🔗 Share this article

Marking two years after the horrific attack of 7 October 2023, which deeply affected world Jewry like no other occurrence since the founding of the state of Israel.

For Jews it was profoundly disturbing. For the Israeli government, the situation represented a significant embarrassment. The entire Zionist project rested on the presumption that the Jewish state would ensure against things like this occurring in the future.

A response seemed necessary. However, the particular response undertaken by Israel – the obliteration of Gaza, the killing and maiming of many thousands non-combatants – constituted a specific policy. This selected path created complexity in the perspective of many Jewish Americans understood the October 7th events that triggered it, and currently challenges their observance of the anniversary. How can someone mourn and commemorate a horrific event affecting their nation during a catastrophe being inflicted upon another people attributed to their identity?

The Complexity of Grieving

The challenge surrounding remembrance exists because of the circumstance where little unity prevails regarding what any of this means. Indeed, among Jewish Americans, this two-year period have seen the disintegration of a decades-long consensus regarding Zionism.

The beginnings of Zionist agreement among American Jewry dates back to a 1915 essay by the lawyer and then future high court jurist Justice Brandeis titled “The Jewish Problem; How to Solve it”. But the consensus really takes hold following the 1967 conflict during 1967. Before then, Jewish Americans maintained a fragile but stable coexistence between groups holding a range of views about the need for a Jewish nation – Zionists, non-Zionists and opponents.

Previous Developments

Such cohabitation endured through the mid-twentieth century, within remaining elements of socialist Jewish movements, in the non-Zionist US Jewish group, in the anti-Zionist Jewish organization and comparable entities. For Louis Finkelstein, the head at JTS, Zionism had greater religious significance instead of governmental, and he did not permit singing Israel's anthem, the Israeli national anthem, during seminary ceremonies in those years. Furthermore, Zionism and pro-Israelism the central focus of Modern Orthodoxy before that war. Jewish identitarian alternatives remained present.

However following Israel defeated adjacent nations in the six-day war during that period, occupying territories including the West Bank, Gaza Strip, Golan Heights and Jerusalem's eastern sector, the American Jewish connection with the country changed dramatically. Israel’s victory, along with enduring anxieties regarding repeated persecution, led to a developing perspective in the country’s vital role within Jewish identity, and generated admiration for its strength. Rhetoric about the remarkable quality of the victory and the “liberation” of land provided the Zionist project a theological, potentially salvific, importance. In those heady years, a significant portion of previous uncertainty about Zionism vanished. During the seventies, Commentary magazine editor Norman Podhoretz stated: “Everyone supports Zionism today.”

The Unity and Its Boundaries

The pro-Israel agreement left out Haredi Jews – who largely believed a Jewish state should only emerge via conventional understanding of the Messiah – but united Reform Judaism, Conservative, Modern Orthodox and the majority of non-affiliated Jews. The predominant version of the consensus, later termed liberal Zionism, was based on the conviction about the nation as a liberal and free – albeit ethnocentric – country. Countless Jewish Americans viewed the administration of Arab, Syria's and Egyptian lands after 1967 as temporary, believing that an agreement would soon emerge that would maintain a Jewish majority within Israel's original borders and Middle Eastern approval of the nation.

Two generations of US Jews were thus brought up with Zionism a fundamental aspect of their identity as Jews. The state transformed into an important element in Jewish learning. Israeli national day evolved into a religious observance. Israeli flags adorned many temples. Summer camps became infused with Israeli songs and learning of contemporary Hebrew, with Israelis visiting educating American teenagers Israeli customs. Trips to the nation expanded and achieved record numbers with Birthright Israel during that year, providing no-cost visits to the nation was provided to Jewish young adults. The nation influenced nearly every aspect of Jewish American identity.

Changing Dynamics

Paradoxically, in these decades following the war, American Jewry became adept in religious diversity. Open-mindedness and communication between Jewish denominations expanded.

Yet concerning support for Israel – there existed diversity reached its limit. One could identify as a right-leaning advocate or a leftwing Zionist, however endorsement of the nation as a Jewish homeland remained unquestioned, and questioning that narrative placed you outside mainstream views – a non-conformist, as Tablet magazine labeled it in a piece recently.

However currently, amid of the ruin within Gaza, famine, dead and orphaned children and anger about the rejection by numerous Jewish individuals who avoid admitting their complicity, that agreement has collapsed. The liberal Zionist “center” {has lost|no longer