Unapologetic.
June 10, 2025
Very educational. In am not ignorant about the Jewish faith and Israel, but this book was very good in explainng the faith from the Jewish perspective. Most useful was the explanation of various Jewish religious and political groups and why so many Jewish people are progressive.
Parts are slow going and very intellectual, but worth getting through as background for later chapters.
Parts are slow going and very intellectual, but worth getting through as background for later chapters.
June 26, 2025
Five stars doesn't seem enough for such a gripping book! Could not put it down! Exceptional in every way!
June 30, 2025
One of the most salient parts of this book - page 163 to 165.
Banalities [politicians stating Israel's right to exist and right to defend itself] are insulting. Speaks to a double standard. Is there any other nation in the world, other than the State of Israel, for which it is somehow considered a demonstration of support merely to take the side of the nation's right to exist and defend its territorial sovereignty against infringers and invaders? Does it make politicians pro-Canada, or Zimbabwe or any other country to declaim that they have a right to exist and defend itself from menacing aggression? Is there a politician in the world who feels a need to speak in this condescending manner about any other modern nation-state? For every other contemporary nation-state not named Israel, the state's legitimacy, right to exist and defend itself are simply assumed and undisputed.
There is no other minority [than the Jews] not the Kurds, not the Yzidis, not the Zoroastrians, nor anyone else in between, whose right to exist as a concrete nation and defend itself as a concrete people have been incessantly challenged as they have been for the Jews. And there is no other modern nation state - not Japan, Paraguay or Ghana, etc., whose right to exist and to defend itself are as continually challenged and doubted as they are for the world's lone Jewish state. There are many who claim that anti-Zionism - opposition to the State of Israel's existence as a Jewish state and a desire to see that Jewish state disbanded is somehow not equivalent to anti-Semitism. This is a lie. They are two sides of the exact same coin.
p. 182. There is no daylight between modern anti-Zionism and modern anti-Semitism. Just as the Jew was historically a scapegoat for all of society's ills, so too is the Jewish State of Israel often vilified today as the scapegoat for all of the world's ills. In order to defeat anti-Zionism as a political force...the underlying Palestinian Arab nationalist cause itself must be dealt a decisive and irrevocable defeat.
p. 195 The rise of virulent anti-Semitism is here, there, and everywhere a symptom that something has gone deeply wrong in a given society. p. 196 The single most pernicious threat facing the viability and flourishing of the Jewish people - and by logical extension, the flourishing also of Christian, the US and all of Western civilization as a whole - is the spread of woke ideology. Through DEI, an entire generation of impressionable minds has been indoctrinated into believing that Jews, the most frequently oppressed group of people in all of human history, actually constitute an "oppressor" class. Wokism is appallingly totalitarian, insofar as the woke wield the levers of power to suppress all dissident speech, root out all wrong thing and attempt to secure by brute force, a stifling intellectual homogeneity. It is a form of neo-Marxism, and neo-paganism - a return to the worship of the false gods of past millennia.
p, 201 The notion that the Jews today are somehow "colonizers" in their ancestral, millennia-old homeland is an ahistorical archaeologically disproven, and empirically debunked myth.
204-5 - But the wokesters also detest Christians, and above all, white male Christians. Without Christianity there would be no entity that we can identify today as Western civilization. It often begins with the Jews but, we know from history, it rarely ends with the Jews. And in this case, as in so many others, the explosive anti-Semitism we have seen since the Simchat Torah massacre is only partially ABOUT the Jews in the first instance. The woke mask has been lifted for all to see. There is no more hiding. We must all join forces to repel this terrifying social conflagration before it devours us all.
p. 249 - The Judeo-Christian tradition [in the US] is the only affirmative positive force capable of withstanding and possibly rolling back the three hegemonic forces that today threaten ruin for the West: wokeism, Islamism and global neoliberalism. It is no coincidence that, as regular church attendance has declined and secular wokeism has ascended in America and throughout the West in general, anti-Semitism has skyrocketed. In the year 2024, any Jewish American who throws in his lot with wokeism and not the one entity pragmatically capable of subduing wokeism, the American church, is foolish beyond measure.
