🔗 Share this article

Two years have passed since that horrific attack of October 7, 2023, an event that deeply affected Jewish communities worldwide more than any event since the founding of Israel as a nation.

For Jews it was deeply traumatic. For Israel as a nation, the situation represented a profound disgrace. The entire Zionist endeavor was founded on the assumption which held that Israel would ensure against such atrocities repeating.

Military action appeared unavoidable. However, the particular response that Israel implemented – the widespread destruction of the Gaza Strip, the deaths and injuries of many thousands ordinary people – represented a decision. This particular approach created complexity in the perspective of many US Jewish community members understood the attack that precipitated the response, and currently challenges the community's commemoration of the day. In what way can people mourn and commemorate a horrific event affecting their nation while simultaneously devastation experienced by another people attributed to their identity?

The Challenge of Mourning

The difficulty surrounding remembrance lies in the circumstance where no agreement exists regarding the significance of these events. Indeed, within US Jewish circles, this two-year period have witnessed the collapse of a half-century-old agreement on Zionism itself.

The early development of pro-Israel unity among American Jewry can be traced to an early twentieth-century publication written by a legal scholar subsequently appointed Supreme Court judge Justice Brandeis called “Jewish Issues; Addressing the Challenge”. Yet the unity truly solidified following the 1967 conflict in 1967. Before then, US Jewish communities housed a fragile but stable cohabitation across various segments which maintained a range of views regarding the necessity for Israel – Zionists, non-Zionists and anti-Zionists.

Background Information

That coexistence endured throughout the 1950s and 60s, through surviving aspects of socialist Jewish movements, within the neutral US Jewish group, in the anti-Zionist religious group and similar institutions. Regarding Chancellor Finkelstein, the head of the theological institution, pro-Israel ideology had greater religious significance rather than political, and he prohibited singing the Israeli national anthem, Hatikvah, during seminary ceremonies in those years. Nor were support for Israel the main element of Modern Orthodoxy until after the 1967 conflict. Different Jewish identity models coexisted.

Yet after Israel overcame adjacent nations during the 1967 conflict that year, occupying territories such as Palestinian territories, Gaza Strip, Golan Heights and East Jerusalem, US Jewish relationship to the nation changed dramatically. The triumphant outcome, coupled with persistent concerns about another genocide, resulted in a growing belief regarding Israel's vital role for Jewish communities, and a source of pride in its resilience. Language regarding the “miraculous” nature of the victory and the “liberation” of territory gave Zionism a theological, potentially salvific, significance. In that triumphant era, much of previous uncertainty about Zionism vanished. In the early 1970s, Publication editor Norman Podhoretz declared: “We are all Zionists now.”

The Consensus and Its Boundaries

The pro-Israel agreement excluded Haredi Jews – who generally maintained Israel should only emerge by a traditional rendering of the Messiah – but united Reform, Conservative, contemporary Orthodox and nearly all non-affiliated Jews. The predominant version of the unified position, identified as liberal Zionism, was founded on the conviction regarding Israel as a liberal and liberal – though Jewish-centered – state. Many American Jews saw the control of Arab, Syrian and Egypt's territories after 1967 as temporary, thinking that a resolution was imminent that would guarantee a Jewish majority within Israel's original borders and regional acceptance of Israel.

Several cohorts of Jewish Americans were thus brought up with Zionism a core part of their religious identity. Israel became an important element within religious instruction. Israel’s Independence Day evolved into a religious observance. Israeli flags adorned most synagogues. Seasonal activities were permeated with Hebrew music and the study of contemporary Hebrew, with visitors from Israel educating American youth Israeli culture. Travel to Israel increased and reached new heights via educational trips during that year, providing no-cost visits to Israel became available to Jewish young adults. Israel permeated virtually all areas of Jewish American identity.

Changing Dynamics

Ironically, during this period following the war, US Jewish communities became adept regarding denominational coexistence. Acceptance and communication between Jewish denominations increased.

However regarding support for Israel – there existed pluralism reached its limit. Individuals might align with a rightwing Zionist or a leftwing Zionist, yet backing Israel as a majority-Jewish country was a given, and challenging that position categorized you outside the consensus – an “Un-Jew”, as one publication termed it in writing in 2021.

Yet presently, under the weight of the ruin within Gaza, food shortages, young victims and outrage about the rejection of many fellow Jews who avoid admitting their involvement, that agreement has broken down. The moderate Zionist position {has lost|no longer