🔗 Share this article

Marking two years after that mass murder of 7 October 2023, which shook global Jewish populations like no other occurrence following the founding of Israel as a nation.

Within Jewish communities the event proved deeply traumatic. For the Israeli government, the situation represented a significant embarrassment. The whole Zionist project rested on the presumption which held that the nation could stop things like this occurring in the future.

Military action appeared unavoidable. But the response that Israel implemented – the comprehensive devastation of Gaza, the deaths and injuries of numerous non-combatants – was a choice. This selected path complicated the perspective of many Jewish Americans processed the initial assault that precipitated the response, and currently challenges their remembrance of the anniversary. How does one honor and reflect on a tragedy affecting their nation in the midst of a catastrophe being inflicted upon a different population connected to their community?

The Complexity of Grieving

The complexity of mourning exists because of the reality that there is no consensus about what any of this means. In fact, among Jewish Americans, this two-year period have seen the collapse of a half-century-old consensus regarding Zionism.

The beginnings of Zionist agreement among American Jewry dates back to writings from 1915 authored by an attorney who would later become Supreme Court judge Louis D. Brandeis named “Jewish Issues; Addressing the Challenge”. However, the agreement truly solidified subsequent to the six-day war during 1967. Earlier, American Jewry housed a fragile but stable parallel existence among different factions holding different opinions regarding the necessity for a Jewish nation – pro-Israel advocates, neutral parties and opponents.

Previous Developments

This parallel existence endured during the post-war decades, within remaining elements of leftist Jewish organizations, within the neutral American Jewish Committee, in the anti-Zionist religious group and other organizations. Regarding Chancellor Finkelstein, the leader of the theological institution, pro-Israel ideology was more spiritual instead of governmental, and he forbade performance of Hatikvah, the Israeli national anthem, at religious school events in those years. Nor were support for Israel the main element within modern Orthodox Judaism before the 1967 conflict. Different Jewish identity models remained present.

However following Israel defeated its neighbors in the six-day war during that period, occupying territories comprising the West Bank, Gaza Strip, the Golan and East Jerusalem, the American Jewish connection with the country changed dramatically. The military success, along with enduring anxieties regarding repeated persecution, led to a growing belief about the nation's essential significance to the Jewish people, and a source of pride regarding its endurance. Discourse concerning the “miraculous” aspect of the victory and the “liberation” of land provided Zionism a spiritual, even messianic, meaning. In those heady years, a significant portion of existing hesitation about Zionism vanished. During the seventies, Commentary magazine editor Podhoretz stated: “Zionism unites us all.”

The Consensus and Restrictions

The Zionist consensus did not include the ultra-Orthodox – who largely believed Israel should only emerge through traditional interpretation of the messiah – but united Reform Judaism, Conservative, Modern Orthodox and nearly all secular Jews. The most popular form of this agreement, what became known as progressive Zionism, was established on the conviction in Israel as a progressive and free – albeit ethnocentric – nation. Countless Jewish Americans saw the occupation of local, Syrian and Egyptian lands post-1967 as provisional, believing that a resolution would soon emerge that would maintain Jewish population majority in pre-1967 Israel and regional acceptance of the nation.

Multiple generations of Jewish Americans were thus brought up with support for Israel a fundamental aspect of their Jewish identity. The state transformed into a central part in Jewish learning. Yom Ha'atzmaut evolved into a religious observance. National symbols were displayed in many temples. Seasonal activities became infused with Hebrew music and education of the language, with Israelis visiting instructing American teenagers Israeli customs. Travel to Israel grew and achieved record numbers through Birthright programs during that year, when a free trip to Israel was offered to US Jewish youth. Israel permeated almost the entirety of US Jewish life.

Changing Dynamics

Interestingly, during this period post-1967, American Jewry developed expertise regarding denominational coexistence. Open-mindedness and dialogue between Jewish denominations increased.

Yet concerning support for Israel – that represented pluralism reached its limit. One could identify as a rightwing Zionist or a liberal advocate, but support for Israel as a majority-Jewish country was assumed, and criticizing that narrative categorized you beyond accepted boundaries – an “Un-Jew”, as Tablet magazine described it in a piece in 2021.

Yet presently, under the weight of the ruin within Gaza, starvation, child casualties and frustration about the rejection within Jewish communities who refuse to recognize their complicity, that consensus has disintegrated. The liberal Zionist “center” {has lost|no longer