Banalities [politicians stating Israel's right to exist and right to defend itself] are insulting. Speaks to a double standard. Is there any other nation in the world, other than the State of Israel, for which it is somehow considered a demonstration of support merely to take the side of the nation's right to exist and defend its territorial sovereignty against infringers and invaders? Does it make politicians pro-Canada, or Zimbabwe or any other country to declaim that they have a right to exist and defend itself from menacing aggression? Is there a politician in the world who feels a need to speak in this condescending manner about any other modern nation-state? For every other contemporary nation-state not named Israel, the state's legitimacy, right to exist and defend itself are simply assumed and undisputed.
There is no other minority [than the Jews] not the Kurds, not the Yzidis, not the Zoroastrians, nor anyone else in between, whose right to exist as a concrete nation and defend itself as a concrete people have been incessantly challenged as they have been for the Jews. And there is no other modern nation state - not Japan, Paraguay or Ghana, etc., whose right to exist and to defend itself are as continually challenged and doubted as they are for the world's lone Jewish state. There are many who claim that anti-Zionism - opposition to the State of Israel's existence as a Jewish state and a desire to see that Jewish state disbanded is somehow not equivalent to anti-Semitism. This is a lie. They are two sides of the exact same coin.
p. 182. There is no daylight between modern anti-Zionism and modern anti-Semitism. Just as the Jew was historically a scapegoat for all of society's ills, so too is the Jewish State of Israel often vilified today as the scapegoat for all of the world's ills. In order to defeat anti-Zionism as a political force...the underlying Palestinian Arab nationalist cause itself must be dealt a decisive and irrevocable defeat.
p. 195 The rise of virulent anti-Semitism is here, there, and everywhere a symptom that something has gone deeply wrong in a given society. p. 196 The single most pernicious threat facing the viability and flourishing of the Jewish people - and by logical extension, the flourishing also of Christian, the US and all of Western civilization as a whole - is the spread of woke ideology. Through DEI, an entire generation of impressionable minds has been indoctrinated into believing that Jews, the most frequently oppressed group of people in all of human history, actually constitute an "oppressor" class. Wokism is appallingly totalitarian, insofar as the woke wield the levers of power to suppress all dissident speech, root out all wrong thing and attempt to secure by brute force, a stifling intellectual homogeneity. It is a form of neo-Marxism, and neo-paganism - a return to the worship of the false gods of past millennia.
p, 201 The notion that the Jews today are somehow "colonizers" in their ancestral, millennia-old homeland is an ahistorical archaeologically disproven, and empirically debunked myth.
204-5 - But the wokesters also detest Christians, and above all, white male Christians. Without Christianity there would be no entity that we can identify today as Western civilization. It often begins with the Jews but, we know from history, it rarely ends with the Jews. And in this case, as in so many others, the explosive anti-Semitism we have seen since the Simchat Torah massacre is only partially ABOUT the Jews in the first instance. The woke mask has been lifted for all to see. There is no more hiding. We must all join forces to repel this terrifying social conflagration before it devours us all.
p. 249 - The Judeo-Christian tradition [in the US] is the only affirmative positive force capable of withstanding and possibly rolling back the three hegemonic forces that today threaten ruin for the West: wokeism, Islamism and global neoliberalism. It is no coincidence that, as regular church attendance has declined and secular wokeism has ascended in America and throughout the West in general, anti-Semitism has skyrocketed. In the year 2024, any Jewish American who throws in his lot with wokeism and not the one entity pragmatically capable of subduing wokeism, the American church, is foolish beyond measure.
October 27, 2025
***.5
This was a tough one for me to rate. The author (who I've never heard of and about whom I know absolutely nothing aside from what he divulged in the book) has a very conservative worldview, and I strenuously disagree with most of his basic assumptions, opinions, and conclusions. However, he also makes a few very good points, and his arguments are mostly well articulated.
