🔗 Share this article

Two years have passed since the deadly assault of the events of October 7th, which shook global Jewish populations like no other occurrence since the establishment of the state of Israel.

Within Jewish communities it was profoundly disturbing. For Israel as a nation, the situation represented a significant embarrassment. The whole Zionist movement had been established on the belief that Israel would ensure against such atrocities from ever happening again.

Some form of retaliation was inevitable. But the response undertaken by Israel – the widespread destruction of the Gaza Strip, the deaths and injuries of numerous non-combatants – represented a decision. And this choice made more difficult how many Jewish Americans processed the attack that precipitated the response, and it now complicates the community's observance of the anniversary. In what way can people honor and reflect on a tragedy affecting their nation while simultaneously a catastrophe being inflicted upon a different population in your name?

The Complexity of Mourning

The complexity in grieving stems from the circumstance where there is no consensus as to what any of this means. Actually, for the American Jewish community, the recent twenty-four months have seen the disintegration of a decades-long consensus on Zionism itself.

The origins of Zionist agreement across American Jewish populations can be traced to writings from 1915 written by a legal scholar and then future high court jurist Louis Brandeis titled “Jewish Issues; Finding Solutions”. But the consensus became firmly established subsequent to the 1967 conflict that year. Previously, US Jewish communities contained a vulnerable but enduring parallel existence among different factions holding different opinions regarding the need for a Jewish nation – pro-Israel advocates, non-Zionists and opponents.

Previous Developments

This parallel existence endured throughout the mid-twentieth century, through surviving aspects of socialist Jewish movements, through the non-aligned American Jewish Committee, among the opposing Jewish organization and similar institutions. Regarding Chancellor Finkelstein, the head of the theological institution, Zionism was more spiritual than political, and he prohibited singing the Israeli national anthem, Hatikvah, at religious school events in those years. Furthermore, support for Israel the main element of Modern Orthodoxy prior to the six-day war. Jewish identitarian alternatives remained present.

Yet after Israel routed adjacent nations in that war that year, occupying territories comprising the West Bank, Gaza Strip, the Golan and Jerusalem's eastern sector, US Jewish relationship to Israel evolved considerably. The triumphant outcome, combined with longstanding fears of a “second Holocaust”, resulted in a developing perspective in the country’s critical importance for Jewish communities, and a source of pride for its strength. Language regarding the remarkable quality of the victory and the reclaiming of areas assigned Zionism a religious, even messianic, significance. In those heady years, much of previous uncertainty regarding Zionism disappeared. In the early 1970s, Writer the commentator famously proclaimed: “Zionism unites us all.”

The Agreement and Its Limits

The Zionist consensus excluded Haredi Jews – who typically thought Israel should only be established via conventional understanding of redemption – yet included Reform Judaism, Conservative, contemporary Orthodox and the majority of secular Jews. The common interpretation of the consensus, later termed liberal Zionism, was established on the idea in Israel as a progressive and free – albeit ethnocentric – country. Many American Jews considered the occupation of Palestinian, Syria's and Egyptian lands post-1967 as not permanent, thinking that a resolution was forthcoming that would ensure a Jewish majority in Israel proper and neighbor recognition of the state.

Several cohorts of Jewish Americans were thus brought up with pro-Israel ideology a fundamental aspect of their Jewish identity. Israel became a central part within religious instruction. Yom Ha'atzmaut became a Jewish holiday. National symbols decorated many temples. Seasonal activities were permeated with Israeli songs and the study of modern Hebrew, with Israelis visiting and teaching US young people Israeli culture. Trips to the nation expanded and achieved record numbers via educational trips during that year, when a free trip to the nation became available to Jewish young adults. The state affected almost the entirety of Jewish American identity.

Evolving Situation

Interestingly, throughout these years after 1967, Jewish Americans developed expertise at religious pluralism. Tolerance and communication across various Jewish groups grew.

Except when it came to the Israeli situation – there existed tolerance ended. You could be a right-leaning advocate or a leftwing Zionist, but support for Israel as a Jewish homeland remained unquestioned, and criticizing that narrative categorized you outside mainstream views – an “Un-Jew”, as Tablet magazine described it in an essay in 2021.

But now, during of the ruin of Gaza, famine, dead and orphaned children and frustration over the denial within Jewish communities who avoid admitting their involvement, that agreement has collapsed. The liberal Zionist “center” {has lost|no longer