In the Shadow of Hitler: Alabama's Jews, the Second World War, and the Holocaust

7. Postwar Alabama

7 Postwar Ala­bama The end of the war did not end disagreements over Zionism, as the conflict between Zionists and anti-­ Zionists of the ACJ continued to divide the Jewish communities in Birmingham and Montgomery and would continue to do so until the establishment of the state of Israel in 1948. In some instances it endured even longer. The differences between Zionists and anti-­ Zionists, although significant, did not prevent the Jewish communities from working together once again to assist the displaced persons, most of whom were Holocaust survivors, find a new home in Ala­ bama, recalling the earlier cooperative effort to resettle prewar refugees from Nazi Germany. At the same time, veterans returned to civilian life, trying to begin or to continue their lives interrupted by war. In doing so they began to fill new leadership roles in the Jewish community over the course of the following decade that helped to fill the breach earlier religious and cultural differences created, as well as the festering contention over Zionism. Controversy and conflict over Zionism could be felt in many of the cities and small towns in the South and elsewhere in America. In Ala­ bama the clash between those associated with the ACJ and the Zionists was most apparent in the larger cities of Birmingham and Montgomery. Throughout the rest of the state, the classical Reform tradition dominated the smaller Jewish congregations, and the lack of sufficient numbers of East­ ern European Jews in these small towns prevented any cultural controversies such as Zionism from becoming problematic issues. In Mobile, the younger, more vibrant East­ ern European Jews wholeheartedly supported Zionism, while the older Reform congregation maintained a passive, if ambivalent, attitude toward it. Zionism, however, never became a contentious issue in the port city, despite the clear cultural divide, largely due to the support of influential Reform Jews such Leo Brown and Sol Kahn for the Zionist cause. Nowhere in Ala­bama was the ACJ more influential than in Montgomery, where one observer noted that “there is a considerable amount of anti-­Zionist Postwar Alabama / 207 feeling and strong sentiment in favor of the Ameri­ can Council for Judaism.” Although the ACJ purportedly promoted the tenets of classical Reform Judaism , it offered little in the way of a positive program, and local ACJ chapters , such as the one in Montgomery, did little more than oppose local Zionists . Such a situation did little to engender enthusiasm among Reform Jews. As Temple Beth-­ Or’s president, Henry A. Weil, also a member of the ACJ, reported in March 1946, “the lack of Zionism as a burning issue here in Montgomery probably accounts for the attitude of indifference in the Temple and its work.”1 Moreover, because the leadership of the federation was largely from Reform Jews who favored the council, it resisted any efforts it deemed sympathetic to the Zionist program. Ultimately this threatened the ability of the federation to function as an effective body. At the beginning of 1948, federation leaders continually postponed that year’s fund-­ raising drive, apparently being “unwilling to raise money for UPA.” As Beatrice Behrman reported, the Zionists finally “formed a committee headed by Nace Cohen— went to the Federation and [said] ‘We’re going to conduct a campaign— if you want to join, fine—if not, the h[ell] with you.’ In other words, they called their bluff. They made arrangements for an opening dinner . . . [and] the Weils and Loebs and Lobmans finally joined the campaign.”2 This did not mean that members of the federation could not work together , especially when the circumstance warranted. Montgomery’s Jews, in­ clud­ ing the factions associated with the council and Zionism, joined to support European Jews who had survived the war, whether through the resettlement of displaced persons or contributions to relief organizations. For instance, in Janu­ ary 1949, Temple Beth-­ Or was designated as “a collection depot for the JDC overseas relief supplies collection.” Both the NCJW and Hadassah led the collection program, and all of the city’s Jewish organizations contributed. “This collection is deemed urgent because of the terrifying winter faced by 1 ½ million of our European brethren and in the hope that we may stay the hand of death which hangs over them through cold, disease and starvation,” the notice for contributions read, “through the extra help of this supply collection it will be possible to bolster the diet of long-­ starved men and women in the former Nazi concentration camps...