🔗 Share this article

It has been the deadly assault of the events of October 7th, which profoundly impacted world Jewry like no other occurrence since the creation of the Jewish state.

Within Jewish communities it was shocking. For Israel as a nation, it was a significant embarrassment. The whole Zionist movement rested on the assumption that the nation would ensure against such atrocities repeating.

A response appeared unavoidable. But the response Israel pursued – the obliteration of Gaza, the casualties of tens of thousands ordinary people – represented a decision. This particular approach created complexity in the way numerous US Jewish community members understood the initial assault that triggered it, and currently challenges the community's observance of the anniversary. In what way can people mourn and commemorate a horrific event affecting their nation while simultaneously devastation experienced by other individuals attributed to their identity?

The Challenge of Remembrance

The complexity surrounding remembrance exists because of the fact that little unity prevails regarding the significance of these events. Indeed, within US Jewish circles, this two-year period have witnessed the disintegration of a half-century-old agreement on Zionism itself.

The early development of Zionist agreement among American Jewry dates back to writings from 1915 by the lawyer and then future Supreme Court judge Louis D. Brandeis called “The Jewish Question; Finding Solutions”. However, the agreement really takes hold after the six-day war in 1967. Previously, US Jewish communities maintained a vulnerable but enduring cohabitation across various segments which maintained diverse perspectives concerning the need for a Jewish nation – pro-Israel advocates, neutral parties and anti-Zionists.

Background Information

This parallel existence endured through the mid-twentieth century, in remnants of leftist Jewish organizations, within the neutral American Jewish Committee, in the anti-Zionist American Council for Judaism and comparable entities. In the view of Louis Finkelstein, the leader at JTS, pro-Israel ideology had greater religious significance instead of governmental, and he did not permit singing the Israeli national anthem, the national song, at JTS ordinations in the early 1960s. Additionally, Zionist ideology the centerpiece within modern Orthodox Judaism prior to the 1967 conflict. Different Jewish identity models coexisted.

However following Israel overcame neighboring countries in the six-day war during that period, occupying territories comprising Palestinian territories, Gaza Strip, Golan Heights and East Jerusalem, the American Jewish connection with the nation changed dramatically. The military success, along with persistent concerns regarding repeated persecution, resulted in a growing belief about the nation's critical importance to the Jewish people, and created pride in its resilience. Rhetoric concerning the “miraculous” nature of the victory and the “liberation” of areas assigned Zionism a religious, potentially salvific, importance. During that enthusiastic period, much of the remaining ambivalence about Zionism dissipated. During the seventies, Commentary magazine editor Podhoretz stated: “We are all Zionists now.”

The Unity and Restrictions

The Zionist consensus did not include the ultra-Orthodox – who generally maintained a Jewish state should only be ushered in by a traditional rendering of the Messiah – but united Reform, Conservative Judaism, Modern Orthodox and nearly all non-affiliated Jews. The predominant version of this agreement, identified as left-leaning Zionism, was established on a belief about the nation as a progressive and liberal – though Jewish-centered – state. Many American Jews considered the occupation of Arab, Syrian and Egyptian lands following the war as not permanent, assuming that a resolution was forthcoming that would maintain a Jewish majority within Israel's original borders and regional acceptance of the state.

Several cohorts of Jewish Americans were raised with pro-Israel ideology an essential component of their Jewish identity. The nation became a key component within religious instruction. Yom Ha'atzmaut turned into a celebration. Israeli flags decorated religious institutions. Summer camps integrated with Israeli songs and education of the language, with Israelis visiting educating US young people Israeli culture. Visits to Israel grew and reached new heights with Birthright Israel during that year, providing no-cost visits to the country was provided to US Jewish youth. The nation influenced almost the entirety of the American Jewish experience.

Shifting Landscape

Interestingly, during this period post-1967, Jewish Americans became adept regarding denominational coexistence. Tolerance and discussion between Jewish denominations expanded.

Except when it came to the Israeli situation – there existed diversity reached its limit. One could identify as a conservative supporter or a progressive supporter, however endorsement of the nation as a majority-Jewish country was a given, and challenging that position placed you beyond accepted boundaries – outside the community, as a Jewish periodical termed it in a piece in 2021.

Yet presently, under the weight of the ruin in Gaza, starvation, young victims and outrage regarding the refusal by numerous Jewish individuals who decline to acknowledge their complicity, that consensus has broken down. The moderate Zionist position {has lost|no longer