🔗 Share this article

Two years have passed since that mass murder of 7 October 2023, an event that shook Jewish communities worldwide like no other occurrence since the founding of Israel as a nation.

Within Jewish communities it was deeply traumatic. For Israel as a nation, the situation represented a significant embarrassment. The whole Zionist movement rested on the assumption which held that the Jewish state would ensure against similar tragedies from ever happening again.

Military action appeared unavoidable. But the response undertaken by Israel – the obliteration of the Gaza Strip, the killing and maiming of tens of thousands non-combatants – constituted a specific policy. And this choice complicated the way numerous US Jewish community members grappled with the October 7th events that triggered it, and it now complicates the community's remembrance of the day. In what way can people honor and reflect on a horrific event against your people while simultaneously a catastrophe experienced by a different population in your name?

The Difficulty of Grieving

The difficulty of mourning lies in the reality that there is no consensus regarding the implications of these developments. Indeed, for the American Jewish community, this two-year period have seen the collapse of a decades-long unity regarding Zionism.

The origins of pro-Israel unity within US Jewish communities dates back to an early twentieth-century publication authored by an attorney subsequently appointed high court jurist Louis D. Brandeis called “Jewish Issues; Addressing the Challenge”. But the consensus truly solidified after the 1967 conflict that year. Previously, American Jewry maintained a vulnerable but enduring coexistence across various segments that had diverse perspectives concerning the necessity for a Jewish nation – Zionists, non-Zionists and anti-Zionists.

Background Information

This parallel existence persisted during the 1950s and 60s, in remnants of leftist Jewish organizations, within the neutral American Jewish Committee, within the critical Jewish organization and other organizations. For Louis Finkelstein, the leader of the Jewish Theological Seminary, Zionism was more spiritual instead of governmental, and he forbade performance of Hatikvah, Hatikvah, at JTS ordinations in the early 1960s. Additionally, support for Israel the central focus of Modern Orthodoxy prior to the six-day war. Alternative Jewish perspectives remained present.

Yet after Israel overcame neighboring countries during the 1967 conflict during that period, seizing land including the West Bank, Gaza, the Golan and Jerusalem's eastern sector, US Jewish perspective on the nation evolved considerably. The military success, along with enduring anxieties regarding repeated persecution, produced a developing perspective about the nation's vital role within Jewish identity, and created pride in its resilience. Rhetoric about the extraordinary aspect of the success and the freeing of territory provided the Zionist project a theological, almost redemptive, significance. During that enthusiastic period, a significant portion of previous uncertainty toward Israel disappeared. In the early 1970s, Publication editor Norman Podhoretz declared: “We are all Zionists now.”

The Consensus and Its Limits

The unified position did not include strictly Orthodox communities – who largely believed a nation should only be ushered in by a traditional rendering of the Messiah – however joined Reform, Conservative, Modern Orthodox and nearly all non-affiliated Jews. The predominant version of the unified position, later termed liberal Zionism, was established on a belief in Israel as a democratic and free – though Jewish-centered – country. Countless Jewish Americans saw the occupation of Palestinian, Syria's and Egyptian lands post-1967 as temporary, thinking that a resolution was forthcoming that would ensure Jewish population majority within Israel's original borders and neighbor recognition of Israel.

Multiple generations of Jewish Americans grew up with support for Israel an essential component of their Jewish identity. Israel became a key component within religious instruction. Yom Ha'atzmaut became a Jewish holiday. National symbols decorated religious institutions. Youth programs were permeated with Israeli songs and the study of the language, with visitors from Israel and teaching American youth Israeli customs. Visits to Israel grew and achieved record numbers with Birthright Israel during that year, when a free trip to the country was provided to Jewish young adults. Israel permeated almost the entirety of US Jewish life.

Changing Dynamics

Interestingly, throughout these years post-1967, Jewish Americans developed expertise in religious diversity. Tolerance and communication between Jewish denominations grew.

However regarding the Israeli situation – that represented pluralism reached its limit. You could be a right-leaning advocate or a liberal advocate, yet backing Israel as a majority-Jewish country was assumed, and criticizing that narrative positioned you outside the consensus – outside the community, as one publication described it in a piece recently.

Yet presently, during of the ruin within Gaza, food shortages, dead and orphaned children and anger over the denial within Jewish communities who avoid admitting their involvement, that consensus has disintegrated. The liberal Zionist “center” {has lost|no longer