The Dissolution of a Zionist Agreement Among US Jewish Community: What Is Emerging Today.

It has been that horrific attack of the events of October 7th, an event that deeply affected Jewish communities worldwide unlike anything else following the founding of the Jewish state.

For Jews it was profoundly disturbing. For the state of Israel, the situation represented a significant embarrassment. The entire Zionist endeavor was founded on the presumption that Israel would prevent similar tragedies occurring in the future.

A response appeared unavoidable. Yet the chosen course that Israel implemented – the obliteration of the Gaza Strip, the deaths and injuries of many thousands of civilians – constituted a specific policy. And this choice complicated the way numerous US Jewish community members understood the October 7th events that set it in motion, and presently makes difficult the community's observance of the anniversary. In what way can people honor and reflect on an atrocity affecting their nation while simultaneously an atrocity being inflicted upon another people in your name?

The Complexity of Mourning

The challenge surrounding remembrance exists because of the reality that there is no consensus as to the implications of these developments. In fact, within US Jewish circles, the last two years have witnessed the disintegration of a decades-long agreement on Zionism itself.

The beginnings of a Zionist consensus within US Jewish communities dates back to writings from 1915 written by a legal scholar and then future high court jurist Justice Brandeis titled “Jewish Issues; Finding Solutions”. But the consensus truly solidified subsequent to the Six-Day War that year. Before then, Jewish Americans contained a delicate yet functioning parallel existence among different factions that had a range of views about the necessity for a Jewish nation – Zionists, non-Zionists and opponents.

Background Information

That coexistence endured during the post-war decades, in remnants of socialist Jewish movements, through the non-aligned American Jewish Committee, in the anti-Zionist American Council for Judaism and other organizations. In the view of Louis Finkelstein, the head of the theological institution, pro-Israel ideology had greater religious significance rather than political, and he did not permit performance of Israel's anthem, Hatikvah, during seminary ceremonies during that period. Furthermore, Zionist ideology the central focus for contemporary Orthodox communities prior to the 1967 conflict. Alternative Jewish perspectives coexisted.

Yet after Israel routed neighboring countries in that war that year, seizing land comprising the West Bank, Gaza, Golan Heights and Jerusalem's eastern sector, the American Jewish perspective on the country changed dramatically. The triumphant outcome, combined with persistent concerns regarding repeated persecution, led to an increasing conviction in the country’s vital role to the Jewish people, and created pride regarding its endurance. Rhetoric regarding the remarkable nature of the outcome and the “liberation” of territory provided Zionism a theological, almost redemptive, significance. In those heady years, much of the remaining ambivalence toward Israel disappeared. In the early 1970s, Commentary magazine editor Norman Podhoretz stated: “We are all Zionists now.”

The Agreement and Restrictions

The pro-Israel agreement did not include Haredi Jews – who generally maintained a nation should only be ushered in by a traditional rendering of the messiah – yet included Reform, Conservative, Modern Orthodox and nearly all non-affiliated Jews. The common interpretation of this agreement, what became known as liberal Zionism, was established on the idea about the nation as a liberal and democratic – albeit ethnocentric – nation. Countless Jewish Americans considered the occupation of Palestinian, Syria's and Egypt's territories post-1967 as temporary, thinking that a solution was imminent that would ensure Jewish population majority in pre-1967 Israel and Middle Eastern approval of the nation.

Two generations of US Jews grew up with Zionism a fundamental aspect of their identity as Jews. The nation became a central part in Jewish learning. Israel’s Independence Day turned into a celebration. Blue and white banners decorated most synagogues. Summer camps became infused with national melodies and the study of modern Hebrew, with visitors from Israel instructing US young people national traditions. Travel to Israel expanded and peaked with Birthright Israel by 1999, when a free trip to Israel was provided to young American Jews. The state affected virtually all areas of US Jewish life.

Changing Dynamics

Interestingly, during this period after 1967, Jewish Americans became adept regarding denominational coexistence. Open-mindedness and discussion among different Jewish movements expanded.

However regarding Zionism and Israel – there existed pluralism ended. One could identify as a conservative supporter or a leftwing Zionist, however endorsement of the nation as a Jewish homeland was a given, and challenging that position placed you beyond accepted boundaries – an “Un-Jew”, as one publication termed it in a piece in 2021.

But now, under the weight of the ruin of Gaza, food shortages, dead and orphaned children and frustration regarding the refusal within Jewish communities who avoid admitting their involvement, that consensus has disintegrated. The moderate Zionist position {has lost|no longer