🔗 Share this article

Marking two years after the deadly assault of 7 October 2023, which profoundly impacted world Jewry like no other occurrence since the creation of the Jewish state.

Within Jewish communities it was profoundly disturbing. For the Israeli government, the situation represented a significant embarrassment. The whole Zionist endeavor was founded on the presumption that Israel would prevent similar tragedies from ever happening again.

Military action appeared unavoidable. However, the particular response undertaken by Israel – the obliteration of Gaza, the deaths and injuries of many thousands ordinary people – was a choice. This selected path made more difficult the perspective of many US Jewish community members grappled with the attack that set it in motion, and presently makes difficult the community's commemoration of that date. How does one grieve and remember a horrific event against your people in the midst of devastation done to other individuals connected to their community?

The Challenge of Grieving

The challenge surrounding remembrance exists because of the reality that no agreement exists as to what any of this means. Indeed, among Jewish Americans, the last two years have seen the disintegration of a half-century-old agreement regarding Zionism.

The origins of a Zionist consensus across American Jewish populations can be traced to an early twentieth-century publication written by a legal scholar subsequently appointed Supreme Court judge Justice Brandeis titled “The Jewish Problem; How to Solve it”. However, the agreement became firmly established subsequent to the six-day war that year. Earlier, Jewish Americans housed a delicate yet functioning parallel existence among different factions which maintained different opinions regarding the necessity of a Jewish state – Zionists, neutral parties and opponents.

Background Information

Such cohabitation persisted through the 1950s and 60s, within remaining elements of Jewish socialism, in the non-Zionist Jewish communal organization, within the critical Jewish organization and similar institutions. Regarding Chancellor Finkelstein, the chancellor of the Jewish Theological Seminary, pro-Israel ideology was more spiritual instead of governmental, and he prohibited the singing of Israel's anthem, Hatikvah, during seminary ceremonies in the early 1960s. Furthermore, support for Israel the centerpiece within modern Orthodox Judaism until after that war. Alternative Jewish perspectives remained present.

However following Israel defeated adjacent nations in that war in 1967, seizing land comprising Palestinian territories, Gaza, the Golan and East Jerusalem, the American Jewish relationship to the nation changed dramatically. Israel’s victory, along with longstanding fears about another genocide, produced an increasing conviction about the nation's critical importance to the Jewish people, and created pride for its strength. Discourse concerning the remarkable nature of the outcome and the freeing of land provided the movement a spiritual, almost redemptive, significance. In those heady years, considerable the remaining ambivalence about Zionism disappeared. During the seventies, Publication editor Podhoretz famously proclaimed: “We are all Zionists now.”

The Consensus and Its Limits

The unified position excluded strictly Orthodox communities – who typically thought a nation should only be ushered in by a traditional rendering of the messiah – but united Reform Judaism, Conservative Judaism, Modern Orthodox and most secular Jews. The common interpretation of the consensus, identified as left-leaning Zionism, was based on the conviction regarding Israel as a democratic and liberal – while majority-Jewish – nation. Countless Jewish Americans viewed the control of Arab, Syrian and Egyptian lands after 1967 as provisional, assuming that a solution was imminent that would ensure Jewish demographic dominance in Israel proper and Middle Eastern approval of the nation.

Multiple generations of American Jews were thus brought up with Zionism an essential component of their Jewish identity. Israel became a central part within religious instruction. Israel’s Independence Day evolved into a religious observance. National symbols decorated many temples. Seasonal activities integrated with Hebrew music and education of the language, with Israeli guests educating American teenagers national traditions. Trips to the nation expanded and peaked via educational trips during that year, providing no-cost visits to Israel became available to young American Jews. The state affected virtually all areas of US Jewish life.

Shifting Landscape

Paradoxically, in these decades post-1967, Jewish Americans became adept in religious diversity. Tolerance and communication among different Jewish movements expanded.

Yet concerning support for Israel – that’s where pluralism ended. One could identify as a rightwing Zionist or a leftwing Zionist, but support for Israel as a Jewish state was assumed, and questioning that perspective categorized you beyond accepted boundaries – outside the community, as a Jewish periodical termed it in an essay in 2021.

However currently, during of the ruin within Gaza, famine, child casualties and anger regarding the refusal within Jewish communities who decline to acknowledge their involvement, that consensus has disintegrated. The moderate Zionist position {has lost|no longer