🔗 Share this article

Marking two years after the mass murder of 7 October 2023, which deeply affected Jewish communities worldwide unlike anything else since the establishment of the state of Israel.

Among Jewish people it was profoundly disturbing. For the state of Israel, the situation represented deeply humiliating. The entire Zionist project was founded on the belief that Israel could stop similar tragedies repeating.

Military action appeared unavoidable. However, the particular response undertaken by Israel – the widespread destruction of the Gaza Strip, the killing and maiming of tens of thousands ordinary people – represented a decision. And this choice complicated the way numerous Jewish Americans processed the initial assault that set it in motion, and currently challenges the community's observance of that date. How does one honor and reflect on a horrific event affecting their nation in the midst of devastation done to another people attributed to their identity?

The Difficulty of Mourning

The complexity in grieving stems from the reality that no agreement exists about the significance of these events. Indeed, among Jewish Americans, the recent twenty-four months have experienced the collapse of a decades-long agreement about the Zionist movement.

The beginnings of Zionist agreement across American Jewish populations dates back to an early twentieth-century publication by the lawyer and then future high court jurist Louis Brandeis called “Jewish Issues; Addressing the Challenge”. But the consensus truly solidified after the six-day war in 1967. Earlier, Jewish Americans housed a delicate yet functioning coexistence among different factions which maintained diverse perspectives concerning the need for a Jewish nation – Zionists, neutral parties and anti-Zionists.

Background Information

This parallel existence persisted during the mid-twentieth century, in remnants of leftist Jewish organizations, in the non-Zionist Jewish communal organization, in the anti-Zionist Jewish organization and comparable entities. In the view of Louis Finkelstein, the head of the theological institution, Zionism was primarily theological instead of governmental, and he prohibited singing Hatikvah, the national song, at religious school events during that period. Additionally, Zionist ideology the main element for contemporary Orthodox communities until after the six-day war. Jewish identitarian alternatives remained present.

Yet after Israel defeated its neighbors during the 1967 conflict that year, taking control of areas including the West Bank, Gaza Strip, Golan Heights and East Jerusalem, the American Jewish relationship to the country underwent significant transformation. The triumphant outcome, along with longstanding fears of a “second Holocaust”, resulted in a developing perspective about the nation's essential significance to the Jewish people, and created pride in its resilience. Discourse about the “miraculous” aspect of the outcome and the freeing of territory gave the Zionist project a spiritual, potentially salvific, meaning. In that triumphant era, a significant portion of the remaining ambivalence regarding Zionism dissipated. During the seventies, Publication editor Norman Podhoretz stated: “Zionism unites us all.”

The Consensus and Its Limits

The unified position did not include Haredi Jews – who typically thought Israel should only be ushered in by a traditional rendering of redemption – yet included Reform, Conservative, contemporary Orthodox and the majority of unaffiliated individuals. The common interpretation of the unified position, later termed left-leaning Zionism, was founded on a belief in Israel as a liberal and free – albeit ethnocentric – country. Many American Jews considered the administration of local, Syrian and Egyptian lands post-1967 as temporary, thinking that an agreement was forthcoming that would guarantee Jewish population majority in pre-1967 Israel and regional acceptance of Israel.

Several cohorts of Jewish Americans grew up with Zionism a core part of their Jewish identity. The state transformed into a central part of Jewish education. Israel’s Independence Day turned into a celebration. Blue and white banners were displayed in many temples. Youth programs were permeated with Hebrew music and the study of modern Hebrew, with Israeli guests educating US young people Israeli customs. Travel to Israel grew and reached new heights through Birthright programs during that year, providing no-cost visits to the nation was provided to US Jewish youth. The state affected almost the entirety of Jewish American identity.

Shifting Landscape

Paradoxically, during this period post-1967, US Jewish communities became adept regarding denominational coexistence. Open-mindedness and communication between Jewish denominations grew.

Except when it came to support for Israel – that represented tolerance reached its limit. Individuals might align with a conservative supporter or a leftwing Zionist, yet backing Israel as a Jewish state remained unquestioned, and questioning that narrative placed you outside the consensus – a non-conformist, as Tablet magazine termed it in an essay that year.

However currently, amid of the devastation in Gaza, starvation, child casualties and outrage about the rejection within Jewish communities who avoid admitting their responsibility, that agreement has collapsed. The moderate Zionist position {has lost|no longer