🔗 Share this article

It has been the deadly assault of October 7, 2023, an event that profoundly impacted Jewish communities worldwide unlike anything else following the establishment of the Jewish state.

Among Jewish people it was deeply traumatic. For Israel as a nation, the situation represented a significant embarrassment. The entire Zionist endeavor was founded on the presumption which held that the Jewish state would ensure against things like this from ever happening again.

A response seemed necessary. But the response undertaken by Israel – the widespread destruction of the Gaza Strip, the killing and maiming of numerous non-combatants – constituted a specific policy. And this choice made more difficult the perspective of many American Jews processed the attack that precipitated the response, and currently challenges their remembrance of that date. How can someone honor and reflect on a horrific event targeting their community in the midst of a catastrophe done to other individuals attributed to their identity?

The Difficulty of Grieving

The challenge of mourning lies in the circumstance where there is no consensus about what any of this means. In fact, within US Jewish circles, the recent twenty-four months have experienced the collapse of a half-century-old consensus on Zionism itself.

The origins of Zionist agreement within US Jewish communities dates back to writings from 1915 by the lawyer and then future high court jurist Louis Brandeis called “The Jewish Question; How to Solve it”. But the consensus became firmly established subsequent to the six-day war that year. Previously, American Jewry housed a vulnerable but enduring coexistence between groups that had a range of views concerning the need for a Jewish nation – Zionists, neutral parties and opponents.

Previous Developments

This parallel existence persisted throughout the post-war decades, through surviving aspects of leftist Jewish organizations, within the neutral Jewish communal organization, within the critical American Council for Judaism and similar institutions. Regarding Chancellor Finkelstein, the leader of the theological institution, pro-Israel ideology was primarily theological rather than political, and he prohibited singing the Israeli national anthem, the Israeli national anthem, at religious school events during that period. Furthermore, Zionism and pro-Israelism the central focus of Modern Orthodoxy before the six-day war. Alternative Jewish perspectives coexisted.

Yet after Israel overcame adjacent nations in that war during that period, taking control of areas such as Palestinian territories, Gaza Strip, Golan Heights and Jerusalem's eastern sector, the American Jewish relationship to Israel changed dramatically. The military success, coupled with longstanding fears about another genocide, produced an increasing conviction regarding Israel's vital role within Jewish identity, and generated admiration in its resilience. Rhetoric concerning the remarkable quality of the outcome and the freeing of territory assigned the movement a theological, almost redemptive, meaning. In those heady years, considerable previous uncertainty regarding Zionism dissipated. In the early 1970s, Writer Podhoretz stated: “We are all Zionists now.”

The Unity and Its Limits

The unified position excluded strictly Orthodox communities – who largely believed a Jewish state should only be established by a traditional rendering of the messiah – yet included Reform Judaism, Conservative, contemporary Orthodox and nearly all unaffiliated individuals. The common interpretation of the consensus, later termed liberal Zionism, was based on a belief about the nation as a progressive and liberal – albeit ethnocentric – state. Numerous US Jews viewed the control of Arab, Syrian and Egypt's territories post-1967 as not permanent, believing that a resolution was imminent that would ensure Jewish population majority in Israel proper and Middle Eastern approval of the nation.

Multiple generations of Jewish Americans were raised with support for Israel a fundamental aspect of their religious identity. The state transformed into a central part within religious instruction. Yom Ha'atzmaut became a Jewish holiday. National symbols adorned many temples. Seasonal activities became infused with national melodies and the study of the language, with Israeli guests and teaching US young people national traditions. Travel to Israel grew and peaked via educational trips during that year, providing no-cost visits to the country was provided to young American Jews. The nation influenced almost the entirety of Jewish American identity.

Shifting Landscape

Ironically, throughout these years post-1967, Jewish Americans grew skilled at religious pluralism. Acceptance and dialogue between Jewish denominations expanded.

Except when it came to support for Israel – that’s where diversity ended. You could be a conservative supporter or a leftwing Zionist, but support for Israel as a Jewish state remained unquestioned, and criticizing that position categorized you beyond accepted boundaries – a non-conformist, as a Jewish periodical described it in writing recently.

Yet presently, under the weight of the ruin of Gaza, food shortages, child casualties and anger regarding the refusal by numerous Jewish individuals who avoid admitting their involvement, that unity has broken down. The liberal Zionist “center” {has lost|no longer