🔗 Share this article

Marking two years after the mass murder of the events of October 7th, which shook global Jewish populations more than any event following the founding of the state of Israel.

For Jews it was profoundly disturbing. For the Israeli government, the situation represented deeply humiliating. The whole Zionist endeavor rested on the presumption that the nation would prevent similar tragedies occurring in the future.

A response appeared unavoidable. But the response undertaken by Israel – the widespread destruction of Gaza, the killing and maiming of tens of thousands ordinary people – constituted a specific policy. This selected path made more difficult the perspective of many American Jews processed the October 7th events that triggered it, and it now complicates the community's observance of the day. How does one honor and reflect on an atrocity targeting their community during devastation being inflicted upon a different population in your name?

The Challenge of Grieving

The complexity of mourning exists because of the fact that there is no consensus about the implications of these developments. Actually, for the American Jewish community, this two-year period have witnessed the disintegration of a fifty-year agreement regarding Zionism.

The origins of a Zionist consensus among American Jewry dates back to an early twentieth-century publication written by a legal scholar subsequently appointed high court jurist Justice Brandeis titled “The Jewish Problem; Addressing the Challenge”. Yet the unity truly solidified following the 1967 conflict during 1967. Before then, Jewish Americans housed a vulnerable but enduring parallel existence across various segments which maintained a range of views concerning the necessity for Israel – Zionists, neutral parties and opponents.

Background Information

That coexistence endured through the post-war decades, within remaining elements of socialist Jewish movements, in the non-Zionist American Jewish Committee, in the anti-Zionist Jewish organization and comparable entities. Regarding Chancellor Finkelstein, the chancellor of the theological institution, Zionism had greater religious significance instead of governmental, and he did not permit the singing of Israel's anthem, Hatikvah, during seminary ceremonies in the early 1960s. Furthermore, support for Israel the main element of Modern Orthodoxy prior to that war. Alternative Jewish perspectives remained present.

But after Israel defeated neighboring countries in that war in 1967, occupying territories such as Palestinian territories, Gaza, Golan Heights and East Jerusalem, US Jewish connection with Israel evolved considerably. The military success, along with longstanding fears about another genocide, led to a growing belief regarding Israel's vital role within Jewish identity, and a source of pride for its strength. Language about the extraordinary quality of the success and the freeing of areas provided the Zionist project a spiritual, almost redemptive, significance. In those heady years, a significant portion of previous uncertainty regarding Zionism vanished. In that decade, Commentary magazine editor the commentator famously proclaimed: “We are all Zionists now.”

The Unity and Its Boundaries

The unified position did not include the ultra-Orthodox – who largely believed a Jewish state should only be established by a traditional rendering of the messiah – however joined Reform Judaism, Conservative Judaism, Modern Orthodox and nearly all non-affiliated Jews. The most popular form of this agreement, what became known as left-leaning Zionism, was based on a belief about the nation as a progressive and democratic – albeit ethnocentric – nation. Numerous US Jews considered the control of Palestinian, Syria's and Egyptian lands after 1967 as not permanent, believing that a resolution was forthcoming that would ensure Jewish population majority in Israel proper and Middle Eastern approval of the state.

Several cohorts of Jewish Americans grew up with support for Israel a fundamental aspect of their identity as Jews. The state transformed into a key component within religious instruction. Yom Ha'atzmaut turned into a celebration. Blue and white banners adorned many temples. Summer camps became infused with Israeli songs and learning of modern Hebrew, with Israelis visiting instructing American teenagers national traditions. Trips to the nation expanded and peaked through Birthright programs by 1999, providing no-cost visits to the country was offered to Jewish young adults. Israel permeated nearly every aspect of US Jewish life.

Shifting Landscape

Interestingly, throughout these years post-1967, American Jewry became adept in religious diversity. Tolerance and dialogue across various Jewish groups expanded.

Except when it came to the Israeli situation – that represented tolerance ended. You could be a right-leaning advocate or a liberal advocate, but support for Israel as a majority-Jewish country remained unquestioned, and criticizing that narrative categorized you outside the consensus – a non-conformist, as one publication labeled it in an essay recently.

Yet presently, amid of the ruin within Gaza, food shortages, young victims and frustration about the rejection of many fellow Jews who decline to acknowledge their involvement, that agreement has broken down. The liberal Zionist “center” {has lost|no longer