🔗 Share this article

Marking two years after that deadly assault of the events of October 7th, an event that profoundly impacted global Jewish populations more than any event following the founding of the Jewish state.

Among Jewish people it was shocking. For the state of Israel, the situation represented deeply humiliating. The whole Zionist endeavor had been established on the belief which held that Israel would prevent similar tragedies repeating.

A response appeared unavoidable. Yet the chosen course that Israel implemented – the widespread destruction of the Gaza Strip, the killing and maiming of numerous ordinary people – was a choice. This particular approach made more difficult the perspective of many US Jewish community members understood the initial assault that set it in motion, and presently makes difficult the community's observance of the day. How does one honor and reflect on a tragedy targeting their community in the midst of a catastrophe experienced by other individuals connected to their community?

The Difficulty of Grieving

The difficulty surrounding remembrance exists because of the fact that there is no consensus as to the implications of these developments. In fact, among Jewish Americans, this two-year period have witnessed the disintegration of a fifty-year unity on Zionism itself.

The early development of a Zionist consensus across American Jewish populations can be traced to an early twentieth-century publication by the lawyer who would later become high court jurist Louis Brandeis titled “The Jewish Problem; Addressing the Challenge”. However, the agreement really takes hold after the six-day war that year. Previously, Jewish Americans maintained a fragile but stable parallel existence across various segments that had a range of views about the necessity of a Jewish state – Zionists, neutral parties and opponents.

Previous Developments

Such cohabitation persisted throughout the mid-twentieth century, through surviving aspects of leftist Jewish organizations, through the non-aligned Jewish communal organization, in the anti-Zionist religious group and other organizations. In the view of Louis Finkelstein, the chancellor of the theological institution, Zionism was primarily theological than political, and he forbade the singing of Israel's anthem, Hatikvah, at religious school events in those years. Furthermore, support for Israel the main element for contemporary Orthodox communities before the 1967 conflict. Jewish identitarian alternatives coexisted.

Yet after Israel overcame adjacent nations in the six-day war during that period, seizing land comprising the West Bank, Gaza Strip, the Golan and Jerusalem's eastern sector, the American Jewish connection with the country changed dramatically. The triumphant outcome, coupled with enduring anxieties about another genocide, resulted in an increasing conviction in the country’s critical importance for Jewish communities, and generated admiration in its resilience. Discourse regarding the remarkable nature of the outcome and the freeing of land assigned Zionism a theological, even messianic, meaning. In that triumphant era, much of the remaining ambivalence regarding Zionism disappeared. In the early 1970s, Writer Norman Podhoretz declared: “Everyone supports Zionism today.”

The Unity and Its Limits

The pro-Israel agreement excluded the ultra-Orthodox – who largely believed a nation should only be established through traditional interpretation of redemption – however joined Reform Judaism, Conservative Judaism, Modern Orthodox and most unaffiliated individuals. The common interpretation of the consensus, what became known as progressive Zionism, was founded on a belief regarding Israel as a liberal and democratic – while majority-Jewish – state. Many American Jews saw the occupation of Arab, Syrian and Egypt's territories post-1967 as temporary, believing that a solution was imminent that would maintain Jewish demographic dominance in Israel proper and regional acceptance of the nation.

Multiple generations of Jewish Americans were thus brought up with Zionism a core part of their Jewish identity. The nation became a central part within religious instruction. Yom Ha'atzmaut turned into a celebration. Israeli flags adorned religious institutions. Youth programs became infused with national melodies and education of the language, with Israelis visiting and teaching American teenagers national traditions. Travel to Israel grew and reached new heights via educational trips by 1999, offering complimentary travel to Israel was provided to Jewish young adults. The nation influenced virtually all areas of the American Jewish experience.

Changing Dynamics

Paradoxically, throughout these years post-1967, US Jewish communities developed expertise regarding denominational coexistence. Acceptance and dialogue across various Jewish groups increased.

However regarding Zionism and Israel – there existed diversity found its boundary. Individuals might align with a right-leaning advocate or a liberal advocate, but support for Israel as a Jewish homeland remained unquestioned, and questioning that narrative placed you beyond accepted boundaries – a non-conformist, as a Jewish periodical described it in writing recently.

However currently, during of the destruction of Gaza, famine, child casualties and outrage over the denial of many fellow Jews who refuse to recognize their complicity, that consensus has collapsed. The moderate Zionist position {has lost|no longer