🔗 Share this article

Two years have passed since the deadly assault of 7 October 2023, which deeply affected global Jewish populations more than any event following the establishment of the Jewish state.

Among Jewish people the event proved shocking. For the state of Israel, it was a profound disgrace. The entire Zionist movement rested on the presumption that the Jewish state would ensure against similar tragedies repeating.

Some form of retaliation seemed necessary. But the response that Israel implemented – the widespread destruction of the Gaza Strip, the killing and maiming of tens of thousands of civilians – was a choice. This selected path made more difficult the way numerous Jewish Americans processed the attack that precipitated the response, and presently makes difficult their observance of the anniversary. How can someone grieve and remember a tragedy targeting their community during a catastrophe experienced by another people in your name?

The Difficulty of Remembrance

The difficulty of mourning exists because of the reality that no agreement exists regarding the significance of these events. Actually, among Jewish Americans, this two-year period have witnessed the disintegration of a decades-long unity about the Zionist movement.

The origins of pro-Israel unity within US Jewish communities extends as far back as a 1915 essay authored by an attorney subsequently appointed Supreme Court judge Louis Brandeis named “The Jewish Question; Finding Solutions”. But the consensus became firmly established following the Six-Day War during 1967. Earlier, Jewish Americans housed a fragile but stable coexistence between groups that had a range of views concerning the requirement for Israel – pro-Israel advocates, non-Zionists and opponents.

Previous Developments

This parallel existence continued throughout the 1950s and 60s, through surviving aspects of Jewish socialism, in the non-Zionist US Jewish group, among the opposing religious group and similar institutions. In the view of Louis Finkelstein, the leader of the theological institution, the Zionist movement had greater religious significance instead of governmental, and he did not permit performance of the Israeli national anthem, the national song, during seminary ceremonies in those years. Nor were Zionist ideology the centerpiece of Modern Orthodoxy prior to the 1967 conflict. Alternative Jewish perspectives existed alongside.

However following Israel routed its neighbors during the 1967 conflict in 1967, taking control of areas such as the West Bank, Gaza Strip, Golan Heights and Jerusalem's eastern sector, US Jewish relationship to the country underwent significant transformation. The military success, combined with enduring anxieties of a “second Holocaust”, resulted in a growing belief in the country’s critical importance within Jewish identity, and created pride for its strength. Discourse regarding the remarkable aspect of the success and the freeing of land gave the movement a religious, even messianic, meaning. In those heady years, much of the remaining ambivalence about Zionism disappeared. During the seventies, Commentary magazine editor Norman Podhoretz declared: “Everyone supports Zionism today.”

The Agreement and Its Boundaries

The pro-Israel agreement left out strictly Orthodox communities – who generally maintained a Jewish state should only be ushered in through traditional interpretation of the Messiah – however joined Reform Judaism, Conservative Judaism, contemporary Orthodox and most non-affiliated Jews. The predominant version of this agreement, later termed progressive Zionism, was based on the idea regarding Israel as a democratic and democratic – though Jewish-centered – state. Countless Jewish Americans considered the control of Palestinian, Syrian and Egyptian lands following the war as provisional, thinking that a resolution was forthcoming that would maintain Jewish demographic dominance in pre-1967 Israel and regional acceptance of Israel.

Several cohorts of American Jews were thus brought up with pro-Israel ideology a core part of their religious identity. The nation became a central part in Jewish learning. Israel’s Independence Day turned into a celebration. National symbols were displayed in many temples. Seasonal activities integrated with Hebrew music and the study of contemporary Hebrew, with visitors from Israel educating American teenagers Israeli customs. Travel to Israel increased and achieved record numbers through Birthright programs during that year, providing no-cost visits to the nation was offered to Jewish young adults. The state affected almost the entirety of US Jewish life.

Shifting Landscape

Ironically, throughout these years following the war, US Jewish communities became adept in religious diversity. Open-mindedness and discussion among different Jewish movements increased.

Yet concerning the Israeli situation – that represented pluralism ended. You could be a conservative supporter or a liberal advocate, yet backing Israel as a Jewish homeland was a given, and questioning that narrative categorized you outside the consensus – a non-conformist, as Tablet magazine termed it in writing in 2021.

But now, amid of the destruction of Gaza, food shortages, child casualties and outrage about the rejection of many fellow Jews who refuse to recognize their complicity, that consensus has broken down. The liberal Zionist “center” {has lost|no longer