🔗 Share this article

It has been that deadly assault of the events of October 7th, an event that shook global Jewish populations like no other occurrence since the founding of the Jewish state.

Within Jewish communities it was shocking. For the state of Israel, it was deeply humiliating. The whole Zionist movement had been established on the assumption which held that the Jewish state would prevent such atrocities occurring in the future.

A response appeared unavoidable. But the response Israel pursued – the widespread destruction of Gaza, the deaths and injuries of tens of thousands of civilians – constituted a specific policy. This selected path complicated the way numerous US Jewish community members processed the attack that triggered it, and presently makes difficult their observance of that date. In what way can people mourn and commemorate an atrocity affecting their nation in the midst of a catastrophe being inflicted upon a different population connected to their community?

The Difficulty of Mourning

The difficulty of mourning lies in the fact that there is no consensus regarding the significance of these events. Indeed, for the American Jewish community, the last two years have seen the collapse of a fifty-year agreement regarding Zionism.

The beginnings of a Zionist consensus across American Jewish populations dates back to an early twentieth-century publication authored by an attorney who would later become supreme court justice Justice Brandeis called “The Jewish Question; How to Solve it”. However, the agreement really takes hold after the 1967 conflict that year. Earlier, US Jewish communities maintained a delicate yet functioning coexistence across various segments that had a range of views regarding the necessity for Israel – Zionists, neutral parties and opponents.

Previous Developments

Such cohabitation continued during the mid-twentieth century, in remnants of socialist Jewish movements, in the non-Zionist US Jewish group, among the opposing American Council for Judaism and comparable entities. Regarding Chancellor Finkelstein, the chancellor at JTS, pro-Israel ideology had greater religious significance instead of governmental, and he did not permit the singing of Israel's anthem, Hatikvah, at religious school events in those years. Furthermore, Zionism and pro-Israelism the central focus within modern Orthodox Judaism prior to the six-day war. Jewish identitarian alternatives remained present.

But after Israel defeated neighboring countries in that war in 1967, taking control of areas such as the West Bank, Gaza Strip, Golan Heights and East Jerusalem, the American Jewish connection with Israel evolved considerably. The military success, coupled with longstanding fears of a “second Holocaust”, produced an increasing conviction in the country’s vital role within Jewish identity, and generated admiration for its strength. Rhetoric about the “miraculous” nature of the victory and the “liberation” of territory gave Zionism a religious, even messianic, meaning. During that enthusiastic period, much of the remaining ambivalence about Zionism disappeared. During the seventies, Writer the commentator stated: “We are all Zionists now.”

The Unity and Restrictions

The pro-Israel agreement did not include strictly Orthodox communities – who typically thought Israel should only emerge through traditional interpretation of the Messiah – yet included Reform Judaism, Conservative, Modern Orthodox and nearly all non-affiliated Jews. The predominant version of the unified position, what became known as left-leaning Zionism, was based on the idea in Israel as a liberal and liberal – albeit ethnocentric – country. Many American Jews considered the administration of Palestinian, Syrian and Egyptian lands following the war as provisional, assuming that a resolution would soon emerge that would ensure Jewish demographic dominance in Israel proper and Middle Eastern approval of the state.

Several cohorts of Jewish Americans were raised with pro-Israel ideology a fundamental aspect of their Jewish identity. Israel became a central part of Jewish education. Israeli national day evolved into a religious observance. Israeli flags were displayed in many temples. Seasonal activities became infused with national melodies and the study of the language, with visitors from Israel instructing American teenagers Israeli customs. Travel to Israel expanded and peaked through Birthright programs in 1999, when a free trip to the nation was provided to young American Jews. The nation influenced virtually all areas of the American Jewish experience.

Evolving Situation

Ironically, during this period post-1967, Jewish Americans became adept in religious diversity. Acceptance and communication between Jewish denominations expanded.

Yet concerning the Israeli situation – that’s where diversity reached its limit. One could identify as a rightwing Zionist or a progressive supporter, yet backing Israel as a Jewish state was assumed, and questioning that narrative categorized you outside the consensus – an “Un-Jew”, as Tablet magazine described it in writing in 2021.

However currently, under the weight of the destruction in Gaza, food shortages, dead and orphaned children and outrage about the rejection by numerous Jewish individuals who refuse to recognize their complicity, that unity has collapsed. The centrist pro-Israel view {has lost|no longer