🔗 Share this article The Collapse of a Zionist Consensus Within US Jewish Community: What's Emerging Now. Marking two years after that mass murder of the events of October 7th, which deeply affected global Jewish populations unlike anything else since the creation of the state of Israel. Within Jewish communities the event proved shocking. For Israel as a nation, the situation represented a significant embarrassment. The entire Zionist movement was founded on the presumption that the Jewish state would ensure against similar tragedies occurring in the future. Military action appeared unavoidable. Yet the chosen course Israel pursued – the comprehensive devastation of Gaza, the killing and maiming of many thousands ordinary people – represented a decision. And this choice complicated the perspective of many US Jewish community members understood the October 7th events that triggered it, and presently makes difficult their remembrance of the day. How does one mourn and commemorate a tragedy against your people during devastation being inflicted upon a different population attributed to their identity? The Challenge of Grieving The difficulty in grieving exists because of the reality that no agreement exists about the implications of these developments. Actually, for the American Jewish community, the last two years have seen the breakdown of a fifty-year consensus on Zionism itself. The beginnings of pro-Israel unity among American Jewry dates back to a 1915 essay written by a legal scholar subsequently appointed high court jurist Louis D. Brandeis titled “The Jewish Problem; Finding Solutions”. However, the agreement truly solidified following the six-day war during 1967. Earlier, US Jewish communities maintained a delicate yet functioning coexistence across various segments which maintained different opinions concerning the necessity for Israel – Zionists, neutral parties and opponents. Previous Developments This parallel existence continued throughout the 1950s and 60s, through surviving aspects of socialist Jewish movements, within the neutral Jewish communal organization, within the critical Jewish organization and comparable entities. For Louis Finkelstein, the leader of the Jewish Theological Seminary, pro-Israel ideology had greater religious significance instead of governmental, and he prohibited performance of the Israeli national anthem, the Israeli national anthem, during seminary ceremonies in the early 1960s. Additionally, Zionism and pro-Israelism the centerpiece of Modern Orthodoxy before that war. Different Jewish identity models remained present. But after Israel routed adjacent nations in that war that year, taking control of areas comprising the West Bank, Gaza, Golan Heights and Jerusalem's eastern sector, the American Jewish perspective on Israel evolved considerably. The military success, combined with longstanding fears of a “second Holocaust”, resulted in a developing perspective regarding Israel's critical importance to the Jewish people, and created pride regarding its endurance. Rhetoric regarding the extraordinary quality of the outcome and the reclaiming of land provided Zionism a religious, potentially salvific, significance. In those heady years, much of previous uncertainty about Zionism dissipated. In the early 1970s, Publication editor Norman Podhoretz declared: “Everyone supports Zionism today.” The Agreement and Its Boundaries The pro-Israel agreement left out the ultra-Orthodox – who generally maintained Israel should only emerge through traditional interpretation of redemption – yet included Reform, Conservative, contemporary Orthodox and most secular Jews. The predominant version of the unified position, identified as progressive Zionism, was founded on the idea about the nation as a democratic and free – albeit ethnocentric – state. Numerous US Jews viewed the administration of local, Syrian and Egypt's territories post-1967 as temporary, thinking that a resolution would soon emerge that would guarantee Jewish demographic dominance within Israel's original borders and regional acceptance of the state. Multiple generations of US Jews grew up with support for Israel a core part of their religious identity. The nation became an important element within religious instruction. Yom Ha'atzmaut evolved into a religious observance. National symbols were displayed in many temples. Seasonal activities became infused with national melodies and the study of the language, with Israelis visiting and teaching US young people Israeli customs. Trips to the nation expanded and reached new heights through Birthright programs in 1999, offering complimentary travel to Israel became available to US Jewish youth. The nation influenced almost the entirety of US Jewish life. Evolving Situation Interestingly, in these decades following the war, Jewish Americans grew skilled at religious pluralism. Acceptance and dialogue between Jewish denominations grew. However regarding support for Israel – that’s where diversity found its boundary. Individuals might align with a right-leaning advocate or a leftwing Zionist, yet backing Israel as a Jewish state remained unquestioned, and challenging that perspective placed you outside mainstream views – an “Un-Jew”, as one publication termed it in an essay in 2021. Yet presently, amid of the devastation of Gaza, starvation, dead and orphaned children and outrage about the rejection by numerous Jewish individuals who decline to acknowledge their responsibility, that agreement has broken down. The moderate Zionist position {has lost|no longer