🔗 Share this article

It has been that horrific attack of October 7, 2023, which shook world Jewry more than any event following the founding of the state of Israel.

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 belief which held that the Jewish state would prevent such atrocities from ever happening again.

A response seemed necessary. Yet the chosen course Israel pursued – the widespread destruction of the Gaza Strip, the deaths and injuries of many thousands ordinary people – represented a decision. This selected path created complexity in the perspective of many American Jews understood the initial assault that triggered it, and it now complicates the community's observance of the anniversary. In what way can people grieve and remember a tragedy affecting their nation while simultaneously a catastrophe experienced by other individuals connected to their community?

The Complexity of Mourning

The challenge of mourning exists because of the circumstance where there is no consensus regarding the implications of these developments. Actually, among Jewish Americans, this two-year period have experienced the disintegration of a fifty-year unity regarding Zionism.

The origins of a Zionist consensus within US Jewish communities dates back to a 1915 essay by the lawyer subsequently appointed high court jurist Louis D. Brandeis named “The Jewish Problem; Finding Solutions”. However, the agreement truly solidified after the six-day war that year. Previously, US Jewish communities contained a fragile but stable parallel existence among different factions holding different opinions regarding the requirement for Israel – Zionists, non-Zionists and opponents.

Background Information

Such cohabitation persisted through the 1950s and 60s, within remaining elements of leftist Jewish organizations, within the neutral American Jewish Committee, in the anti-Zionist Jewish organization and other organizations. For Louis Finkelstein, the chancellor of the theological institution, the Zionist movement had greater religious significance instead of governmental, and he prohibited performance of Hatikvah, the national song, during seminary ceremonies in those years. Nor were Zionism and pro-Israelism the centerpiece within modern Orthodox Judaism until after the 1967 conflict. Different Jewish identity models coexisted.

Yet after Israel routed adjacent nations in the six-day war during that period, occupying territories such as Palestinian territories, Gaza Strip, Golan Heights and East Jerusalem, US Jewish perspective on Israel evolved considerably. Israel’s victory, coupled with longstanding fears of a “second Holocaust”, led to a growing belief in the country’s critical importance within Jewish identity, and created pride regarding its endurance. Language concerning the remarkable nature of the victory and the reclaiming of land provided the Zionist project a religious, potentially salvific, significance. In that triumphant era, a significant portion of existing hesitation regarding Zionism vanished. In that decade, Writer Norman Podhoretz stated: “Everyone supports Zionism today.”

The Consensus and Its Boundaries

The pro-Israel agreement excluded Haredi Jews – who generally maintained a Jewish state should only emerge by a traditional rendering of the Messiah – however joined Reform, Conservative, contemporary Orthodox and nearly all secular Jews. The common interpretation of the unified position, later termed left-leaning Zionism, was founded on the idea regarding Israel as a progressive and free – while majority-Jewish – nation. Numerous US Jews viewed the administration of Arab, Syrian and Egypt's territories after 1967 as provisional, thinking that a resolution was imminent that would maintain a Jewish majority in Israel proper and regional acceptance of Israel.

Two generations of Jewish Americans were raised with support for Israel a core part of their identity as Jews. Israel became a central part in Jewish learning. Israel’s Independence Day turned into a celebration. Blue and white banners adorned most synagogues. Summer camps integrated with national melodies and education of the language, with visitors from Israel educating American youth national traditions. Trips to the nation expanded and achieved record numbers through Birthright programs in 1999, providing no-cost visits to Israel was provided to young American Jews. The state affected almost the entirety of Jewish American identity.

Evolving Situation

Ironically, in these decades post-1967, US Jewish communities developed expertise regarding denominational coexistence. Acceptance and dialogue among different Jewish movements grew.

Yet concerning support for Israel – that’s where pluralism found its boundary. You could be a conservative supporter or a progressive supporter, yet backing Israel as a majority-Jewish country was assumed, and challenging that narrative positioned you outside mainstream views – outside the community, as Tablet magazine described it in an essay in 2021.

But now, during of the destruction within Gaza, food shortages, dead and orphaned children and outrage regarding the refusal by numerous Jewish individuals who decline to acknowledge their responsibility, that consensus has collapsed. The moderate Zionist position {has lost|no longer