His basic premise is that Judaism underpins what he considers as Judeo-Christian Western Civilization, and that Torah and Halacha form the basis of American law. This Jewish-Christian alliance is opposed by the forces of Islamism, wokeism, and global neo-liberalism. He also rails against Marxism, socialism, leftists, liberalism, libertarians, progressive Judaism (reform, conservative, reconstructionist), and trans people, all of which are incompatible with "biblical values."
The result of this reasoning is strong support for religious nationalism, both in Israel and the US. He repeats many of the standard religious Zionist talking points, but as an attorney he emphasizes some of the legal arguments that legitimize the West Bank (aka Judea and Samaria) settlements. Unsurprisingly, he lauds trump and Pompeo for the Abraham Accords, castigates Obama for the Iran nuclear deal, and doesn't seem overly bothered by the horrendously destructive war in Gaza. In other words, nothing you wouldn't hear from the average Likud supporter.
More interesting was his reasoning for opposing the neo-conservative approach as typified by the Bush Administration. He's also against the regular ongoing US financial aid to Israel, which surprised me and is one of the few things I actually agree with him on. And despite his fawning embrace of republicans in general and American Christians in particular, he does a good job rejecting right-wing antisemitism, calling out odious figures such as Candace Owens, Nick Fuentes, and Tucker Carlson, and makes a strong case for why Israel is beneficial to the US as an ally.
Ultimately, aside from being Generally Wrong (i.e. disagreeing with me), the inherent bigotry underlying his American Exceptionalism and Fox News-like attitudes towards DEI, is that the same religious nationalism he supports can also be reversed to support the Palestinian cause. He tries to dismiss their claims to the land as completely without merit, but even if that were true, it's certainly not how they see it, nor how most of the world sees it. Too much of the time, all he's doing is changing the names in the slogans - he doesn't see anything fundamentally wrong with slogans like "From the River to the Sea," he just thinks that it all belongs to his people, and not to them.
This was a tough one for me to rate. The author (who I've never heard of and about whom I know absolutely nothing aside from what he divulged in the book) has a very conservative worldview, and I strenuously disagree with most of his basic assumptions, opinions, and conclusions. However, he also makes a few very good points, and his arguments are mostly well articulated.
His basic premise is that Judaism underpins what he considers as Judeo-Christian Western Civilization, and that Torah and Halacha form the basis of American law. This Jewish-Christian alliance is opposed by the forces of Islamism, wokeism, and global neo-liberalism. He also rails against Marxism, socialism, leftists, liberalism, libertarians, progressive Judaism (reform, conservative, reconstructionist), and trans people, all of which are incompatible with "biblical values."
The result of this reasoning is strong support for religious nationalism, both in Israel and the US. He repeats many of the standard religious Zionist talking points, but as an attorney he emphasizes some of the legal arguments that legitimize the West Bank (aka Judea and Samaria) settlements. Unsurprisingly, he lauds trump and Pompeo for the Abraham Accords, castigates Obama for the Iran nuclear deal, and doesn't seem overly bothered by the horrendously destructive war in Gaza. In other words, nothing you wouldn't hear from the average Likud supporter.
More interesting was his reasoning for opposing the neo-conservative approach as typified by the Bush Administration. He's also against the regular ongoing US financial aid to Israel, which surprised me and is one of the few things I actually agree with him on. And despite his fawning embrace of republicans in general and American Christians in particular, he does a good job rejecting right-wing antisemitism, calling out odious figures such as Candace Owens, Nick Fuentes, and Tucker Carlson, and makes a strong case for why Israel is beneficial to the US as an ally.
