🔗 Share this article

Marking two years after that horrific attack of October 7, 2023, which deeply affected world Jewry unlike anything else following the founding of the Jewish state.

Among Jewish people the event proved deeply traumatic. For the state of Israel, it was deeply humiliating. The whole Zionist endeavor had been established on the assumption which held that the nation would prevent things like this occurring in the future.

Some form of retaliation was inevitable. However, the particular response that Israel implemented – the widespread destruction of the Gaza Strip, the casualties of many thousands ordinary people – constituted a specific policy. This particular approach complicated how many US Jewish community members processed the October 7th events that precipitated the response, and presently makes difficult the community's commemoration of the anniversary. In what way can people grieve and remember an atrocity against your people in the midst of a catastrophe experienced by other individuals connected to their community?

The Difficulty of Grieving

The complexity in grieving exists because of the circumstance where no agreement exists regarding the implications of these developments. In fact, within US Jewish circles, this two-year period have seen the disintegration of a half-century-old unity on Zionism itself.

The early development of a Zionist consensus within US Jewish communities extends as far back as writings from 1915 written by a legal scholar and then future Supreme Court judge Justice Brandeis called “Jewish Issues; Finding Solutions”. Yet the unity became firmly established after the six-day war in 1967. Before then, US Jewish communities contained a vulnerable but enduring cohabitation across various segments that had diverse perspectives regarding the need for a Jewish nation – pro-Israel advocates, neutral parties and anti-Zionists.

Previous Developments

Such cohabitation continued through the 1950s and 60s, through surviving aspects of leftist Jewish organizations, in the non-Zionist American Jewish Committee, within the critical religious group and similar institutions. For Louis Finkelstein, the leader of the Jewish Theological Seminary, pro-Israel ideology had greater religious significance than political, and he did not permit singing the Israeli national anthem, the national song, during seminary ceremonies in the early 1960s. Nor were Zionist ideology the main element within modern Orthodox Judaism until after the six-day war. Different Jewish identity models existed alongside.

However following Israel routed neighboring countries in that war that year, seizing land including the West Bank, Gaza, the Golan and Jerusalem's eastern sector, the American Jewish connection with the nation evolved considerably. The military success, coupled with persistent concerns regarding repeated persecution, resulted in an increasing conviction about the nation's essential significance for Jewish communities, and created pride regarding its endurance. Discourse regarding the “miraculous” nature of the success and the freeing of land assigned Zionism a theological, almost redemptive, importance. In that triumphant era, much of previous uncertainty toward Israel dissipated. In the early 1970s, Commentary magazine editor the commentator stated: “Zionism unites us all.”

The Unity and Its Limits

The pro-Israel agreement left out the ultra-Orthodox – who typically thought a nation should only emerge through traditional interpretation of the Messiah – however joined Reform, Conservative Judaism, Modern Orthodox and nearly all unaffiliated individuals. The most popular form of this agreement, identified as progressive Zionism, was established on the conviction regarding Israel as a democratic and democratic – albeit ethnocentric – state. Many American Jews saw the occupation of Palestinian, Syrian and Egyptian lands following the war as provisional, thinking that a resolution was forthcoming that would guarantee a Jewish majority within Israel's original borders and regional acceptance of the state.

Multiple generations of US Jews were thus brought up with support for Israel a core part of their Jewish identity. The state transformed into a central part within religious instruction. Israeli national day became a Jewish holiday. Israeli flags adorned many temples. Youth programs were permeated with Hebrew music and the study of modern Hebrew, with Israelis visiting instructing US young people national traditions. Travel to Israel increased and reached new heights with Birthright Israel by 1999, providing no-cost visits to Israel became available to US Jewish youth. The nation influenced almost the entirety of US Jewish life.

Shifting Landscape

Paradoxically, throughout these years following the war, Jewish Americans grew skilled in religious diversity. Open-mindedness and dialogue across various Jewish groups increased.

Yet concerning the Israeli situation – there existed diversity ended. One could identify as a right-leaning advocate or a liberal advocate, yet backing Israel as a Jewish homeland was a given, and questioning that perspective categorized you outside the consensus – an “Un-Jew”, as one publication described it in a piece recently.

However currently, under the weight of the devastation of Gaza, famine, dead and orphaned children and frustration about the rejection of many fellow Jews who decline to acknowledge their complicity, that consensus has collapsed. The moderate Zionist position {has lost|no longer