🔗 Share this article

Marking two years after that horrific attack of 7 October 2023, which deeply affected global Jewish populations unlike anything else since the creation of the Jewish state.

Within Jewish communities it was profoundly disturbing. For the state of Israel, it was deeply humiliating. The entire Zionist project was founded on the assumption which held that the nation would prevent things like this repeating.

A response was inevitable. Yet the chosen course undertaken by Israel – the widespread destruction of the Gaza Strip, the deaths and injuries of tens of thousands ordinary people – constituted a specific policy. This particular approach made more difficult how many American Jews processed the October 7th events that precipitated the response, and it now complicates the community's commemoration of the anniversary. How can someone honor and reflect on an atrocity targeting their community in the midst of an atrocity done to a different population attributed to their identity?

The Difficulty of Remembrance

The challenge in grieving stems from the circumstance where there is no consensus regarding the implications of these developments. In fact, for the American Jewish community, the last two years have seen the breakdown of a decades-long agreement about the Zionist movement.

The beginnings of pro-Israel unity among American Jewry can be traced to an early twentieth-century publication written by a legal scholar subsequently appointed high court jurist Justice Brandeis named “The Jewish Problem; How to Solve it”. But the consensus really takes hold following the 1967 conflict in 1967. Before then, Jewish Americans maintained a fragile but stable cohabitation among different factions which maintained a range of views about the requirement of a Jewish state – pro-Israel advocates, non-Zionists and opponents.

Background Information

Such cohabitation persisted throughout the mid-twentieth century, through surviving aspects of socialist Jewish movements, through the non-aligned American Jewish Committee, among the opposing religious group and other organizations. In the view of Louis Finkelstein, the leader at JTS, pro-Israel ideology was more spiritual rather than political, and he forbade performance of Israel's anthem, the national song, at JTS ordinations in those years. Nor were Zionist ideology the central focus within modern Orthodox Judaism until after that war. Different Jewish identity models coexisted.

However following Israel routed adjacent nations in the six-day war during that period, seizing land comprising Palestinian territories, Gaza Strip, Golan Heights and East Jerusalem, the American Jewish connection with Israel changed dramatically. The triumphant outcome, along with enduring anxieties about another genocide, resulted in an increasing conviction in the country’s critical importance within Jewish identity, and generated admiration for its strength. Rhetoric about the remarkable quality of the victory and the freeing of territory assigned the movement a religious, potentially salvific, significance. In that triumphant era, a significant portion of existing hesitation toward Israel disappeared. During the seventies, Commentary magazine editor the commentator stated: “Zionism unites us all.”

The Agreement and Its Boundaries

The pro-Israel agreement excluded Haredi Jews – who largely believed a nation should only be established via conventional understanding of the messiah – however joined Reform, Conservative Judaism, Modern Orthodox and the majority of secular Jews. The most popular form of the consensus, later termed left-leaning Zionism, was founded on the conviction about the nation as a progressive and democratic – albeit ethnocentric – country. Numerous US Jews saw the occupation of Palestinian, Syrian and Egypt's territories post-1967 as not permanent, thinking that a resolution was forthcoming that would ensure Jewish demographic dominance within Israel's original borders and regional acceptance of Israel.

Two generations of American Jews grew up with pro-Israel ideology a core part of their religious identity. The state transformed into a central part in Jewish learning. Yom Ha'atzmaut evolved into a religious observance. National symbols were displayed in religious institutions. Summer camps were permeated with Israeli songs and learning of modern Hebrew, with Israeli guests instructing American teenagers Israeli culture. Travel to Israel increased and reached new heights via educational trips during that year, when a free trip to Israel was offered to Jewish young adults. The state affected almost the entirety of the American Jewish experience.

Changing Dynamics

Paradoxically, during this period post-1967, American Jewry became adept regarding denominational coexistence. Acceptance and discussion between Jewish denominations grew.

Yet concerning the Israeli situation – there existed tolerance found its boundary. One could identify as a conservative supporter or a progressive supporter, but support for Israel as a majority-Jewish country was a given, and questioning that position placed you outside mainstream views – outside the community, as a Jewish periodical termed it in a piece recently.

However currently, during of the devastation within Gaza, famine, dead and orphaned children and frustration over the denial of many fellow Jews who refuse to recognize their responsibility, that unity has disintegrated. The liberal Zionist “center” {has lost|no longer