🔗 Share this article

It has been the deadly assault of October 7, 2023, which shook world Jewry unlike anything else since the establishment of the state of Israel.

For Jews the event proved profoundly disturbing. For the state of Israel, the situation represented a profound disgrace. The entire Zionist project rested on the presumption which held that the Jewish state could stop similar tragedies from ever happening again.

Some form of retaliation appeared unavoidable. Yet the chosen course that Israel implemented – the obliteration of Gaza, the casualties of tens of thousands non-combatants – constituted a specific policy. And this choice complicated the way numerous American Jews grappled with the attack that precipitated the response, and presently makes difficult the community's remembrance of that date. How can someone grieve and remember a tragedy against your people while simultaneously devastation done to another people connected to their community?

The Challenge of Mourning

The challenge surrounding remembrance exists because of the fact that there is no consensus about the significance of these events. In fact, for the American Jewish community, the recent twenty-four months have experienced the disintegration of a half-century-old consensus on Zionism itself.

The early development of a Zionist consensus within US Jewish communities extends as far back as an early twentieth-century publication written by a legal scholar subsequently appointed supreme court justice Louis D. Brandeis named “The Jewish Problem; How to Solve it”. Yet the unity truly solidified subsequent to the 1967 conflict in 1967. Previously, Jewish Americans housed a vulnerable but enduring parallel existence among different factions that had different opinions about the need for a Jewish nation – pro-Israel advocates, non-Zionists and anti-Zionists.

Historical Context

This parallel existence persisted during the post-war decades, within remaining elements of socialist Jewish movements, through the non-aligned American Jewish Committee, within the critical American Council for Judaism and comparable entities. For Louis Finkelstein, the head at JTS, the Zionist movement had greater religious significance rather than political, and he forbade singing Israel's anthem, the Israeli national anthem, at JTS ordinations in those years. Nor were Zionism and pro-Israelism the central focus for contemporary Orthodox communities prior to that war. Alternative Jewish perspectives coexisted.

But after Israel routed its neighbors in that war in 1967, taking control of areas comprising Palestinian territories, Gaza, Golan Heights and East Jerusalem, US Jewish perspective on the country underwent significant transformation. The triumphant outcome, along with persistent concerns of a “second Holocaust”, led to a developing perspective regarding Israel's essential significance for Jewish communities, and a source of pride in its resilience. Discourse about the “miraculous” aspect of the outcome and the reclaiming of territory provided Zionism a theological, potentially salvific, importance. In those heady years, a significant portion of previous uncertainty toward Israel disappeared. In that decade, Publication editor Podhoretz declared: “We are all Zionists now.”

The Consensus and Its Limits

The pro-Israel agreement left out the ultra-Orthodox – who generally maintained Israel should only emerge by a traditional rendering of redemption – yet included Reform, Conservative, contemporary Orthodox and most non-affiliated Jews. The most popular form of the consensus, what became known as progressive Zionism, was founded on a belief about the nation as a progressive and liberal – though Jewish-centered – country. Many American Jews saw the control of local, Syria's and Egypt's territories post-1967 as not permanent, assuming that a solution would soon emerge that would ensure Jewish demographic dominance within Israel's original borders and neighbor recognition of the nation.

Several cohorts of American Jews were thus brought up with support for Israel an essential component of their identity as Jews. The nation became an important element of Jewish education. Yom Ha'atzmaut evolved into a religious observance. Blue and white banners decorated most synagogues. Summer camps became infused with national melodies and education of contemporary Hebrew, with Israeli guests instructing American teenagers national traditions. Visits to Israel increased and reached new heights via educational trips in 1999, providing no-cost visits to Israel became available to young American Jews. The state affected nearly every aspect of US Jewish life.

Changing Dynamics

Interestingly, during this period after 1967, US Jewish communities developed expertise at religious pluralism. Tolerance and communication between Jewish denominations grew.

Yet concerning Zionism and Israel – that represented pluralism found its boundary. Individuals might align with a right-leaning advocate or a leftwing Zionist, however endorsement of the nation as a Jewish state remained unquestioned, and challenging that position placed you outside the consensus – outside the community, as a Jewish periodical described it in writing recently.

However currently, amid of the destruction within Gaza, starvation, young victims and anger about the rejection within Jewish communities who avoid admitting their involvement, that unity has broken down. The moderate Zionist position {has lost|no longer