🔗 Share this article

It has been the horrific attack of the events of October 7th, which shook world Jewry like no other occurrence since the establishment of the state of Israel.

Within Jewish communities the event proved profoundly disturbing. For the state of Israel, the situation represented deeply humiliating. The whole Zionist project rested on the assumption which held that the nation would ensure against such atrocities repeating.

A response seemed necessary. However, the particular response undertaken by Israel – the widespread destruction of the Gaza Strip, the casualties of many thousands ordinary people – represented a decision. And this choice complicated the perspective of many Jewish Americans understood the October 7th events that set it in motion, and currently challenges the community's observance of the anniversary. How can someone honor and reflect on a tragedy affecting their nation in the midst of a catastrophe done to another people connected to their community?

The Challenge of Grieving

The complexity in grieving lies in the fact that no agreement exists as to the significance of these events. In fact, within US Jewish circles, this two-year period have witnessed the disintegration of a fifty-year consensus on Zionism itself.

The early development of a Zionist consensus within US Jewish communities extends as far back as a 1915 essay written by a legal scholar who would later become high court jurist Justice Brandeis named “The Jewish Problem; Addressing the Challenge”. However, the agreement really takes hold subsequent to the six-day war in 1967. Previously, US Jewish communities housed a vulnerable but enduring cohabitation across various segments holding different opinions about the necessity for Israel – pro-Israel advocates, neutral parties and anti-Zionists.

Previous Developments

Such cohabitation endured through the post-war decades, in remnants of socialist Jewish movements, through the non-aligned Jewish communal organization, among the opposing religious group and other organizations. Regarding Chancellor Finkelstein, the head of the Jewish Theological Seminary, pro-Israel ideology was primarily theological rather than political, and he prohibited performance of Israel's anthem, Hatikvah, at JTS ordinations in the early 1960s. Furthermore, Zionist ideology the central focus for contemporary Orthodox communities before the six-day war. Jewish identitarian alternatives remained present.

However following Israel routed neighboring countries in the six-day war during that period, occupying territories comprising Palestinian territories, Gaza, the Golan and Jerusalem's eastern sector, the American Jewish perspective on the nation underwent significant transformation. Israel’s victory, coupled with persistent concerns regarding repeated persecution, led to an increasing conviction in the country’s critical importance within Jewish identity, and generated admiration regarding its endurance. Rhetoric concerning the extraordinary aspect of the success and the “liberation” of areas assigned the movement a theological, almost redemptive, importance. In those heady years, much of previous uncertainty about Zionism vanished. During the seventies, Writer Podhoretz famously proclaimed: “We are all Zionists now.”

The Unity and Its Boundaries

The Zionist consensus excluded Haredi Jews – who largely believed a Jewish state should only emerge through traditional interpretation of redemption – yet included Reform, Conservative, contemporary Orthodox and nearly all non-affiliated Jews. The predominant version of the consensus, identified as liberal Zionism, was based on the idea in Israel as a liberal and liberal – albeit ethnocentric – country. Countless Jewish Americans saw the occupation of Arab, Syria's and Egyptian lands post-1967 as provisional, thinking that a resolution was forthcoming that would maintain Jewish population majority in pre-1967 Israel and Middle Eastern approval of the state.

Two generations of US Jews grew up with Zionism a fundamental aspect of their identity as Jews. The nation became a central part of Jewish education. Israel’s Independence Day became a Jewish holiday. Israeli flags adorned most synagogues. Youth programs integrated with national melodies and learning of contemporary Hebrew, with Israeli guests and teaching American teenagers Israeli culture. Trips to the nation expanded and reached new heights through Birthright programs during that year, offering complimentary travel to Israel was provided to young American Jews. The state affected nearly every aspect of Jewish American identity.

Changing Dynamics

Interestingly, during this period after 1967, American Jewry developed expertise in religious diversity. Open-mindedness and communication among different Jewish movements increased.

Yet concerning the Israeli situation – there existed diversity found its boundary. Individuals might align with a conservative supporter or a liberal advocate, yet backing Israel as a majority-Jewish country was a given, and challenging that position placed you outside the consensus – an “Un-Jew”, as a Jewish periodical labeled it in writing recently.

But now, during of the destruction of Gaza, food shortages, young victims and anger regarding the refusal within Jewish communities who decline to acknowledge their involvement, that consensus has disintegrated. The moderate Zionist position {has lost|no longer