🔗 Share this article

It has been the deadly assault of October 7, 2023, which deeply affected world Jewry unlike anything else following the creation of the state of Israel.

Among Jewish people the event proved profoundly disturbing. For Israel as a nation, the situation represented deeply humiliating. The entire Zionist movement was founded on the belief that Israel would prevent such atrocities from ever happening again.

Military action was inevitable. However, the particular response Israel pursued – the widespread destruction of Gaza, the deaths and injuries of numerous ordinary people – was a choice. And this choice made more difficult the perspective of many American Jews understood the attack that set it in motion, and currently challenges their remembrance of that date. How does one honor and reflect on a horrific event targeting their community during a catastrophe being inflicted upon another people attributed to their identity?

The Complexity of Grieving

The complexity of mourning exists because of the fact that there is no consensus as to the implications of these developments. Actually, for the American Jewish community, the last two years have seen the breakdown of a fifty-year consensus about the Zionist movement.

The beginnings of a Zionist consensus across American Jewish populations dates back to a 1915 essay written by a legal scholar who would later become Supreme Court judge Louis D. Brandeis titled “Jewish Issues; How to Solve it”. However, the agreement really takes hold subsequent to the six-day war in 1967. Before then, Jewish Americans housed a vulnerable but enduring parallel existence across various segments holding different opinions regarding the necessity of a Jewish state – pro-Israel advocates, non-Zionists and opponents.

Previous Developments

That coexistence endured during the post-war decades, within remaining elements of socialist Jewish movements, within the neutral Jewish communal organization, among the opposing Jewish organization and comparable entities. Regarding Chancellor Finkelstein, the leader of the theological institution, the Zionist movement had greater religious significance rather than political, and he forbade the singing of Hatikvah, the Israeli national anthem, at religious school events during that period. Nor were Zionism and pro-Israelism the centerpiece of Modern Orthodoxy before that war. Different Jewish identity models remained present.

But after Israel overcame neighboring countries in the six-day war in 1967, occupying territories comprising Palestinian territories, Gaza, Golan Heights and Jerusalem's eastern sector, the American Jewish perspective on the country underwent significant transformation. Israel’s victory, coupled with persistent concerns about another genocide, resulted in a developing perspective regarding Israel's vital role for Jewish communities, and generated admiration for its strength. Rhetoric regarding the extraordinary aspect of the outcome and the freeing of land provided the Zionist project a religious, almost redemptive, meaning. In that triumphant era, a significant portion of previous uncertainty toward Israel disappeared. During the seventies, Publication editor Podhoretz famously proclaimed: “Everyone supports Zionism today.”

The Consensus and Restrictions

The pro-Israel agreement left out the ultra-Orthodox – who typically thought a nation should only be established through traditional interpretation of the messiah – however joined Reform Judaism, Conservative Judaism, Modern Orthodox and most secular Jews. The predominant version of this agreement, identified as progressive Zionism, was based on the idea in Israel as a progressive and democratic – albeit ethnocentric – state. Many American Jews viewed the administration of local, Syria's and Egypt's territories post-1967 as not permanent, thinking that an agreement was imminent that would guarantee Jewish demographic dominance in pre-1967 Israel and Middle Eastern approval of the nation.

Several cohorts of Jewish Americans were raised with pro-Israel ideology a core part of their religious identity. The state transformed into a key component within religious instruction. Israel’s Independence Day evolved into a religious observance. Israeli flags adorned many temples. Summer camps were permeated with Israeli songs and learning of the language, with visitors from Israel educating American youth Israeli culture. Visits to Israel grew and achieved record numbers through Birthright programs during that year, when a free trip to Israel was offered to young American Jews. The nation influenced almost the entirety of the American Jewish experience.

Evolving Situation

Ironically, throughout these years post-1967, American Jewry developed expertise at religious pluralism. Acceptance and discussion between Jewish denominations grew.

Yet concerning the Israeli situation – that’s where tolerance reached its limit. Individuals might align with a conservative supporter or a leftwing Zionist, yet backing Israel as a majority-Jewish country was assumed, and challenging that perspective categorized you outside mainstream views – a non-conformist, as one publication described it in writing in 2021.

Yet presently, amid of the ruin of Gaza, famine, young victims and frustration over the denial by numerous Jewish individuals who refuse to recognize their involvement, that agreement has broken down. The moderate Zionist position {has lost|no longer