🔗 Share this article

Two years have passed since that deadly assault of 7 October 2023, an event that profoundly impacted Jewish communities worldwide more than any event since the establishment of the state of Israel.

For Jews the event proved deeply traumatic. For the Israeli government, the situation represented a profound disgrace. The entire Zionist project had been established on the assumption that Israel could stop things like this occurring in the future.

A response seemed necessary. However, the particular response undertaken by Israel – the comprehensive devastation of the Gaza Strip, the deaths and injuries of many thousands non-combatants – represented a decision. This particular approach created complexity in the perspective of many US Jewish community members grappled with the attack that triggered it, and presently makes difficult their remembrance of the anniversary. In what way can people mourn and commemorate an atrocity against your people while simultaneously devastation experienced by another people attributed to their identity?

The Challenge of Mourning

The challenge surrounding remembrance exists because of the reality that little unity prevails about the implications of these developments. In fact, for the American Jewish community, the last two years have witnessed the collapse of a fifty-year unity regarding Zionism.

The origins of Zionist agreement within US Jewish communities extends as far back as writings from 1915 by the lawyer who would later become high court jurist Louis Brandeis titled “The Jewish Problem; Addressing the Challenge”. However, the agreement really takes hold subsequent to the Six-Day War in 1967. Earlier, American Jewry contained a fragile but stable parallel existence between groups holding different opinions concerning the requirement for a Jewish nation – pro-Israel advocates, neutral parties and anti-Zionists.

Historical Context

This parallel existence persisted during the 1950s and 60s, in remnants of leftist Jewish organizations, in the non-Zionist Jewish communal organization, within the critical religious group and similar institutions. For Louis Finkelstein, the head at JTS, Zionism was primarily theological instead of governmental, and he did not permit the singing of Hatikvah, Hatikvah, at religious school events in the early 1960s. Furthermore, support for Israel the central focus of Modern Orthodoxy before the six-day war. Jewish identitarian alternatives remained present.

But after Israel routed adjacent nations in the six-day war during that period, seizing land including the West Bank, Gaza Strip, the Golan and Jerusalem's eastern sector, the American Jewish relationship to the country evolved considerably. The triumphant outcome, coupled with persistent concerns regarding repeated persecution, produced a growing belief regarding Israel's critical importance for Jewish communities, and generated admiration regarding its endurance. Language concerning the extraordinary nature of the success and the reclaiming of land provided the movement a religious, even messianic, significance. In that triumphant era, much of existing hesitation toward Israel vanished. In the early 1970s, Commentary magazine editor Podhoretz famously proclaimed: “We are all Zionists now.”

The Agreement and Restrictions

The Zionist consensus did not include the ultra-Orthodox – who generally maintained a Jewish state should only be ushered in through traditional interpretation of the Messiah – but united Reform, Conservative, Modern Orthodox and most unaffiliated individuals. The predominant version of the consensus, identified as progressive Zionism, was established on the idea in Israel as a progressive and democratic – though Jewish-centered – country. Many American Jews considered the control of Palestinian, Syrian and Egypt's territories following the war as not permanent, thinking that a solution was imminent that would guarantee a Jewish majority within Israel's original borders and regional acceptance of Israel.

Several cohorts of Jewish Americans were thus brought up with support for Israel a fundamental aspect of their identity as Jews. Israel became a central part within religious instruction. Israeli national day turned into a celebration. Israeli flags adorned many temples. Seasonal activities integrated with Hebrew music and education of contemporary Hebrew, with visitors from Israel and teaching American youth Israeli culture. Travel to Israel expanded and achieved record numbers via educational trips during that year, when a free trip to the country became available to young American Jews. The state affected almost the entirety of the American Jewish experience.

Shifting Landscape

Ironically, in these decades post-1967, Jewish Americans became adept in religious diversity. Acceptance and communication among different Jewish movements increased.

Except when it came to Zionism and Israel – that represented tolerance found its boundary. You could be a right-leaning advocate or a liberal advocate, but support for Israel as a Jewish homeland was a given, and questioning that position positioned you outside mainstream views – an “Un-Jew”, as a Jewish periodical termed it in an essay that year.

However currently, amid of the devastation of Gaza, food shortages, child casualties and frustration about the rejection of many fellow Jews who avoid admitting their complicity, that unity has disintegrated. The centrist pro-Israel view {has lost|no longer