Ultimately, aside from being Generally Wrong (i.e. disagreeing with me), the inherent bigotry underlying his American Exceptionalism and Fox News-like attitudes towards DEI, is that the same religious nationalism he supports can also be reversed to support the Palestinian cause. He tries to dismiss their claims to the land as completely without merit, but even if that were true, it's certainly not how they see it, nor how most of the world sees it. Too much of the time, all he's doing is changing the names in the slogans - he doesn't see anything fundamentally wrong with slogans like "From the River to the Sea," he just thinks that it all belongs to his people, and not to them.
July 6, 2025
Hammer offers a rigid, ideologically narrow case for American support of Israel—one that might have resonated across political and religious lines if he weren’t so dismissive of the vast majority of American Jews. While he sets out to defend the practicality of America's investment in Israel and Jewry with moral urgency, his tone toward non-Orthodox Judaism is condescending, alienating, and exclusionary.
Despite invoking Jewish history, Hammer neglects one of its most vital teachings: that internal division—sinat chinam—has historically undermined Jewish survival more than any external threat. His repeated dismissal of Reform and Reconstructionist Judaism erases large and vibrant parts of Jewish life that have long been committed to Zionism and Jewish continuity. The fact that he fails to acknowledge thriving non-Orthodox Zionist efforts—like Recharging Reform Judaism, the Pardes Institute's North American work, or Livnot U’Lehibanot—suggests not only a lack of information, but a deliberate ideological blind spot.
He calls leading Jewish advocates like ADL CEO Jonathan Greenblatt a "disgrace", dismissing their work without grappling seriously with their contributions, especially in combating the rise of right-wing extremism that Hammer himself denounces. This contradiction weakens Hammer's credibility and undercuts his broader strategic arguments.
Equally concerning is Hammer’s uncritical embrace of Donald Trump. While he praises Trump’s foreign policy regarding Israel, he fails to address how Trump’s political rhetoric and permissiveness toward extremism contributed to a surge in American antisemitism long before October 7th. This omission signals either strategic evasion or selective moral concern—both of which diminish the ethical authority Hammer seeks to claim. Hammer's framing of gender roles and power also warrants attention. His repeated use of gendered theological language (e.g., referring to God as “Himself”) further reinforces a limited and exclusionary worldview, one that many contemporary readers—especially women—will find alienating.
What could have been a serious contribution to the pro-Israel discourse is ultimately a polemic aimed at reinforcing ideological purity. Instead of mobilizing a coalition, Hammer alienates allies. America needs persuasive, strategic defenders of Israel—but it also needs humility, pluralism, and the capacity to listen. Those values are glaringly absent here.
Despite invoking Jewish history, Hammer neglects one of its most vital teachings: that internal division—sinat chinam—has historically undermined Jewish survival more than any external threat. His repeated dismissal of Reform and Reconstructionist Judaism erases large and vibrant parts of Jewish life that have long been committed to Zionism and Jewish continuity. The fact that he fails to acknowledge thriving non-Orthodox Zionist efforts—like Recharging Reform Judaism, the Pardes Institute's North American work, or Livnot U’Lehibanot—suggests not only a lack of information, but a deliberate ideological blind spot.
He calls leading Jewish advocates like ADL CEO Jonathan Greenblatt a "disgrace", dismissing their work without grappling seriously with their contributions, especially in combating the rise of right-wing extremism that Hammer himself denounces. This contradiction weakens Hammer's credibility and undercuts his broader strategic arguments.
Equally concerning is Hammer’s uncritical embrace of Donald Trump. While he praises Trump’s foreign policy regarding Israel, he fails to address how Trump’s political rhetoric and permissiveness toward extremism contributed to a surge in American antisemitism long before October 7th. This omission signals either strategic evasion or selective moral concern—both of which diminish the ethical authority Hammer seeks to claim. Hammer's framing of gender roles and power also warrants attention. His repeated use of gendered theological language (e.g., referring to God as “Himself”) further reinforces a limited and exclusionary worldview, one that many contemporary readers—especially women—will find alienating.
What could have been a serious contribution to the pro-Israel discourse is ultimately a polemic aimed at reinforcing ideological purity. Instead of mobilizing a coalition, Hammer alienates allies. America needs persuasive, strategic defenders of Israel—but it also needs humility, pluralism, and the capacity to listen. Those values are glaringly absent here.
