The Collapse of a Zionist Agreement Among American Jews: What Is Taking Shape Today.
Two years have passed since that horrific attack of October 7, 2023, which deeply affected Jewish communities worldwide more than any event following the creation of Israel as a nation.
For Jews the event proved shocking. For the Israeli government, the situation represented a significant embarrassment. The whole Zionist endeavor rested on the assumption which held that the Jewish state would ensure against things like this from ever happening again.
Military action seemed necessary. Yet the chosen course Israel pursued – the widespread destruction of Gaza, the deaths and injuries of tens of thousands non-combatants – was a choice. This particular approach complicated the way numerous US Jewish community members processed the attack that set it in motion, and it now complicates the community's observance of the anniversary. In what way can people grieve and remember an atrocity against your people during a catastrophe being inflicted upon other individuals connected to their community?
The Challenge of Mourning
The difficulty in grieving stems from the reality that no agreement exists regarding what any of this means. Indeed, within US Jewish circles, the last two years have witnessed the collapse of a decades-long consensus on Zionism itself.
The beginnings of a Zionist consensus among American Jewry extends as far back as a 1915 essay written by a legal scholar who would later become Supreme Court judge Justice Brandeis named “The Jewish Question; Finding Solutions”. Yet the unity really takes hold after the 1967 conflict that year. Before then, American Jewry housed a fragile but stable parallel existence among different factions which maintained diverse perspectives about the necessity for a Jewish nation – Zionists, neutral parties and opponents.
Historical Context
Such cohabitation persisted throughout the mid-twentieth century, within remaining elements of leftist Jewish organizations, through the non-aligned American Jewish Committee, in the anti-Zionist American Council for Judaism and comparable entities. For Louis Finkelstein, the head of the Jewish Theological Seminary, pro-Israel ideology was primarily theological rather than political, and he did not permit performance of Israel's anthem, the Israeli national anthem, during seminary ceremonies in those years. Additionally, support for Israel the main element for contemporary Orthodox communities prior to that war. Jewish identitarian alternatives coexisted.
Yet after Israel routed neighboring countries in that war in 1967, seizing land including Palestinian territories, Gaza Strip, Golan Heights and Jerusalem's eastern sector, US Jewish relationship to the nation underwent significant transformation. Israel’s victory, coupled with longstanding fears regarding repeated persecution, led to a growing belief in the country’s critical importance within Jewish identity, and created pride for its strength. Discourse concerning the “miraculous” quality of the outcome and the freeing of territory provided the Zionist project a theological, almost redemptive, importance. In those heady years, much of the remaining ambivalence regarding Zionism disappeared. In the early 1970s, Writer the commentator stated: “Everyone supports Zionism today.”
The Agreement and Its Limits
The pro-Israel agreement excluded Haredi Jews – who generally maintained a nation should only be established through traditional interpretation of redemption – however joined Reform Judaism, Conservative Judaism, contemporary Orthodox and most non-affiliated Jews. The predominant version of this agreement, what became known as left-leaning Zionism, was founded on a belief regarding Israel as a progressive and liberal – while majority-Jewish – state. Many American Jews viewed the administration of local, Syria's and Egyptian lands after 1967 as provisional, assuming that a solution was imminent that would ensure Jewish demographic dominance in pre-1967 Israel and regional acceptance of Israel.
Two generations of American Jews grew up with support for Israel an essential component of their identity as Jews. The nation became an important element of Jewish education. Israeli national day evolved into a religious observance. Israeli flags adorned many temples. Seasonal activities integrated with Israeli songs and learning of contemporary Hebrew, with Israeli guests instructing American teenagers Israeli customs. Travel to Israel increased and reached new heights with Birthright Israel in 1999, when a free trip to the country was offered to young American Jews. The nation influenced almost the entirety of Jewish American identity.
Evolving Situation
Paradoxically, in these decades following the war, Jewish Americans became adept at religious pluralism. Tolerance and dialogue among different Jewish movements increased.
Except when it came to Zionism and Israel – that represented tolerance reached its limit. Individuals might align with a rightwing Zionist or a leftwing Zionist, however endorsement of the nation as a Jewish state remained unquestioned, and challenging that narrative categorized you outside the consensus – outside the community, as a Jewish periodical labeled it in a piece that year.
However currently, during of the ruin in Gaza, starvation, dead and orphaned children and anger about the rejection of many fellow Jews who refuse to recognize their responsibility, that agreement has collapsed. The moderate Zionist position {has lost|no longer