🔗 Share this article

Two years have passed since that deadly assault of the events of October 7th, an event that shook Jewish communities worldwide unlike anything else following the founding of Israel as a nation.

Among Jewish people the event proved profoundly disturbing. For Israel as a nation, it was deeply humiliating. The entire Zionist movement had been established on the assumption which held that the Jewish state would ensure against things like this from ever happening again.

Military action was inevitable. But the response Israel pursued – the comprehensive devastation of the Gaza Strip, the killing and maiming of many thousands ordinary people – constituted a specific policy. This particular approach complicated the perspective of many Jewish Americans processed the initial assault that triggered it, and currently challenges their remembrance of that date. How can someone honor and reflect on a horrific event against your people during an atrocity being inflicted upon a different population in your name?

The Challenge of Mourning

The challenge in grieving exists because of the circumstance where there is no consensus as to what any of this means. Actually, among Jewish Americans, the recent twenty-four months have witnessed the collapse of a decades-long unity regarding Zionism.

The beginnings of Zionist agreement across American Jewish populations dates back to a 1915 essay written by a legal scholar subsequently appointed supreme court justice Justice Brandeis called “Jewish Issues; Finding Solutions”. However, the agreement truly solidified following the 1967 conflict during 1967. Before then, US Jewish communities contained a fragile but stable parallel existence between groups holding a range of views concerning the need of a Jewish state – pro-Israel advocates, neutral parties and anti-Zionists.

Previous Developments

That coexistence continued through the post-war decades, through surviving aspects of leftist Jewish organizations, within the neutral American Jewish Committee, among the opposing American Council for Judaism and comparable entities. In the view of Louis Finkelstein, the leader at JTS, pro-Israel ideology had greater religious significance rather than political, and he did not permit singing Hatikvah, Hatikvah, at JTS ordinations during that period. Furthermore, Zionist ideology the centerpiece for contemporary Orthodox communities before the 1967 conflict. Different Jewish identity models existed alongside.

But after Israel overcame neighboring countries in that war that year, occupying territories comprising Palestinian territories, Gaza, the Golan and East Jerusalem, US Jewish relationship to the nation evolved considerably. The military success, along with persistent concerns of a “second Holocaust”, produced a developing perspective in the country’s essential significance within Jewish identity, and generated admiration for its strength. Language concerning the “miraculous” aspect of the victory and the freeing of areas assigned the movement a spiritual, even messianic, significance. In those heady years, a significant portion of the remaining ambivalence about Zionism dissipated. In the early 1970s, Publication editor Podhoretz declared: “Everyone supports Zionism today.”

The Unity and Restrictions

The unified position excluded strictly Orthodox communities – who generally maintained Israel should only be established by a traditional rendering of redemption – however joined Reform, Conservative, Modern Orthodox and nearly all unaffiliated individuals. The most popular form of the unified position, identified as left-leaning Zionism, was based on a belief about the nation as a democratic and liberal – albeit ethnocentric – nation. Countless Jewish Americans saw the control of Arab, Syrian and Egyptian lands post-1967 as temporary, assuming that an agreement was imminent that would maintain Jewish population majority in Israel proper and Middle Eastern approval of Israel.

Several cohorts of Jewish Americans grew up with Zionism a core part of their identity as Jews. The nation became a key component of Jewish education. Israeli national day turned into a celebration. National symbols decorated most synagogues. Seasonal activities were permeated with national melodies and learning of the language, with Israeli guests and teaching American youth Israeli customs. Trips to the nation grew and reached new heights with Birthright Israel by 1999, offering complimentary travel to Israel became available to young American Jews. The state affected nearly every aspect of the American Jewish experience.

Evolving Situation

Paradoxically, in these decades post-1967, US Jewish communities became adept in religious diversity. Open-mindedness and discussion among different Jewish movements increased.

However regarding support for Israel – that’s where diversity ended. One could identify as a conservative supporter or a liberal advocate, but support for Israel as a Jewish state was a given, and criticizing that position positioned you outside mainstream views – a non-conformist, as Tablet magazine described it in a piece in 2021.

Yet presently, amid of the ruin within Gaza, food shortages, young victims and anger regarding the refusal of many fellow Jews who avoid admitting their complicity, that agreement has disintegrated. The moderate Zionist position {has lost|no longer