🔗 Share this article

Two years have passed since that horrific attack of October 7, 2023, which deeply affected Jewish communities worldwide like no other occurrence following the establishment of the Jewish state.

For Jews the event proved deeply traumatic. For the Israeli government, it was deeply humiliating. The entire Zionist endeavor rested on the presumption which held that Israel would ensure against similar tragedies repeating.

Some form of retaliation was inevitable. However, the particular response Israel pursued – the comprehensive devastation of Gaza, the deaths and injuries of tens of thousands ordinary people – constituted a specific policy. This particular approach created complexity in the way numerous American Jews processed the initial assault that triggered it, and presently makes difficult their observance of the anniversary. How can someone honor and reflect on an atrocity against your people while simultaneously an atrocity done to another people attributed to their identity?

The Difficulty of Mourning

The difficulty surrounding remembrance exists because of the reality that no agreement exists about the significance of these events. In fact, within US Jewish circles, the last two years have seen the collapse of a half-century-old agreement on Zionism itself.

The beginnings of Zionist agreement among American Jewry can be traced to writings from 1915 authored by an attorney and then future high court jurist Louis D. Brandeis called “The Jewish Question; Addressing the Challenge”. But the consensus really takes hold following the 1967 conflict in 1967. Previously, American Jewry housed a vulnerable but enduring parallel existence between groups that had different opinions regarding the need of a Jewish state – Zionists, non-Zionists and anti-Zionists.

Background Information

That coexistence continued throughout the mid-twentieth century, within remaining elements of Jewish socialism, in the non-Zionist US Jewish group, in the anti-Zionist Jewish organization and other organizations. In the view of Louis Finkelstein, the leader at JTS, the Zionist movement was more spiritual than political, and he prohibited singing Hatikvah, Hatikvah, during seminary ceremonies during that period. Furthermore, support for Israel the main element of Modern Orthodoxy until after the six-day war. Different Jewish identity models existed alongside.

However following Israel defeated neighboring countries in the six-day war during that period, seizing land such as Palestinian territories, Gaza, the Golan and Jerusalem's eastern sector, US Jewish relationship to the country evolved considerably. The triumphant outcome, combined with persistent concerns about another genocide, resulted in an increasing conviction about the nation's critical importance to the Jewish people, and created pride in its resilience. Language concerning the “miraculous” quality of the outcome and the “liberation” of territory gave the movement a religious, almost redemptive, meaning. In that triumphant era, much of previous uncertainty about Zionism dissipated. During the seventies, Writer Podhoretz stated: “Zionism unites us all.”

The Agreement and Restrictions

The pro-Israel agreement excluded the ultra-Orthodox – who largely believed a Jewish state should only be established by a traditional rendering of the Messiah – however joined Reform Judaism, Conservative, Modern Orthodox and nearly all secular Jews. The predominant version of the consensus, identified as progressive Zionism, was established on the conviction about the nation as a progressive and free – though Jewish-centered – country. Numerous US Jews considered the occupation of Palestinian, Syria's and Egyptian lands after 1967 as not permanent, thinking that a resolution was imminent that would guarantee Jewish population majority in pre-1967 Israel and Middle Eastern approval of Israel.

Two generations of American Jews grew up with support for Israel a core part of their Jewish identity. Israel became an important element within religious instruction. Yom Ha'atzmaut evolved into a religious observance. National symbols decorated most synagogues. Youth programs were permeated with national melodies and learning of the language, with visitors from Israel instructing US young people Israeli customs. Visits to Israel expanded and reached new heights with Birthright Israel in 1999, providing no-cost visits to the country was provided to US Jewish youth. The state affected virtually all areas of the American Jewish experience.

Evolving Situation

Ironically, in these decades after 1967, American Jewry grew skilled regarding denominational coexistence. Open-mindedness and communication among different Jewish movements grew.

Yet concerning Zionism and Israel – there existed pluralism found its boundary. One could identify as a conservative supporter or a liberal advocate, yet backing Israel as a majority-Jewish country was a given, and criticizing that perspective placed you outside mainstream views – outside the community, as one publication described it in writing that year.

Yet presently, amid of the devastation in Gaza, starvation, dead and orphaned children and frustration regarding the refusal within Jewish communities who refuse to recognize their responsibility, that consensus has broken down. The liberal Zionist “center” {has lost|no longer