🔗 Share this article

Two years have passed since the horrific attack of the events of October 7th, which profoundly impacted global Jewish populations unlike anything else since the creation of the state of Israel.

For Jews it was profoundly disturbing. For the state of Israel, it was deeply humiliating. The entire Zionist endeavor was founded on the belief which held that the nation would prevent things like this repeating.

Some form of retaliation seemed necessary. Yet the chosen course Israel pursued – the obliteration of Gaza, the deaths and injuries of many thousands ordinary people – constituted a specific policy. And this choice complicated how many American Jews grappled with the October 7th events that triggered it, and currently challenges the community's commemoration of the day. In what way can people mourn and commemorate an atrocity targeting their community during devastation experienced by a different population attributed to their identity?

The Challenge of Grieving

The challenge in grieving lies in the fact that there is no consensus as to what any of this means. Indeed, among Jewish Americans, the last two years have experienced the breakdown of a fifty-year consensus on Zionism itself.

The early development of Zionist agreement across American Jewish populations extends as far back as a 1915 essay by the lawyer who would later become supreme court justice Louis Brandeis titled “Jewish Issues; Addressing the Challenge”. Yet the unity really takes hold after the 1967 conflict during 1967. Earlier, US Jewish communities maintained a vulnerable but enduring coexistence across various segments that had a range of views regarding the need for a Jewish nation – pro-Israel advocates, non-Zionists and anti-Zionists.

Historical Context

This parallel existence continued through the 1950s and 60s, through surviving aspects of leftist Jewish organizations, through the non-aligned US Jewish group, among the opposing Jewish organization and similar institutions. For Louis Finkelstein, the chancellor of the Jewish Theological Seminary, the Zionist movement had greater religious significance instead of governmental, and he forbade the singing of the Israeli national anthem, the Israeli national anthem, at JTS ordinations during that period. Furthermore, support for Israel the centerpiece within modern Orthodox Judaism prior to the 1967 conflict. Jewish identitarian alternatives existed alongside.

But after Israel routed neighboring countries in that war that year, seizing land comprising Palestinian territories, Gaza Strip, Golan Heights and Jerusalem's eastern sector, US Jewish perspective on the country underwent significant transformation. The military success, combined with longstanding fears regarding repeated persecution, led to a growing belief regarding Israel's critical importance within Jewish identity, and a source of pride regarding its endurance. Rhetoric regarding the remarkable quality of the outcome and the freeing of territory gave Zionism a religious, potentially salvific, significance. In those heady years, a significant portion of existing hesitation regarding Zionism dissipated. During the seventies, Writer Norman Podhoretz famously proclaimed: “Zionism unites us all.”

The Agreement and Its Limits

The pro-Israel agreement left out the ultra-Orthodox – who largely believed a nation should only be established through traditional interpretation of redemption – but united Reform, Conservative, contemporary Orthodox and most secular Jews. The predominant version of the consensus, what became known as left-leaning Zionism, was founded on the idea about the nation as a democratic and liberal – while majority-Jewish – country. Many American Jews saw the occupation of local, Syrian and Egypt's territories after 1967 as temporary, assuming that a solution would soon emerge that would ensure a Jewish majority within Israel's original borders and regional acceptance of the nation.

Several cohorts of US Jews were thus brought up with Zionism a core part of their Jewish identity. Israel became a key component of Jewish education. Israeli national day turned into a celebration. National symbols decorated most synagogues. Youth programs were permeated with national melodies and education of modern Hebrew, with Israeli guests educating US young people Israeli culture. Visits to Israel expanded and reached new heights through Birthright programs in 1999, when a free trip to Israel was offered to US Jewish youth. The nation influenced nearly every aspect of Jewish American identity.

Shifting Landscape

Ironically, throughout these years following the war, US Jewish communities grew skilled regarding denominational coexistence. Open-mindedness and communication between Jewish denominations expanded.

However regarding the Israeli situation – that represented tolerance ended. You could be a right-leaning advocate or a liberal advocate, but support for Israel as a majority-Jewish country was assumed, and challenging that perspective categorized you beyond accepted boundaries – a non-conformist, as Tablet magazine described it in an essay in 2021.

But now, during of the ruin of Gaza, famine, child casualties and outrage about the rejection within Jewish communities who avoid admitting their involvement, that agreement has broken down. The liberal Zionist “center” {has lost|no longer