🔗 Share this article

It has been that horrific attack of October 7, 2023, an event that shook Jewish communities worldwide like no other occurrence following the establishment of the state of Israel.

Among Jewish people the event proved deeply traumatic. For the state of Israel, it was deeply humiliating. The whole Zionist movement rested on the belief that the Jewish state would prevent such atrocities occurring in the future.

A response seemed necessary. But the response Israel pursued – the comprehensive devastation of the Gaza Strip, the casualties of many thousands non-combatants – was a choice. This selected path made more difficult the perspective of many US Jewish community members grappled with the attack that triggered it, and presently makes difficult the community's remembrance of the anniversary. How does one mourn and commemorate a horrific event targeting their community in the midst of devastation being inflicted upon a different population in your name?

The Complexity of Grieving

The challenge of mourning stems from the fact that little unity prevails regarding the significance of these events. Indeed, for the American Jewish community, the recent twenty-four months have witnessed the collapse of a fifty-year consensus on Zionism itself.

The origins of a Zionist consensus among American Jewry dates back to an early twentieth-century publication by the lawyer subsequently appointed high court jurist Louis D. Brandeis titled “The Jewish Question; How to Solve it”. However, the agreement really takes hold subsequent to the 1967 conflict in 1967. Earlier, US Jewish communities housed a fragile but stable cohabitation across various segments holding a range of views about the requirement for Israel – pro-Israel advocates, non-Zionists and anti-Zionists.

Background Information

Such cohabitation endured throughout the post-war decades, through surviving aspects of socialist Jewish movements, in the non-Zionist US Jewish group, in the anti-Zionist religious group and similar institutions. For Louis Finkelstein, the chancellor of the theological institution, the Zionist movement had greater religious significance instead of governmental, and he prohibited performance of Hatikvah, the national song, during seminary ceremonies during that period. Nor were Zionism and pro-Israelism the main element for contemporary Orthodox communities before the 1967 conflict. Alternative Jewish perspectives existed alongside.

However following Israel defeated adjacent nations in that war in 1967, taking control of areas including Palestinian territories, Gaza, Golan Heights and East Jerusalem, US Jewish connection with Israel underwent significant transformation. The military success, along with enduring anxieties regarding repeated persecution, led to a growing belief about the nation's essential significance for Jewish communities, and created pride for its strength. Rhetoric about the remarkable nature of the success and the reclaiming of land provided the movement a religious, almost redemptive, significance. During that enthusiastic period, a significant portion of previous uncertainty regarding Zionism dissipated. In the early 1970s, Writer Norman Podhoretz declared: “We are all Zionists now.”

The Consensus and Its Limits

The Zionist consensus left out the ultra-Orthodox – who generally maintained a nation should only emerge via conventional understanding of the messiah – however joined Reform Judaism, Conservative Judaism, contemporary Orthodox and most secular Jews. The common interpretation of the consensus, identified as progressive Zionism, was founded on a belief in Israel as a liberal and free – albeit ethnocentric – country. Many American Jews viewed the occupation of Arab, Syrian and Egypt's territories following the war as provisional, believing that a resolution was imminent that would ensure Jewish demographic dominance in Israel proper and regional acceptance of the state.

Multiple generations of Jewish Americans were thus brought up with support for Israel a fundamental aspect of their Jewish identity. The nation became a central part of Jewish education. Israeli national day became a Jewish holiday. Blue and white banners adorned many temples. Youth programs integrated with Israeli songs and the study of contemporary Hebrew, with Israeli guests educating US young people Israeli culture. Visits to Israel expanded and reached new heights through Birthright programs during that year, providing no-cost visits to the nation became available to US Jewish youth. Israel permeated nearly every aspect of the American Jewish experience.

Shifting Landscape

Interestingly, during this period following the war, Jewish Americans grew skilled at religious pluralism. Open-mindedness and communication among different Jewish movements grew.

Except when it came to the Israeli situation – that’s where diversity ended. One could identify as a right-leaning advocate or a leftwing Zionist, but support for Israel as a Jewish homeland was assumed, and questioning that narrative placed you outside mainstream views – outside the community, as a Jewish periodical termed it in a piece recently.

However currently, amid of the destruction within Gaza, food shortages, child casualties and anger regarding the refusal within Jewish communities who refuse to recognize their responsibility, that unity has broken down. The liberal Zionist “center” {has lost|no longer