🔗 Share this article

It has been that horrific attack of 7 October 2023, an event that deeply affected global Jewish populations more than any event following the creation of Israel as a nation.

Among Jewish people it was profoundly disturbing. For the state of Israel, it was a significant embarrassment. The whole Zionist endeavor rested on the belief that the Jewish state would prevent such atrocities occurring in the future.

Some form of retaliation was inevitable. However, the particular response that Israel implemented – the widespread destruction of the Gaza Strip, the casualties of many thousands ordinary people – was a choice. This particular approach created complexity in how many American Jews grappled with the initial assault that triggered it, and presently makes difficult their observance of the anniversary. How can someone grieve and remember a tragedy targeting their community while simultaneously a catastrophe being inflicted upon another people connected to their community?

The Challenge of Remembrance

The difficulty surrounding remembrance lies in the fact that little unity prevails as to the implications of these developments. Indeed, among Jewish Americans, the recent twenty-four months have seen the disintegration of a decades-long unity on Zionism itself.

The origins of a Zionist consensus among American Jewry can be traced to a 1915 essay by the lawyer who would later become high court jurist Louis D. Brandeis titled “The Jewish Problem; How to Solve it”. Yet the unity became firmly established after the Six-Day War in 1967. Before then, US Jewish communities contained a fragile but stable cohabitation across various segments that had different opinions about the requirement for Israel – Zionists, neutral parties and anti-Zionists.

Background Information

That coexistence persisted through the post-war decades, within remaining elements of socialist Jewish movements, through the non-aligned American Jewish Committee, within the critical Jewish organization and comparable entities. In the view of Louis Finkelstein, the leader of the theological institution, the Zionist movement had greater religious significance instead of governmental, and he did not permit performance of the Israeli national anthem, the Israeli national anthem, at religious school events in the early 1960s. Nor were support for Israel the centerpiece of Modern Orthodoxy until after that war. Alternative Jewish perspectives coexisted.

However following Israel defeated neighboring countries in the six-day war that year, occupying territories such as Palestinian territories, Gaza, the Golan and East Jerusalem, the American Jewish perspective on the nation evolved considerably. The military success, coupled with persistent concerns of a “second Holocaust”, produced a growing belief about the nation's vital role for Jewish communities, and a source of pride for its strength. Rhetoric about the “miraculous” nature of the success and the freeing of areas gave the Zionist project a spiritual, potentially salvific, significance. During that enthusiastic period, considerable previous uncertainty about Zionism vanished. In that decade, Publication editor Norman Podhoretz stated: “Zionism unites us all.”

The Agreement and Its Boundaries

The Zionist consensus left out strictly Orthodox communities – who largely believed a nation should only emerge via conventional understanding of the messiah – but united Reform Judaism, Conservative Judaism, contemporary Orthodox and most secular Jews. The predominant version of the consensus, identified as liberal Zionism, was established on a belief in Israel as a democratic and liberal – though Jewish-centered – nation. Numerous US Jews considered the control of local, Syria's and Egyptian lands after 1967 as temporary, believing that a resolution was imminent that would ensure a Jewish majority in pre-1967 Israel and regional acceptance of Israel.

Two generations of US Jews were thus brought up with support for Israel a fundamental aspect of their religious identity. The nation became an important element of Jewish education. Israeli national day became a Jewish holiday. Israeli flags were displayed in many temples. Summer camps became infused with Israeli songs and education of contemporary Hebrew, with Israelis visiting instructing US young people Israeli customs. Trips to the nation expanded and reached new heights with Birthright Israel during that year, offering complimentary travel to the country was provided to US Jewish youth. The state affected nearly every aspect of US Jewish life.

Evolving Situation

Paradoxically, throughout these years after 1967, Jewish Americans developed expertise at religious pluralism. Open-mindedness and dialogue between Jewish denominations grew.

Yet concerning support for Israel – there existed diversity ended. Individuals might align with a rightwing Zionist or a leftwing Zionist, yet backing Israel as a Jewish homeland was assumed, and questioning that narrative placed you beyond accepted boundaries – outside the community, as one publication described it in an essay in 2021.

However currently, amid of the devastation in Gaza, famine, child casualties and frustration regarding the refusal by numerous Jewish individuals who avoid admitting their involvement, that unity has collapsed. The centrist pro-Israel view {has lost|no longer