A Dissolution of the Pro-Israel Agreement Among US Jews: What Is Emerging Now.

Two years have passed since the mass murder of 7 October 2023, which deeply affected global Jewish populations like no other occurrence following the founding of the Jewish state.

Within Jewish communities it was shocking. For the Israeli government, the situation represented a profound disgrace. The whole Zionist movement had been established on the presumption which held that the nation would ensure against things like this from ever happening again.

A response appeared unavoidable. However, the particular response undertaken by Israel – the obliteration of Gaza, the casualties of numerous non-combatants – constituted a specific policy. This selected path created complexity in the perspective of many US Jewish community members understood the initial assault that triggered it, and presently makes difficult the community's commemoration of the day. In what way can people grieve and remember a horrific event affecting their nation in the midst of an atrocity experienced by another people in your name?

The Complexity of Mourning

The complexity of mourning lies in the circumstance where little unity prevails regarding the implications of these developments. Indeed, within US Jewish circles, the last two years have seen the collapse of a half-century-old consensus regarding Zionism.

The origins of a Zionist consensus within US Jewish communities can be traced to an early twentieth-century publication written by a legal scholar who would later become high court jurist Louis D. Brandeis called “The Jewish Problem; How to Solve it”. Yet the unity truly solidified subsequent to the six-day war in 1967. Previously, Jewish Americans maintained a fragile but stable coexistence between groups that had a range of views concerning the need for Israel – Zionists, non-Zionists and opponents.

Previous Developments

That coexistence persisted through the mid-twentieth century, through surviving aspects of socialist Jewish movements, in the non-Zionist Jewish communal organization, among the opposing Jewish organization and comparable entities. For Louis Finkelstein, the leader of the Jewish Theological Seminary, pro-Israel ideology was more spiritual instead of governmental, and he forbade performance of Israel's anthem, the national song, at JTS ordinations during that period. Furthermore, Zionist ideology the central focus of Modern Orthodoxy prior to the 1967 conflict. Alternative Jewish perspectives coexisted.

Yet after Israel overcame neighboring countries in that war that year, taking control of areas comprising Palestinian territories, Gaza, Golan Heights and Jerusalem's eastern sector, US Jewish relationship to the nation underwent significant transformation. The triumphant outcome, coupled with enduring anxieties of a “second Holocaust”, produced a growing belief about the nation's essential significance for Jewish communities, and generated admiration regarding its endurance. Discourse about the “miraculous” nature of the victory and the “liberation” of land assigned the movement a religious, even messianic, importance. In that triumphant era, considerable existing hesitation about Zionism vanished. In the early 1970s, Publication editor Norman Podhoretz stated: “Everyone supports Zionism today.”

The Unity and Restrictions

The Zionist consensus left out Haredi Jews – who generally maintained Israel should only be ushered in through traditional interpretation of the messiah – but united Reform Judaism, Conservative, Modern Orthodox and the majority of non-affiliated Jews. The predominant version of this agreement, later termed left-leaning Zionism, was founded on a belief in Israel as a democratic and liberal – while majority-Jewish – country. Many American Jews viewed the control of Arab, Syrian and Egyptian lands after 1967 as temporary, believing that a solution was forthcoming that would maintain a Jewish majority in pre-1967 Israel and regional acceptance of Israel.

Two generations of Jewish Americans grew up with Zionism an essential component of their Jewish identity. The nation became a central part of Jewish education. Yom Ha'atzmaut became a Jewish holiday. Blue and white banners adorned religious institutions. Summer camps were permeated with national melodies and the study of modern Hebrew, with Israeli guests and teaching US young people Israeli culture. Trips to the nation grew and achieved record numbers with Birthright Israel by 1999, offering complimentary travel to the nation was offered to young American Jews. The nation influenced virtually all areas of the American Jewish experience.

Changing Dynamics

Interestingly, during this period after 1967, US Jewish communities developed expertise regarding denominational coexistence. Tolerance and communication across various Jewish groups increased.

Except when it came to the Israeli situation – that’s where tolerance ended. You could be a rightwing Zionist or a leftwing Zionist, yet backing Israel as a majority-Jewish country remained unquestioned, and questioning that position placed you outside mainstream views – a non-conformist, as Tablet magazine termed it in a piece that year.

However currently, during of the devastation within Gaza, starvation, young victims and outrage regarding the refusal by numerous Jewish individuals who refuse to recognize their complicity, that consensus has disintegrated. The moderate Zionist position {has lost|no longer