🔗 Share this article

Marking two years after the deadly assault of 7 October 2023, which profoundly impacted world Jewry unlike anything else since the founding of the Jewish state.

Among Jewish people it was deeply traumatic. For Israel as a nation, the situation represented a profound disgrace. The whole Zionist project had been established on the belief which held that Israel would prevent similar tragedies occurring in the future.

Military action seemed necessary. However, the particular response that Israel implemented – the comprehensive devastation of Gaza, the deaths and injuries of numerous of civilians – represented a decision. This particular approach complicated the way numerous US Jewish community members processed the October 7th events that set it in motion, and currently challenges their commemoration of the day. In what way can people grieve and remember an atrocity against your people in the midst of devastation done to other individuals in your name?

The Difficulty of Grieving

The complexity in grieving stems from the reality that there is no consensus regarding the significance of these events. Actually, for the American Jewish community, this two-year period have seen the collapse of a decades-long consensus about the Zionist movement.

The beginnings of Zionist agreement within US Jewish communities dates back to an early twentieth-century publication authored by an attorney subsequently appointed supreme court justice Justice Brandeis titled “The Jewish Question; Finding Solutions”. Yet the unity became firmly established after the Six-Day War that year. Before then, Jewish Americans housed a delicate yet functioning cohabitation among different factions holding diverse perspectives about the requirement for a Jewish nation – Zionists, non-Zionists and opponents.

Background Information

This parallel existence continued throughout the mid-twentieth century, in remnants of Jewish socialism, within the neutral US Jewish group, in the anti-Zionist Jewish organization and comparable entities. Regarding Chancellor Finkelstein, the leader of the Jewish Theological Seminary, Zionism was more spiritual rather than political, and he forbade the singing of Hatikvah, Hatikvah, at religious school events in those years. Furthermore, Zionist ideology the centerpiece for contemporary Orthodox communities before the 1967 conflict. Different Jewish identity models remained present.

But after Israel routed its neighbors in that war that year, taking control of areas comprising Palestinian territories, Gaza, the Golan and Jerusalem's eastern sector, US Jewish connection with the nation underwent significant transformation. The military success, coupled with persistent concerns about another genocide, produced an increasing conviction in the country’s vital role for Jewish communities, and a source of pride for its strength. Language concerning the remarkable nature of the victory and the “liberation” of areas assigned the Zionist project a religious, potentially salvific, significance. In those heady years, much of the remaining ambivalence regarding Zionism vanished. In the early 1970s, Writer the commentator stated: “Zionism unites us all.”

The Agreement and Restrictions

The Zionist consensus excluded Haredi Jews – who generally maintained a Jewish state should only emerge by a traditional rendering of redemption – yet included Reform, Conservative Judaism, contemporary Orthodox and the majority of secular Jews. The common interpretation of this agreement, what became known as progressive Zionism, was founded on the conviction in Israel as a liberal and democratic – though Jewish-centered – state. Numerous US Jews viewed the administration of Arab, Syrian and Egyptian lands after 1967 as provisional, thinking that an agreement was forthcoming that would maintain Jewish population majority in pre-1967 Israel and neighbor recognition of the nation.

Multiple generations of American Jews were raised with Zionism an essential component of their religious identity. The nation became a key component in Jewish learning. Yom Ha'atzmaut became a Jewish holiday. National symbols adorned most synagogues. Summer camps were permeated with national melodies and learning of contemporary Hebrew, with visitors from Israel educating American youth Israeli culture. Trips to the nation expanded and achieved record numbers via educational trips in 1999, when a free trip to the country was provided to young American Jews. The nation influenced nearly every aspect of US Jewish life.

Shifting Landscape

Interestingly, throughout these years post-1967, US Jewish communities grew skilled in religious diversity. Tolerance and discussion across various Jewish groups increased.

Except when it came to the Israeli situation – there existed diversity reached its limit. You could be a conservative supporter or a leftwing Zionist, however endorsement of the nation as a majority-Jewish country was a given, and challenging that perspective positioned you outside the consensus – a non-conformist, as one publication termed it in an essay recently.

Yet presently, under the weight of the destruction in Gaza, famine, young victims and outrage regarding the refusal by numerous Jewish individuals who refuse to recognize their responsibility, that consensus has collapsed. The liberal Zionist “center” {has lost|no longer