🔗 Share this article

Two years have passed since the horrific attack of the events of October 7th, an event that deeply affected global Jewish populations unlike anything else since the establishment of Israel as a nation.

Among Jewish people the event proved shocking. For Israel as a nation, the situation represented a significant embarrassment. The entire Zionist project rested on the presumption which held that the nation would ensure against similar tragedies from ever happening again.

Some form of retaliation seemed necessary. But the response that Israel implemented – the obliteration of the Gaza Strip, the deaths and injuries of numerous ordinary people – constituted a specific policy. This selected path complicated how many Jewish Americans grappled with the initial assault that precipitated the response, and it now complicates their observance of the anniversary. How can someone grieve and remember a horrific event affecting their nation while simultaneously devastation experienced by other individuals connected to their community?

The Complexity of Grieving

The difficulty in grieving lies in the circumstance where no agreement exists regarding the implications of these developments. In fact, among Jewish Americans, this two-year period have seen the breakdown of a fifty-year agreement regarding Zionism.

The origins of Zionist agreement among American Jewry can be traced to writings from 1915 written by a legal scholar and then future Supreme Court judge Louis Brandeis titled “The Jewish Problem; How to Solve it”. But the consensus truly solidified following the six-day war during 1967. Before then, Jewish Americans maintained a fragile but stable coexistence among different factions which maintained a range of views about the requirement of a Jewish state – pro-Israel advocates, non-Zionists and opponents.

Previous Developments

Such cohabitation persisted during the 1950s and 60s, in remnants of Jewish socialism, within the neutral US Jewish group, in the anti-Zionist Jewish organization and other organizations. In the view of Louis Finkelstein, the leader at JTS, pro-Israel ideology was more spiritual rather than political, and he forbade performance of Hatikvah, Hatikvah, during seminary ceremonies in those years. Nor were Zionism and pro-Israelism the main element within modern Orthodox Judaism until after the 1967 conflict. Jewish identitarian alternatives existed alongside.

But after Israel routed its neighbors during the 1967 conflict in 1967, taking control of areas comprising the West Bank, Gaza, the Golan and East Jerusalem, US Jewish relationship to Israel evolved considerably. The triumphant outcome, combined with persistent concerns regarding repeated persecution, led to a growing belief about the nation's critical importance within Jewish identity, and created pride in its resilience. Discourse concerning the “miraculous” quality of the victory and the freeing of areas gave the Zionist project a religious, almost redemptive, importance. In that triumphant era, considerable the remaining ambivalence about Zionism disappeared. In the early 1970s, Writer Podhoretz declared: “Everyone supports Zionism today.”

The Consensus and Its Boundaries

The pro-Israel agreement did not include the ultra-Orthodox – who generally maintained a Jewish state should only emerge through traditional interpretation of the messiah – yet included Reform Judaism, Conservative Judaism, Modern Orthodox and most secular Jews. The most popular form of the consensus, identified as liberal Zionism, was founded on the idea about the nation as a democratic and democratic – though Jewish-centered – state. Countless Jewish Americans considered the administration of Arab, Syrian and Egyptian lands post-1967 as not permanent, believing that an agreement would soon emerge that would guarantee a Jewish majority within Israel's original borders and regional acceptance of the state.

Multiple generations of American Jews were raised with support for Israel an essential component of their religious identity. Israel became a central part within religious instruction. Israel’s Independence Day evolved into a religious observance. National symbols adorned religious institutions. Seasonal activities integrated with national melodies and learning of contemporary Hebrew, with Israeli guests educating US young people Israeli culture. Trips to the nation grew and reached new heights via educational trips during that year, when a free trip to the nation became available to US Jewish youth. Israel permeated almost the entirety of Jewish American identity.

Evolving Situation

Interestingly, in these decades post-1967, American Jewry became adept regarding denominational coexistence. Acceptance and dialogue between Jewish denominations grew.

Except when it came to support for Israel – that’s where tolerance found its boundary. You could be a rightwing Zionist or a leftwing Zionist, however endorsement of the nation as a Jewish state was assumed, and questioning that perspective categorized you beyond accepted boundaries – an “Un-Jew”, as a Jewish periodical termed it in a piece recently.

But now, under the weight of the devastation of Gaza, famine, young victims and outrage over the denial of many fellow Jews who avoid admitting their involvement, that unity has disintegrated. The moderate Zionist position {has lost|no longer