A Breakdown of a Pro-Israel Consensus Within American Jewish Community: What Is Taking Shape Now.

Two years have passed since the mass murder of the events of October 7th, which profoundly impacted global Jewish populations like no other occurrence since the creation of the Jewish state.

Among Jewish people it was profoundly disturbing. For the state of Israel, the situation represented a profound disgrace. The entire Zionist movement rested on the belief which held that Israel would ensure against things like this occurring in the future.

Some form of retaliation was inevitable. However, the particular response that Israel implemented – the widespread destruction of the Gaza Strip, the deaths and injuries of many thousands of civilians – represented a decision. And this choice complicated how many Jewish Americans understood the October 7th events that precipitated the response, and currently challenges the community's observance of that date. In what way can people honor and reflect on a tragedy affecting their nation in the midst of an atrocity done to another people connected to their community?

The Complexity of Grieving

The challenge surrounding remembrance exists because of the reality that there is no consensus about what any of this means. Indeed, among Jewish Americans, the recent twenty-four months have seen the disintegration of a half-century-old agreement on Zionism itself.

The origins of Zionist agreement across American Jewish populations dates back to a 1915 essay authored by an attorney who would later become supreme court justice Justice Brandeis titled “The Jewish Question; Addressing the Challenge”. But the consensus truly solidified after the six-day war in 1967. Before then, US Jewish communities contained a delicate yet functioning cohabitation between groups that had different opinions concerning the necessity of a Jewish state – pro-Israel advocates, non-Zionists and anti-Zionists.

Historical Context

That coexistence endured during the 1950s and 60s, through surviving aspects of leftist Jewish organizations, in the non-Zionist American Jewish Committee, among the opposing American Council for Judaism and other organizations. Regarding Chancellor Finkelstein, the chancellor of the Jewish Theological Seminary, pro-Israel ideology was primarily theological than political, and he forbade singing the Israeli national anthem, the Israeli national anthem, during seminary ceremonies in those years. Nor were Zionism and pro-Israelism the central focus for contemporary Orthodox communities until after that war. Different Jewish identity models remained present.

Yet after Israel defeated neighboring countries during the 1967 conflict during that period, seizing land comprising Palestinian territories, Gaza Strip, Golan Heights and Jerusalem's eastern sector, the American Jewish connection with Israel evolved considerably. Israel’s victory, combined with persistent concerns regarding repeated persecution, produced a growing belief regarding Israel's vital role to the Jewish people, and generated admiration regarding its endurance. Rhetoric regarding the “miraculous” aspect of the outcome and the “liberation” of territory gave the movement a spiritual, even messianic, significance. In that triumphant era, a significant portion of previous uncertainty about Zionism dissipated. During the seventies, Publication editor Podhoretz stated: “We are all Zionists now.”

The Agreement and Restrictions

The pro-Israel agreement left out strictly Orthodox communities – who typically thought a Jewish state should only be established by a traditional rendering of the Messiah – yet included Reform Judaism, Conservative Judaism, contemporary Orthodox and nearly all unaffiliated individuals. The predominant version of the consensus, what became known as liberal Zionism, was based on the conviction regarding Israel as a democratic and free – though Jewish-centered – state. Many American Jews considered the administration of local, Syria's and Egyptian lands post-1967 as not permanent, assuming that an agreement would soon emerge that would ensure Jewish demographic dominance within Israel's original borders and regional acceptance of the nation.

Two generations of American Jews were raised with support for Israel a fundamental aspect of their religious identity. The state transformed into an important element within religious instruction. Israel’s Independence Day evolved into a religious observance. Blue and white banners adorned most synagogues. Summer camps were permeated with Hebrew music and education of modern Hebrew, with visitors from Israel instructing US young people Israeli culture. Travel to Israel grew and peaked with Birthright Israel in 1999, providing no-cost visits to Israel was offered to US Jewish youth. The nation influenced virtually all areas of US Jewish life.

Changing Dynamics

Interestingly, throughout these years after 1967, Jewish Americans became adept in religious diversity. Acceptance and communication across various Jewish groups grew.

Yet concerning Zionism and Israel – that represented pluralism found its boundary. One could identify as a conservative supporter or a liberal advocate, however endorsement of the nation as a Jewish state was a given, and challenging that position placed you beyond accepted boundaries – outside the community, as Tablet magazine labeled it in writing that year.

But now, during of the ruin within Gaza, food shortages, dead and orphaned children and anger over the denial of many fellow Jews who avoid admitting their complicity, that consensus has collapsed. The moderate Zionist position {has lost|no longer