🔗 Share this article

Marking two years after the deadly assault of 7 October 2023, an event that shook Jewish communities worldwide like no other occurrence since the establishment of Israel as a nation.

For Jews it was shocking. For the state of Israel, the situation represented deeply humiliating. The whole Zionist movement was founded on the presumption that Israel could stop such atrocities from ever happening again.

A response appeared unavoidable. However, the particular response Israel pursued – the widespread destruction of the Gaza Strip, the killing and maiming of tens of thousands non-combatants – constituted a specific policy. And this choice complicated the way numerous US Jewish community members processed the attack that set it in motion, and it now complicates the community's remembrance of the day. How can someone mourn and commemorate a tragedy targeting their community while simultaneously an atrocity being inflicted upon a different population attributed to their identity?

The Challenge of Remembrance

The difficulty surrounding remembrance lies in the reality that there is no consensus regarding the implications of these developments. Indeed, among Jewish Americans, this two-year period have seen the breakdown of a decades-long consensus about the Zionist movement.

The beginnings of pro-Israel unity across American Jewish populations can be traced to writings from 1915 by the lawyer and then future Supreme Court judge Louis Brandeis titled “The Jewish Problem; Finding Solutions”. But the consensus really takes hold following the Six-Day War during 1967. Earlier, Jewish Americans maintained a vulnerable but enduring cohabitation among different factions holding diverse perspectives about the requirement of a Jewish state – pro-Israel advocates, non-Zionists and anti-Zionists.

Background Information

That coexistence persisted during the post-war decades, within remaining elements of leftist Jewish organizations, within the neutral American Jewish Committee, within the critical Jewish organization and other organizations. Regarding Chancellor Finkelstein, the leader of the Jewish Theological Seminary, Zionism was primarily theological rather than political, and he forbade singing Israel's anthem, the Israeli national anthem, at religious school events in the early 1960s. Furthermore, Zionist ideology the main element within modern Orthodox Judaism until after that war. Jewish identitarian alternatives coexisted.

But after Israel routed neighboring countries in the six-day war in 1967, seizing land comprising the West Bank, Gaza Strip, the Golan and Jerusalem's eastern sector, US Jewish perspective on Israel underwent significant transformation. Israel’s victory, combined with enduring anxieties about another genocide, resulted in an increasing conviction regarding Israel's vital role within Jewish identity, and generated admiration regarding its endurance. Discourse about the extraordinary quality of the success and the reclaiming of land gave the Zionist project a religious, potentially salvific, importance. In those heady years, much of previous uncertainty about Zionism dissipated. In that decade, Publication editor Norman Podhoretz declared: “Zionism unites us all.”

The Consensus and Its Boundaries

The unified position did not include the ultra-Orthodox – who typically thought Israel should only be established through traditional interpretation of the messiah – yet included Reform Judaism, Conservative, Modern Orthodox and nearly all unaffiliated individuals. The predominant version of the consensus, what became known as left-leaning Zionism, was established on the idea in Israel as a democratic and free – albeit ethnocentric – nation. Numerous US Jews viewed the control of Palestinian, Syrian and Egypt's territories post-1967 as not permanent, believing that an agreement would soon emerge that would guarantee Jewish demographic dominance in Israel proper and neighbor recognition of Israel.

Multiple generations of US Jews were raised with Zionism a fundamental aspect of their religious identity. The state transformed into an important element in Jewish learning. Yom Ha'atzmaut became a Jewish holiday. Blue and white banners decorated religious institutions. Seasonal activities were permeated with Hebrew music and learning of the language, with Israeli guests educating American teenagers Israeli customs. Visits to Israel grew and peaked through Birthright programs by 1999, offering complimentary travel to the country became available to Jewish young adults. The nation influenced nearly every aspect of US Jewish life.

Shifting Landscape

Interestingly, in these decades post-1967, Jewish Americans grew skilled in religious diversity. Acceptance and communication across various Jewish groups expanded.

However regarding Zionism and Israel – that’s where diversity ended. One could identify as a conservative supporter or a leftwing Zionist, yet backing Israel as a Jewish state remained unquestioned, and criticizing that perspective categorized you outside mainstream views – a non-conformist, as one publication described it in writing that year.

However currently, under the weight of the ruin in Gaza, starvation, dead and orphaned children and outrage about the rejection of many fellow Jews who decline to acknowledge their responsibility, that unity has disintegrated. The liberal Zionist “center” {has lost|no longer