🔗 Share this article

Marking two years after that mass murder of 7 October 2023, an event that shook world Jewry like no other occurrence following the founding of Israel as a nation.

For Jews the event proved profoundly disturbing. For Israel as a nation, it was deeply humiliating. The entire Zionist endeavor had been established on the belief which held that the nation would prevent things like this occurring in the future.

Military action appeared unavoidable. Yet the chosen course undertaken by Israel – the comprehensive devastation of Gaza, the deaths and injuries of tens of thousands ordinary people – constituted a specific policy. And this choice complicated how many Jewish Americans processed the initial assault that set it in motion, and currently challenges their commemoration of the day. In what way can people mourn and commemorate a horrific event against your people in the midst of an atrocity being inflicted upon a different population attributed to their identity?

The Challenge of Remembrance

The challenge of mourning lies in the fact that no agreement exists regarding what any of this means. In fact, within US Jewish circles, the recent twenty-four months have witnessed the collapse of a decades-long unity on Zionism itself.

The origins of pro-Israel unity among American Jewry dates back to an early twentieth-century publication authored by an attorney subsequently appointed high court jurist Louis Brandeis called “The Jewish Problem; Finding Solutions”. However, the agreement truly solidified subsequent to the Six-Day War during 1967. Before then, American Jewry housed a fragile but stable parallel existence between groups holding a range of views concerning the requirement of a Jewish state – Zionists, non-Zionists and opponents.

Background Information

That coexistence persisted through the mid-twentieth century, within remaining elements of socialist Jewish movements, within the neutral US Jewish group, within the critical Jewish organization and other organizations. In the view of Louis Finkelstein, the leader at JTS, pro-Israel ideology had greater religious significance instead of governmental, and he forbade singing Hatikvah, Hatikvah, at religious school events in the early 1960s. Furthermore, support for Israel the centerpiece for contemporary Orthodox communities prior to that war. Different Jewish identity models coexisted.

Yet after Israel overcame neighboring countries in that war during that period, taking control of areas such as Palestinian territories, Gaza Strip, Golan Heights and East Jerusalem, US Jewish perspective on the country changed dramatically. The triumphant outcome, coupled with persistent concerns regarding repeated persecution, resulted in a developing perspective about the nation's essential significance within Jewish identity, and a source of pride in its resilience. Discourse concerning the remarkable aspect of the outcome and the reclaiming of territory gave the movement a theological, potentially salvific, meaning. In that triumphant era, a significant portion of existing hesitation about Zionism dissipated. In the early 1970s, Commentary magazine editor the commentator declared: “Everyone supports Zionism today.”

The Agreement and Restrictions

The Zionist consensus excluded the ultra-Orthodox – who generally maintained a Jewish state should only be ushered in via conventional understanding of the messiah – yet included Reform Judaism, Conservative Judaism, contemporary Orthodox and the majority of non-affiliated Jews. The most popular form of this agreement, identified as left-leaning Zionism, was founded on the conviction about the nation as a democratic and liberal – albeit ethnocentric – state. Countless Jewish Americans considered the administration of Palestinian, Syrian and Egypt's territories after 1967 as not permanent, thinking that a resolution would soon emerge that would ensure a Jewish majority in pre-1967 Israel and Middle Eastern approval of the nation.

Multiple generations of American Jews were raised with Zionism a core part of their identity as Jews. Israel became an important element of Jewish education. Israeli national day evolved into a religious observance. Israeli flags were displayed in most synagogues. Youth programs became infused with Hebrew music and education of the language, with Israeli guests educating American youth Israeli culture. Visits to Israel increased and peaked through Birthright programs by 1999, offering complimentary travel to the nation was provided to young American Jews. Israel permeated virtually all areas of the American Jewish experience.

Changing Dynamics

Interestingly, during this period after 1967, American Jewry became adept in religious diversity. Open-mindedness and communication across various Jewish groups increased.

Except when it came to the Israeli situation – there existed tolerance reached its limit. You could be a conservative supporter or a progressive supporter, however endorsement of the nation as a Jewish homeland remained unquestioned, and challenging that perspective placed you beyond accepted boundaries – outside the community, as one publication labeled it in writing that year.

But now, amid of the ruin within Gaza, food shortages, young victims and anger over the denial by numerous Jewish individuals who decline to acknowledge their responsibility, that agreement has collapsed. The moderate Zionist position {has lost|no longer