The Breakdown of a Zionist Agreement Within American Jews: What Is Emerging Now.
Marking two years after the mass murder of 7 October 2023, an event that shook global Jewish populations more than any event since the establishment of the Jewish state.
Among Jewish people it was deeply traumatic. For Israel as a nation, it was a significant embarrassment. The whole Zionist endeavor was founded on the belief which held that the Jewish state could stop such atrocities from ever happening again.
A response was inevitable. Yet the chosen course that Israel implemented – the obliteration of Gaza, the casualties of many thousands of civilians – was a choice. This particular approach complicated the way numerous American Jews understood the initial assault that precipitated the response, and presently makes difficult the community's observance of that date. How can someone honor and reflect on a horrific event against your people while simultaneously an atrocity being inflicted upon another people connected to their community?
The Challenge of Grieving
The challenge surrounding remembrance exists because of the circumstance where little unity prevails as to what any of this means. Actually, within US Jewish circles, the recent twenty-four months have experienced the breakdown of a decades-long consensus regarding Zionism.
The beginnings of pro-Israel unity among American Jewry dates back to an early twentieth-century publication written by a legal scholar who would later become high court jurist Justice Brandeis titled “The Jewish Question; How to Solve it”. But the consensus became firmly established following the 1967 conflict in 1967. Previously, Jewish Americans housed a fragile but stable coexistence among different factions which maintained different opinions concerning the necessity of a Jewish state – Zionists, neutral parties and anti-Zionists.
Historical Context
Such cohabitation continued during the mid-twentieth century, in remnants of socialist Jewish movements, through the non-aligned Jewish communal organization, within the critical religious group and other organizations. For Louis Finkelstein, the chancellor of the Jewish Theological Seminary, the Zionist movement had greater religious significance rather than political, and he prohibited the singing of the Israeli national anthem, the Israeli national anthem, at JTS ordinations during that period. Furthermore, Zionist ideology the central focus of Modern Orthodoxy until after the 1967 conflict. Different Jewish identity models existed alongside.
Yet after Israel defeated its neighbors during the 1967 conflict that year, seizing land comprising Palestinian territories, Gaza, the Golan and Jerusalem's eastern sector, US Jewish perspective on the nation changed dramatically. The triumphant outcome, along with persistent concerns about another genocide, led to a developing perspective regarding Israel's vital role for Jewish communities, and a source of pride in its resilience. Discourse concerning the remarkable aspect of the victory and the reclaiming of areas provided the movement a spiritual, potentially salvific, importance. During that enthusiastic period, a significant portion of previous uncertainty about Zionism dissipated. In the early 1970s, Publication editor Podhoretz declared: “Zionism unites us all.”
The Unity and Restrictions
The unified position did not include strictly Orthodox communities – who largely believed a Jewish state should only emerge by a traditional rendering of redemption – yet included Reform, Conservative Judaism, contemporary Orthodox and most non-affiliated Jews. The common interpretation of this agreement, later termed left-leaning Zionism, was founded on the idea regarding Israel as a progressive and liberal – albeit ethnocentric – nation. Numerous US Jews considered the occupation of Arab, Syria's and Egypt's territories following the war as provisional, assuming that a resolution was forthcoming that would ensure Jewish population majority within Israel's original borders and regional acceptance of Israel.
Several cohorts of US Jews were thus brought up with Zionism an essential component of their identity as Jews. Israel became a key component within religious instruction. Yom Ha'atzmaut evolved into a religious observance. National symbols adorned many temples. Summer camps were permeated with national melodies and education of the language, with Israelis visiting and teaching American teenagers Israeli culture. Travel to Israel grew and peaked through Birthright programs by 1999, when a free trip to the country became available to US Jewish youth. The nation influenced nearly every aspect of Jewish American identity.
Changing Dynamics
Ironically, throughout these years post-1967, US Jewish communities became adept in religious diversity. Acceptance and dialogue among different Jewish movements expanded.
Except when it came to support for Israel – that represented tolerance ended. Individuals might align with a rightwing Zionist or a liberal advocate, yet backing Israel as a Jewish state remained unquestioned, and questioning that narrative positioned you outside mainstream views – a non-conformist, as Tablet magazine described it in an essay recently.
However currently, during of the devastation within Gaza, famine, young victims and anger over the denial of many fellow Jews who refuse to recognize their complicity, that consensus has collapsed. The liberal Zionist “center” {has lost|no longer
