🔗 Share this article

Marking two years after that deadly assault of the events of October 7th, an event that profoundly impacted Jewish communities worldwide unlike anything else since the establishment of the state of Israel.

Within Jewish communities it was profoundly disturbing. For the state of Israel, the situation represented a profound disgrace. The whole Zionist project rested on the belief which held that the Jewish state would ensure against such atrocities repeating.

Military action seemed necessary. However, the particular response undertaken by Israel – the comprehensive devastation of Gaza, the killing and maiming of tens of thousands non-combatants – represented a decision. And this choice created complexity in the perspective of many American Jews grappled with the attack that precipitated the response, and currently challenges the community's remembrance of that date. How can someone grieve and remember a horrific event against your people while simultaneously devastation done to a different population connected to their community?

The Complexity of Remembrance

The difficulty in grieving exists because of the circumstance where little unity prevails regarding the implications of these developments. Actually, within US Jewish circles, this two-year period have experienced the breakdown of a decades-long consensus about the Zionist movement.

The beginnings of a Zionist consensus within US Jewish communities dates back to an early twentieth-century publication by the lawyer subsequently appointed supreme court justice Justice Brandeis titled “The Jewish Problem; How to Solve it”. Yet the unity became firmly established after the Six-Day War that year. Earlier, US Jewish communities maintained a fragile but stable cohabitation among different factions that had diverse perspectives concerning the requirement of a Jewish state – Zionists, non-Zionists and opponents.

Previous Developments

That coexistence persisted during the 1950s and 60s, within remaining elements of socialist Jewish movements, through the non-aligned Jewish communal organization, in the anti-Zionist religious group and comparable entities. For Louis Finkelstein, the leader at JTS, Zionism was primarily theological than political, and he did not permit singing Hatikvah, Hatikvah, during seminary ceremonies in those years. Furthermore, Zionist ideology the main element for contemporary Orthodox communities before the six-day war. Different Jewish identity models coexisted.

However following Israel routed its neighbors in the six-day war that year, seizing land such as Palestinian territories, Gaza Strip, the Golan and Jerusalem's eastern sector, US Jewish perspective on the nation underwent significant transformation. The military success, along with longstanding fears about another genocide, resulted in an increasing conviction about the nation's essential significance to the Jewish people, and created pride for its strength. Discourse regarding the “miraculous” quality of the outcome and the “liberation” of territory gave the Zionist project a religious, even messianic, importance. In that triumphant era, much of previous uncertainty about Zionism dissipated. In the early 1970s, Writer Norman Podhoretz declared: “Everyone supports Zionism today.”

The Agreement and Its Boundaries

The Zionist consensus did not include Haredi Jews – who generally maintained Israel should only be established via conventional understanding of redemption – but united Reform Judaism, Conservative Judaism, contemporary Orthodox and the majority of non-affiliated Jews. The most popular form of this agreement, what became known as progressive Zionism, was founded on the conviction about the nation as a progressive and democratic – while majority-Jewish – country. Many American Jews viewed the control of Palestinian, Syria's and Egyptian lands after 1967 as provisional, thinking that a resolution was forthcoming that would maintain Jewish demographic dominance in pre-1967 Israel and neighbor recognition of the state.

Two generations of American Jews 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 were displayed in most synagogues. Seasonal activities became infused with national melodies and the study of contemporary Hebrew, with Israelis visiting and teaching American youth Israeli customs. Travel to Israel grew and peaked through Birthright programs in 1999, when a free trip to the nation was offered to US Jewish youth. The nation influenced nearly every aspect of US Jewish life.

Evolving Situation

Paradoxically, in these decades post-1967, US Jewish communities developed expertise regarding denominational coexistence. Acceptance and discussion among different Jewish movements expanded.

However regarding the Israeli situation – there existed tolerance ended. You could be a rightwing Zionist or a progressive supporter, however endorsement of the nation as a majority-Jewish country remained unquestioned, and challenging that perspective positioned you outside the consensus – a non-conformist, as a Jewish periodical labeled it in writing that year.

But now, during of the devastation in Gaza, famine, dead and orphaned children and frustration over the denial by numerous Jewish individuals who avoid admitting their responsibility, that unity has broken down. The moderate Zionist position {has lost|no longer