We often joke in our Chosen Food course that every Jewish holyday could be summed up with the quip: "They tried to kill us.  They failed. Let’s eat."

Behind that old saw is the belief (backed by history) that the Jewish people have survived empires, expulsions, and attempted genocides. However, today, we face a different kind of existential threat—one that comes not from external enemies, but from within our own community.

Cross the threshold of any synagogue, Jewish community centre, or university Hillel today, and you'll likely encounter a tension unimaginable by previous generations. Jews no longer debate kashrut observance or the breadth and depth of religious practice that have long characterized Jewish life. Instead, we tear into each other about Israel’s policies and actions.  Is the preemptive attack actually preemptive or aggressive? Is the offensive actually defensive? Is it genocide - or is it antisemitic to say so?

I wrote a book in 2012 called End of the Jews: Radical Breaks, Remakes and What Comes Next as an exploration of past fracture moments, moments when a crisis threatened to destroy the Jewish people.  I demonstrated how, at each juncture, the “old” way of being Jewish did, in fact, end, and gave way to a new, more robust way of "Jewing."  Each time, the crisis was forced upon us, and each time, we emerged stronger.

Today, I fear that the conflict about Israel and Zionism will drive a wedge so deep into the very foundation of our community that it will tear apart the fabric of Jewish continuity itself.

Let’s look at the statistics first. They are sobering.

According to the 2020 Pew Research Study on American Jews, young American Jews are less emotionally attached to Israel than older ones. As of 2020, the study reveals, half of Jewish adults under age 30 describe themselves as very or somewhat emotionally attached to Israel (48%), compared with two-thirds of Jews ages 65 and older. Among Jews ages 50 and older, 51% say that caring about Israel is essential to what being Jewish means to them, and an additional 37% say it is important but not essential; just 10% say that caring about Israel is not important to them. By contrast, among Jewish adults under 30, one-third say that caring about Israel is essential (35%), and one-quarter (27%) say it’s not important to what being Jewish means to them.  The same pattern – lower levels of attachment to Israel among younger Jewish adults than among older ones – also was present in the 2013 survey.

It's not a stretch to posit a sharpening of the divide since October 8, 2023.

This isn't merely a matter of political preference, or generational divide —it represents what some scholars are calling the most serious internal challenge to Jewish unity since the destruction of the Second Temple.
Dr. Shaul Magid of Dartmouth College has written extensively about what he terms the "post-Zionist" Jewish identity emerging particularly among younger American Jews. In his 2021 book The Necessity of Exile, Magid argues that we're witnessing the birth of two distinct Jewish civilizations: one that sees Israel as central to Jewish identity and survival, and another that views Zionism as incompatible with Jewish ethical values.

Jewish Voice for Peace, an anti-Zionist Jewish organization is but one manifestation of this divide.  What was once a fringe group has grown into a movement with over 200,000 supporters. At the same time, organizations like StandWithUs continue to mobilize thousands of pro-Israel Jewish students on college campuses. The result? Jewish students increasingly find themselves on opposite sides of protest lines. One side dismisses the other as self-haters.  One side wonders where the other side went wrong.

Where campus Hillels across North America report increased attendance (and increasing polarization), some Jewish students have formed alternative organizations like "Open Hillel" (now known as "Judaism On Our Own Terms") that welcome non, anti- or "conditional" Zionist perspectives. The result is a fragmented Jewish student experience where young Jews often feel forced to choose sides in a conflict that seems to have no middle ground.

And what of the mainstream Jewish institutions?  Are they undergoing a similar fracturing?  Hardly.  Their response has been to harden their positions. The Jewish Federations of North America continue to make Israel advocacy a central pillar of their work, allocating millions of dollars annually to pro-Israel programming. Meanwhile, some Reform synagogues have begun hosting "difficult conversations" about Israel that sometimes devolve into heated confrontations between congregants. Are Jewish communities “excommunicating” members who hold different views on Israel?  Not really.  Not yet… but they are making those that hold different views look elsewhere for community.

This isn't the first time the Jewish people have faced an internal crisis of this magnitude. Our World Religions class spends considerable time exploring the fallout from the destruction of the Second Temple in 70 CE, which led to competing visions of Jewish survival—some advocating armed resistance, others embracing diaspora existence, still others seeking accommodation with Roman rule. Similarly, the Haskalah (Jewish Enlightenment) of the 18th and 19th centuries created deep rifts between traditional and modernizing Jews.

But this crisis feels different. It strikes at the heart of how Jews understand their place in the world after the Shoah. Since the late 1960s, Israel served as a unifying symbol of Jewish resilience and renewal. The fact that this symbol has become divisive represents a fundamental shift in Jewish consciousness.

The implications of this divisiveness extend far beyond political disagreement. Jewish philanthropy is fragmenting as donors refuse to support organizations that don't align with their views on Israel. Perhaps most troubling, young Jews are increasingly disengaging from Jewish life altogether rather than navigate these shark-filled waters.

What makes this schism particularly dangerous is that both sides claim to represent authentic Jewish values. Pro-Israel Jews point to the commandment to defend Jewish life and the historical necessity of Jewish sovereignty. Anti-Zionist Jews invoke the prophetic tradition of pursuing justice and the Jewish experience of oppression. Both sides can cite texts, tradition, and moral imperatives to support their positions.

This isn't a debate that can be resolved through better hasbara or more effective advocacy. It's a fundamental disagreement about what it means to be Jewish in the 21st century—and whether Jewish identity can survive if it becomes entirely untethered from the Jewish state.

The first step in addressing any crisis is acknowledging its severity.

The Jewish community can no longer afford to treat this as a temporary political disagreement that will resolve itself with time. The divide between Zionist and non/anti-/"conditional" Zionist Jews represents an existential challenge that requires urgent attention and creative solutions.

As I'll explore in Part 2 next week, the answer isn't choosing sides—it's finding ways to maintain Jewish unity while allowing space for diverse political perspectives. This will require rethinking Jewish education, reimagining community institutions, and returning to the textual and cultural traditions that have sustained the Jewish people through previous crises.

The stakes couldn't be higher.

The question now is whether we have the wisdom and courage to address it.

This article shares INSIGHTS into the types of topics we teach in our online high school courses.

Have we peaked your curiosity to learn more about our virtual school?

Previous Posts