🔗 Share this article

Two years have passed since the mass murder of 7 October 2023, which shook Jewish communities worldwide more than any event since the creation of the Jewish state.

Within Jewish communities the event proved shocking. For the state of Israel, the situation represented a significant embarrassment. The entire Zionist endeavor was founded on the presumption which held that the nation would ensure against such atrocities repeating.

A response appeared unavoidable. However, the particular response undertaken by Israel – the comprehensive devastation of the Gaza Strip, the deaths and injuries of many thousands of civilians – was a choice. And this choice made more difficult the perspective of many American Jews grappled with the attack that precipitated the response, and presently makes difficult their remembrance of the day. How can someone mourn and commemorate a horrific event affecting their nation while simultaneously an atrocity done to another people in your name?

The Challenge of Mourning

The difficulty surrounding remembrance exists because of the fact that no agreement exists about what any of this means. Indeed, among Jewish Americans, the last two years have experienced the disintegration of a fifty-year unity on Zionism itself.

The origins of pro-Israel unity within US Jewish communities dates back to an early twentieth-century publication authored by an attorney who would later become supreme court justice Justice Brandeis called “The Jewish Problem; Finding Solutions”. However, the agreement truly solidified subsequent to the Six-Day War in 1967. Before then, Jewish Americans housed a vulnerable but enduring parallel existence among different factions which maintained diverse perspectives about the necessity for Israel – Zionists, non-Zionists and opponents.

Previous Developments

Such cohabitation persisted during the 1950s and 60s, through surviving aspects of Jewish socialism, within the neutral Jewish communal organization, among the opposing Jewish organization and comparable entities. In the view of Louis Finkelstein, the chancellor of the Jewish Theological Seminary, pro-Israel ideology had greater religious significance instead of governmental, and he did not permit singing Israel's anthem, the national song, at JTS ordinations in the early 1960s. Furthermore, support for Israel the main element within modern Orthodox Judaism before that war. Alternative Jewish perspectives remained present.

However following Israel routed its neighbors in that war in 1967, taking control of areas including Palestinian territories, Gaza, Golan Heights and East Jerusalem, the American Jewish relationship to Israel underwent significant transformation. The triumphant outcome, coupled with enduring anxieties regarding repeated persecution, resulted in a growing belief in the country’s essential significance for Jewish communities, and created pride for its strength. Discourse about the extraordinary nature of the outcome and the reclaiming of territory provided the movement a spiritual, almost redemptive, meaning. In that triumphant era, considerable the remaining ambivalence toward Israel disappeared. In that decade, Commentary magazine editor the commentator stated: “Everyone supports Zionism today.”

The Unity and Restrictions

The unified position excluded Haredi Jews – who largely believed a nation should only be ushered in by a traditional rendering of the messiah – but united Reform, Conservative, Modern Orthodox and most non-affiliated Jews. The common interpretation of this agreement, what became known as progressive Zionism, was based on the conviction about the nation as a liberal and democratic – albeit ethnocentric – state. Countless Jewish Americans viewed the control of local, Syria's and Egypt's territories after 1967 as temporary, believing that a solution was forthcoming that would ensure a Jewish majority in Israel proper and regional acceptance of the nation.

Two generations of Jewish Americans were thus brought up with pro-Israel ideology an essential component of their identity as Jews. The nation became a central part in Jewish learning. Israeli national day turned into a celebration. National symbols adorned religious institutions. Youth programs integrated with Israeli songs and education of contemporary Hebrew, with Israeli guests and teaching American youth national traditions. Travel to Israel grew and reached new heights via educational trips during that year, providing no-cost visits to the country became available to young American Jews. The state affected virtually all areas of the American Jewish experience.

Shifting Landscape

Interestingly, in these decades after 1967, American Jewry became adept regarding denominational coexistence. Open-mindedness and discussion between Jewish denominations increased.

Yet concerning support for Israel – there existed pluralism found its boundary. Individuals might align with a conservative supporter or a leftwing Zionist, but support for Israel as a majority-Jewish country was assumed, and questioning that narrative positioned you outside mainstream views – a non-conformist, as Tablet magazine described it in an essay recently.

However currently, during of the devastation of Gaza, food shortages, child casualties and anger over the denial of many fellow Jews who avoid admitting their responsibility, that consensus has collapsed. The moderate Zionist position {has lost|no longer