A Breakdown of the Zionist Agreement Among US Jews: What's Emerging Today.
Two years have passed since the mass murder of 7 October 2023, which deeply affected global Jewish populations more than any event since the founding of the state of Israel.
For Jews it was profoundly disturbing. For Israel as a nation, it was deeply humiliating. The whole Zionist movement was founded on the assumption which held that the nation could stop things like this from ever happening again.
Military action seemed necessary. But the response undertaken by Israel – the comprehensive devastation of the Gaza Strip, the casualties of tens of thousands ordinary people – constituted a specific policy. And this choice complicated how many US Jewish community members processed the attack that triggered it, and presently makes difficult the community's observance of the anniversary. How does one mourn and commemorate a horrific event affecting their nation in the midst of devastation being inflicted upon a different population connected to their community?
The Complexity of Grieving
The complexity of mourning exists because of the circumstance where no agreement exists about the implications of these developments. Actually, among Jewish Americans, the recent twenty-four months have seen the disintegration of a decades-long agreement regarding Zionism.
The origins of pro-Israel unity among American Jewry dates back to a 1915 essay authored by an attorney who would later become high court jurist Louis D. Brandeis titled “Jewish Issues; How to Solve it”. But the consensus became firmly established subsequent to the six-day war that year. Previously, American Jewry maintained a delicate yet functioning parallel existence between groups that had different opinions regarding the need of a Jewish state – Zionists, non-Zionists and anti-Zionists.
Background Information
That coexistence endured throughout the 1950s and 60s, in remnants of Jewish socialism, in the non-Zionist Jewish communal organization, in the anti-Zionist American Council for Judaism and similar institutions. For Louis Finkelstein, the head at JTS, the Zionist movement was more spiritual rather than political, and he did not permit performance of the Israeli national anthem, Hatikvah, at JTS ordinations during that period. Furthermore, Zionist ideology the centerpiece within modern Orthodox Judaism prior to the six-day war. Different Jewish identity models existed alongside.
Yet after Israel routed neighboring countries in that war during that period, taking control of areas such as Palestinian territories, Gaza Strip, Golan Heights and Jerusalem's eastern sector, the American Jewish connection with Israel underwent significant transformation. The military success, along with enduring anxieties about another genocide, produced a developing perspective regarding Israel's essential significance to the Jewish people, and created pride regarding its endurance. Language about the remarkable nature of the success and the reclaiming of areas gave the Zionist project a theological, potentially salvific, significance. In that triumphant era, considerable previous uncertainty toward Israel disappeared. In the early 1970s, Writer Norman Podhoretz declared: “Everyone supports Zionism today.”
The Unity and Its Limits
The pro-Israel agreement left out strictly Orthodox communities – who largely believed Israel should only emerge through traditional interpretation of the Messiah – yet included Reform Judaism, Conservative Judaism, Modern Orthodox and the majority of unaffiliated individuals. The common interpretation of the consensus, identified as liberal Zionism, was established on a belief about the nation as a democratic and liberal – albeit ethnocentric – country. Numerous US Jews viewed the control of local, Syrian and Egyptian lands after 1967 as not permanent, thinking that an agreement was forthcoming that would guarantee a Jewish majority within Israel's original borders and neighbor recognition of the nation.
Several cohorts of American Jews grew up with support for Israel an essential component of their religious identity. Israel became an important element of Jewish education. Israeli national day turned into a celebration. Blue and white banners decorated most synagogues. Summer camps became infused with Hebrew music and learning of contemporary Hebrew, with visitors from Israel and teaching US young people Israeli culture. Travel to Israel grew and peaked via educational trips by 1999, when a free trip to the country was offered to Jewish young adults. The nation influenced nearly every aspect of the American Jewish experience.
Changing Dynamics
Interestingly, throughout these years following the war, American Jewry became adept regarding denominational coexistence. Acceptance and dialogue across various Jewish groups expanded.
Except when it came to Zionism and Israel – there existed tolerance found its boundary. You could be a rightwing Zionist or a progressive supporter, however endorsement of the nation as a Jewish homeland was a given, and questioning that perspective positioned you outside mainstream views – outside the community, as a Jewish periodical described it in a piece recently.
Yet presently, during of the devastation within Gaza, food shortages, dead and orphaned children and frustration about the rejection within Jewish communities who refuse to recognize their involvement, that agreement has broken down. The moderate Zionist position {has lost|no longer
