🔗 Share this article

It has been that horrific attack of the events of October 7th, an event that profoundly impacted Jewish communities worldwide like no other occurrence following the creation of the Jewish state.

Among Jewish people it was profoundly disturbing. For the state of Israel, it was a significant embarrassment. The entire Zionist project had been established on the presumption that the Jewish state would prevent similar tragedies repeating.

Some form of retaliation appeared unavoidable. But the response Israel pursued – the obliteration of the Gaza Strip, the casualties of numerous of civilians – represented a decision. This selected path created complexity in how many US Jewish community members processed the October 7th events that set it in motion, and currently challenges their remembrance of the day. In what way can people mourn and commemorate a horrific event against your people while simultaneously an atrocity being inflicted upon other individuals connected to their community?

The Challenge of Remembrance

The complexity in grieving lies in the circumstance where there is no consensus regarding what any of this means. Indeed, among Jewish Americans, the last two years have witnessed the disintegration of a half-century-old agreement regarding Zionism.

The early development of a Zionist consensus within US Jewish communities dates back to an early twentieth-century publication authored by an attorney subsequently appointed Supreme Court judge Louis Brandeis named “The Jewish Problem; Addressing the Challenge”. Yet the unity became firmly established following the six-day war in 1967. Earlier, US Jewish communities maintained a fragile but stable cohabitation between groups which maintained diverse perspectives concerning the requirement for a Jewish nation – pro-Israel advocates, non-Zionists and anti-Zionists.

Background Information

This parallel existence persisted through the mid-twentieth century, within remaining elements of Jewish socialism, within the neutral American Jewish Committee, within the critical American Council for Judaism and similar institutions. For Louis Finkelstein, the head of the Jewish Theological Seminary, Zionism was more spiritual instead of governmental, and he prohibited singing Hatikvah, Hatikvah, during seminary ceremonies during that period. Furthermore, Zionist ideology the centerpiece of Modern Orthodoxy prior to the six-day war. Alternative Jewish perspectives existed alongside.

Yet after Israel overcame adjacent nations during the 1967 conflict during that period, occupying territories comprising Palestinian territories, Gaza Strip, Golan Heights and East Jerusalem, the American Jewish perspective on the country underwent significant transformation. Israel’s victory, coupled with persistent concerns about another genocide, produced an increasing conviction in the country’s critical importance within Jewish identity, and a source of pride in its resilience. Rhetoric concerning the remarkable nature of the success and the “liberation” of areas assigned Zionism a spiritual, potentially salvific, significance. In those heady years, much of the remaining ambivalence regarding Zionism disappeared. During the seventies, Publication editor Podhoretz famously proclaimed: “Everyone supports Zionism today.”

The Unity and Restrictions

The pro-Israel agreement excluded the ultra-Orthodox – who typically thought a Jewish state should only be ushered in by a traditional rendering of redemption – but united Reform, Conservative Judaism, Modern Orthodox and nearly all non-affiliated Jews. The common interpretation of the unified position, what became known as liberal Zionism, was established on a belief regarding Israel as a progressive and liberal – though Jewish-centered – country. Countless Jewish Americans saw the administration of local, Syria's and Egypt's territories following the war as provisional, thinking that an agreement would soon emerge that would maintain a Jewish majority in pre-1967 Israel and regional acceptance of the nation.

Multiple generations of American Jews were thus brought up with support for Israel a core part of their identity as Jews. Israel became a central part within religious instruction. Yom Ha'atzmaut became a Jewish holiday. National symbols were displayed in religious institutions. Summer camps became infused with Hebrew music and the study of modern Hebrew, with Israeli guests instructing American teenagers Israeli culture. Visits to Israel increased and achieved record numbers through Birthright programs by 1999, when a free trip to Israel was provided to young American Jews. Israel permeated almost the entirety of US Jewish life.

Evolving Situation

Ironically, in these decades after 1967, US Jewish communities grew skilled regarding denominational coexistence. Tolerance and communication across various Jewish groups increased.

However regarding Zionism and Israel – that represented pluralism ended. You could be a conservative supporter or a liberal advocate, but support for Israel as a Jewish state was assumed, and criticizing that position placed you beyond accepted boundaries – an “Un-Jew”, as a Jewish periodical termed it in a piece in 2021.

However currently, amid of the destruction in Gaza, food shortages, young victims and frustration regarding the refusal within Jewish communities who refuse to recognize their involvement, that consensus has collapsed. The centrist pro-Israel view {has lost|no longer