🔗 Share this article

Two years have passed since the horrific attack of 7 October 2023, which profoundly impacted world Jewry like no other occurrence since the establishment of the state of Israel.

Within Jewish communities the event proved deeply traumatic. For the Israeli government, it was a profound disgrace. The whole Zionist movement was founded on the belief that the Jewish state would prevent things like this from ever happening again.

Military action was inevitable. However, the particular response Israel pursued – the widespread destruction of the Gaza Strip, the killing and maiming of numerous of civilians – constituted a specific policy. This particular approach created complexity in how many US Jewish community members processed the October 7th events that triggered it, and currently challenges the community's commemoration of that date. How can someone grieve and remember an atrocity affecting their nation during a catastrophe being inflicted upon another people connected to their community?

The Complexity of Mourning

The difficulty in grieving stems from the reality that little unity prevails as to what any of this means. Indeed, within US Jewish circles, the recent twenty-four months have witnessed the disintegration of a fifty-year consensus about the Zionist movement.

The origins of pro-Israel unity across American Jewish populations can be traced to a 1915 essay written by a legal scholar subsequently appointed high court jurist Louis Brandeis titled “The Jewish Question; Addressing the Challenge”. Yet the unity truly solidified subsequent to the six-day war in 1967. Before then, American Jewry maintained a vulnerable but enduring cohabitation across various segments that had different opinions about the necessity of a Jewish state – Zionists, non-Zionists and anti-Zionists.

Previous Developments

Such cohabitation continued throughout the post-war decades, through surviving aspects of socialist Jewish movements, in the non-Zionist Jewish communal organization, in the anti-Zionist religious group and similar institutions. Regarding Chancellor Finkelstein, the chancellor of the Jewish Theological Seminary, pro-Israel ideology was primarily theological than political, and he forbade performance of the Israeli national anthem, Hatikvah, during seminary ceremonies in the early 1960s. Furthermore, support for Israel the main element within modern Orthodox Judaism until after that war. Alternative Jewish perspectives coexisted.

But after Israel overcame its neighbors in that war during that period, taking control of areas including Palestinian territories, Gaza, the Golan and East Jerusalem, US Jewish connection with the nation underwent significant transformation. Israel’s victory, combined with persistent concerns of a “second Holocaust”, led to a developing perspective about the nation's critical importance for Jewish communities, and created pride regarding its endurance. Language about the “miraculous” nature of the outcome and the “liberation” of areas provided the Zionist project a spiritual, even messianic, meaning. During that enthusiastic period, much of previous uncertainty regarding Zionism disappeared. During the seventies, Commentary magazine editor Podhoretz declared: “Zionism unites us all.”

The Agreement and Its Limits

The unified position did not include the ultra-Orthodox – who typically thought Israel should only be established via conventional understanding of redemption – but united Reform Judaism, Conservative Judaism, contemporary Orthodox and most unaffiliated individuals. The most popular form of the unified position, identified as left-leaning Zionism, was founded on a belief regarding Israel as a liberal and free – albeit ethnocentric – nation. Numerous US Jews considered the administration of Palestinian, Syrian and Egyptian lands post-1967 as temporary, thinking that a solution was forthcoming that would ensure a Jewish majority in Israel proper and neighbor recognition of the nation.

Several cohorts of US Jews grew up with pro-Israel ideology a core part of their identity as Jews. The state transformed into a key component within religious instruction. Yom Ha'atzmaut evolved into a religious observance. Blue and white banners decorated religious institutions. Summer camps became infused with national melodies and learning of contemporary Hebrew, with Israelis visiting educating American youth national traditions. Visits to Israel expanded and reached new heights with Birthright Israel by 1999, when a free trip to Israel was offered to US Jewish youth. Israel permeated nearly every aspect of US Jewish life.

Changing Dynamics

Paradoxically, throughout these years following the war, American Jewry became adept in religious diversity. Open-mindedness and discussion across various Jewish groups grew.

However regarding support for Israel – that’s where pluralism reached its limit. You could be a conservative supporter or a liberal advocate, however endorsement of the nation as a Jewish state remained unquestioned, and criticizing that perspective positioned you outside mainstream views – outside the community, as Tablet magazine described it in a piece recently.

Yet presently, during of the ruin within Gaza, famine, dead and orphaned children and anger over the denial by numerous Jewish individuals who refuse to recognize their involvement, that consensus has disintegrated. The liberal Zionist “center” {has lost|no longer