October 14, 2025
I have very mixed feelings about "Israel and Civilization: The Fate of the Jewish Nation and the Destiny of the West" by Josh Hammer. On one hand, it offers an important and much-needed perspective. On the other, it’s written in a way that makes it difficult for the average reader to access those ideas.
If the author’s goal was to demonstrate his intellect and command of dense policy language, he succeeded. If it was to engage and educate readers who aren’t attorneys or policy insiders, it falls flat. Many, I suspect, won’t make it through the long, heavy first chapter before giving up.
The tragedy is that Hammer’s insights are genuinely valuable—but buried beneath complex phrasing, lengthy chapters, and needlessly intricate sentences. If he hopes to reach a broader audience, I’d suggest studying modern writing techniques that favor clarity and brevity. The ideas deserve to shine without requiring a dictionary and a pot of coffee to uncover them.
If the author’s goal was to demonstrate his intellect and command of dense policy language, he succeeded. If it was to engage and educate readers who aren’t attorneys or policy insiders, it falls flat. Many, I suspect, won’t make it through the long, heavy first chapter before giving up.
The tragedy is that Hammer’s insights are genuinely valuable—but buried beneath complex phrasing, lengthy chapters, and needlessly intricate sentences. If he hopes to reach a broader audience, I’d suggest studying modern writing techniques that favor clarity and brevity. The ideas deserve to shine without requiring a dictionary and a pot of coffee to uncover them.
October 26, 2025
While it does make a decent argument for Jewish nationalism and the Western interests therein, it does not explicitly condemn the often exclusionary ethnic nationalism that fuels the current conflict in the Levant. It even implicitly embraces the idea of an Israel solely for the Jewish population with hypothetical borders that undeniably extend far further than what currently is considered to be Israeli territory in any treaty since 1947.
Therefore, I think an honest review should appreciate the depth of the arguments made while highlighting that the conclusion drawn from those arguments won't bring us any further in the current conflict. It is, after all, a purely ideological and emotive argumentation and it should be read as such.
Therefore, I think an honest review should appreciate the depth of the arguments made while highlighting that the conclusion drawn from those arguments won't bring us any further in the current conflict. It is, after all, a purely ideological and emotive argumentation and it should be read as such.
December 11, 2025
I am uncertain as to a rating so I’m ‘rounding up’. This work has several distinct sections. I appreciate the thorough research beginning with history, then more current events, literature, sociology, theology. The author states strong concerns and opinions. Some of which I agree with and some I do not. Others I am uncertain. Regardless of where I personally am at this moment, the author raises important concerns, issues, challenges and considerations that we must think about as individuals and discuss within our communities and outside our communities. I look forward to the dialogue and to continuing to learn and may it be in a safe environment.
November 22, 2025
We know of the nation of Israel, but there are many fascets of the land we still don't really think about. In this book, Josh aims to help you understand the nation, the people, and the current climate of the world when speaking of Israel. While there were many words I had to look up for clarification, it was well written. It was a bit repetitive in parts, but overall still a worthwhile book to read and ponder on.
October 18, 2025
A must read. There is so much in this book; history, theology, world economic/ political structures, but at the same very readable. It's a clear warning that must be acknowledged as to the current state of our world and our future.
Read
December 18, 2025Read this earlier this year. Started writing a review/summary but stopped after I felt overwhelmed after writing four pages of it, lol. I agreed with some points, disagreed with many others, and found some arguments to be intellectually disingenuous.
July 21, 2025
Very good.
October 10, 2025
Excellent read! Informative and well written. You will learn much about Jewish life and what it means to our Western way of life.
October 22, 2025
An entire book of propaganda. What did you expect from Josh Hammer?
October 29, 2025
Got it because Charlie Kirk was really excited about this. Sucked
Displaying 1 - 22 of 22 reviews