🔗 Share this article

Two years have passed since the mass murder of 7 October 2023, an event that shook global Jewish populations unlike anything else since the establishment of Israel as a nation.

For Jews it was profoundly disturbing. For Israel as a nation, the situation represented deeply humiliating. The whole Zionist endeavor was founded on the assumption that Israel would prevent similar tragedies from ever happening again.

A response seemed necessary. Yet the chosen course Israel pursued – the widespread destruction of the Gaza Strip, the deaths and injuries of numerous of civilians – constituted a specific policy. And this choice created complexity in the perspective of many American Jews grappled with the October 7th events that set it in motion, and currently challenges their commemoration of the day. How can someone honor and reflect on a horrific event targeting their community in the midst of a catastrophe experienced by another people connected to their community?

The Complexity of Remembrance

The difficulty in grieving exists because of the fact that no agreement exists regarding the significance of these events. Actually, among Jewish Americans, the last two years have experienced the breakdown of a half-century-old consensus on Zionism itself.

The beginnings of a Zionist consensus within US Jewish communities can be traced to writings from 1915 authored by an attorney and then future Supreme Court judge Louis Brandeis called “The Jewish Question; Addressing the Challenge”. But the consensus truly solidified after the six-day war in 1967. Earlier, American Jewry contained a fragile but stable parallel existence among different factions which maintained different opinions regarding the need of a Jewish state – pro-Israel advocates, neutral parties and opponents.

Historical Context

This parallel existence persisted throughout the post-war decades, in remnants of leftist Jewish organizations, through the non-aligned Jewish communal organization, in the anti-Zionist religious group and similar institutions. Regarding Chancellor Finkelstein, the chancellor at JTS, pro-Israel ideology was primarily theological than political, and he forbade performance of Israel's anthem, the Israeli national anthem, at religious school events during that period. Nor were Zionism and pro-Israelism the main element within modern Orthodox Judaism prior to that war. Jewish identitarian alternatives remained present.

But after Israel overcame neighboring countries in the six-day war during that period, occupying territories comprising the West Bank, Gaza Strip, Golan Heights and Jerusalem's eastern sector, US Jewish perspective on Israel underwent significant transformation. The military success, along with enduring anxieties regarding repeated persecution, resulted in an increasing conviction regarding Israel's essential significance within Jewish identity, and a source of pride regarding its endurance. Discourse about the “miraculous” aspect of the victory and the “liberation” of territory gave the Zionist project a theological, potentially salvific, significance. In those heady years, much of existing hesitation about Zionism disappeared. In that decade, Writer Podhoretz stated: “Zionism unites us all.”

The Consensus and Its Boundaries

The pro-Israel agreement did not include strictly Orthodox communities – who typically thought a nation should only emerge through traditional interpretation of redemption – but united Reform, Conservative Judaism, contemporary Orthodox and most secular Jews. The common interpretation of the consensus, what became known as liberal Zionism, was based on the conviction about the nation as a liberal and democratic – though Jewish-centered – nation. Numerous US Jews saw the administration of Palestinian, Syria's and Egypt's territories following the war as temporary, believing that an agreement was imminent that would ensure a Jewish majority within Israel's original borders and Middle Eastern approval of Israel.

Multiple generations of Jewish Americans were raised with Zionism an essential component of their Jewish identity. Israel became a central part within religious instruction. Israel’s Independence Day turned into a celebration. Blue and white banners were displayed in most synagogues. Summer camps became infused with Israeli songs and the study of modern Hebrew, with Israelis visiting instructing American teenagers Israeli customs. Trips to the nation increased and peaked with Birthright Israel by 1999, providing no-cost visits to the nation became available to young American Jews. Israel permeated virtually all areas of US Jewish life.

Evolving Situation

Ironically, in these decades after 1967, American Jewry grew skilled regarding denominational coexistence. Open-mindedness and dialogue among different Jewish movements grew.

However regarding support for Israel – that’s where tolerance found its boundary. Individuals might align with a right-leaning advocate or a liberal advocate, but support for Israel as a Jewish homeland was assumed, and challenging that narrative categorized you outside mainstream views – an “Un-Jew”, as Tablet magazine described it in an essay that year.

However currently, during of the destruction of Gaza, famine, young victims and frustration about the rejection by numerous Jewish individuals who avoid admitting their complicity, that agreement has collapsed. The moderate Zionist position {has lost|no longer