🔗 Share this article

Marking two years after that deadly assault of the events of October 7th, which shook global Jewish populations like no other occurrence since the founding of the Jewish state.

Within Jewish communities it was shocking. For the Israeli government, it was a significant embarrassment. The whole Zionist endeavor had been established on the assumption which held that the Jewish state would prevent similar tragedies from ever happening again.

Military action was inevitable. But the response that Israel implemented – the widespread destruction of Gaza, the casualties of numerous non-combatants – was a choice. And this choice made more difficult the perspective of many US Jewish community members processed the attack that set it in motion, and currently challenges the community's commemoration of that date. How can someone grieve and remember an atrocity targeting their community while simultaneously an atrocity done to other individuals attributed to their identity?

The Difficulty of Mourning

The complexity of mourning exists because of the fact that there is no consensus about what any of this means. Indeed, among Jewish Americans, this two-year period have witnessed the collapse of a decades-long agreement regarding Zionism.

The origins of pro-Israel unity among American Jewry extends as far back as writings from 1915 authored by an attorney and then future high court jurist Louis Brandeis titled “The Jewish Problem; Addressing the Challenge”. But the consensus really takes hold subsequent to the 1967 conflict during 1967. Before then, Jewish Americans maintained a vulnerable but enduring coexistence across various segments holding a range of views concerning the requirement for a Jewish nation – Zionists, non-Zionists and opponents.

Historical Context

Such cohabitation endured through the post-war decades, through surviving aspects of leftist Jewish organizations, within the neutral US Jewish group, among the opposing American Council for Judaism and similar institutions. For Louis Finkelstein, the head of the Jewish Theological Seminary, pro-Israel ideology was more spiritual rather than political, and he prohibited singing the Israeli national anthem, the Israeli national anthem, at religious school events in the early 1960s. Additionally, Zionism and pro-Israelism the central focus of Modern Orthodoxy prior to that war. Different Jewish identity models remained present.

However following Israel defeated neighboring countries in the six-day war that year, seizing land comprising Palestinian territories, Gaza Strip, Golan Heights and East Jerusalem, the American Jewish connection with the country changed dramatically. Israel’s victory, coupled with persistent concerns about another genocide, led to an increasing conviction about the nation's vital role for Jewish communities, and a source of pride regarding its endurance. Discourse concerning the extraordinary aspect of the outcome and the reclaiming of areas provided the movement a theological, even messianic, meaning. In that triumphant era, considerable previous uncertainty toward Israel dissipated. During the seventies, Commentary magazine editor Norman Podhoretz declared: “We are all Zionists now.”

The Unity and Its Boundaries

The Zionist consensus excluded strictly Orthodox communities – who typically thought a Jewish state should only be established via conventional understanding of the messiah – however joined Reform Judaism, Conservative, Modern Orthodox and the majority of non-affiliated Jews. The most popular form of this agreement, identified as liberal Zionism, was founded on the idea about the nation as a liberal and democratic – while majority-Jewish – state. Numerous US Jews considered the administration of Arab, Syria's and Egyptian lands post-1967 as not permanent, assuming that an agreement would soon emerge that would guarantee Jewish population majority in Israel proper and regional acceptance of Israel.

Two generations of US Jews were raised with support for Israel a fundamental aspect of their Jewish identity. The state transformed into a central part within religious instruction. Israeli national day evolved into a religious observance. National symbols adorned many temples. Summer camps were permeated with national melodies and learning of the language, with Israeli guests and teaching American youth Israeli culture. Trips to the nation grew and reached new heights via educational trips in 1999, offering complimentary travel to the nation became available to Jewish young adults. Israel permeated almost the entirety of the American Jewish experience.

Evolving Situation

Ironically, during this period following the war, American Jewry grew skilled at religious pluralism. Tolerance and discussion among different Jewish movements grew.

Except when it came to the Israeli situation – that represented pluralism found its boundary. Individuals might align with a rightwing Zionist or a progressive supporter, however endorsement of the nation as a Jewish state remained unquestioned, and questioning that narrative categorized you outside mainstream views – an “Un-Jew”, as a Jewish periodical described it in writing that year.

Yet presently, under the weight of the devastation within Gaza, famine, young victims and anger about the rejection of many fellow Jews who avoid admitting their involvement, that unity has collapsed. The liberal Zionist “center” {has lost|no longer