🔗 Share this article

It has been the deadly assault of 7 October 2023, an event that deeply affected Jewish communities worldwide more than any event since the founding of the state of Israel.

Among Jewish people the event proved shocking. For Israel as a nation, the situation represented deeply humiliating. The whole Zionist movement had been established on the presumption which held that the Jewish state could stop things like this repeating.

A response appeared unavoidable. But the response that Israel implemented – the widespread destruction of Gaza, the deaths and injuries of many thousands ordinary people – was a choice. And this choice made more difficult the perspective of many Jewish Americans processed the October 7th events that set it in motion, and presently makes difficult the community's commemoration of the anniversary. In what way can people grieve and remember a horrific event against your people while simultaneously an atrocity being inflicted upon other individuals attributed to their identity?

The Challenge of Remembrance

The challenge surrounding remembrance stems from the fact that there is no consensus regarding what any of this means. In fact, among Jewish Americans, this two-year period have seen the disintegration of a fifty-year agreement about the Zionist movement.

The origins of a Zionist consensus within US Jewish communities dates back to writings from 1915 authored by an attorney who would later become high court jurist Louis Brandeis named “The Jewish Problem; How to Solve it”. But the consensus became firmly established subsequent to the 1967 conflict in 1967. Before then, Jewish Americans housed a delicate yet functioning coexistence among different factions which maintained a range of views concerning the need for a Jewish nation – Zionists, non-Zionists and anti-Zionists.

Previous Developments

That coexistence persisted during the 1950s and 60s, in remnants of leftist Jewish organizations, in the non-Zionist Jewish communal organization, in the anti-Zionist Jewish organization and similar institutions. In the view of Louis Finkelstein, the leader of the Jewish Theological Seminary, pro-Israel ideology was primarily theological instead of governmental, and he did not permit performance of Israel's anthem, the national song, during seminary ceremonies in those years. Furthermore, support for Israel the main element within modern Orthodox Judaism prior to the 1967 conflict. Alternative Jewish perspectives remained present.

But after Israel overcame adjacent nations during the 1967 conflict during that period, seizing land including Palestinian territories, Gaza, Golan Heights and East Jerusalem, the American Jewish connection with Israel changed dramatically. The triumphant outcome, combined with enduring anxieties regarding repeated persecution, resulted in an increasing conviction regarding Israel's essential significance to the Jewish people, and created pride in its resilience. Language regarding the remarkable quality of the success and the reclaiming of land gave the Zionist project a theological, even messianic, meaning. In that triumphant era, considerable previous uncertainty toward Israel dissipated. During the seventies, Commentary magazine editor Norman Podhoretz declared: “We are all Zionists now.”

The Unity and Restrictions

The unified position did not include Haredi Jews – who largely believed Israel should only be established by a traditional rendering of the Messiah – yet included Reform, Conservative Judaism, contemporary Orthodox and most unaffiliated individuals. The most popular form of the unified position, later termed progressive Zionism, was founded on the idea in Israel as a progressive and democratic – though Jewish-centered – state. Many American Jews saw the control of Arab, Syrian and Egypt's territories after 1967 as temporary, assuming that a resolution was imminent that would maintain a Jewish majority within Israel's original borders and regional acceptance of the state.

Several cohorts of US Jews grew up with Zionism a core part of their Jewish identity. The state transformed into a central part of Jewish education. Yom Ha'atzmaut turned into a celebration. Blue and white banners were displayed in religious institutions. Youth programs became infused with Israeli songs and the study of contemporary Hebrew, with visitors from Israel instructing US young people Israeli customs. Visits to Israel increased and reached new heights with Birthright Israel during that year, offering complimentary travel to Israel was provided to young American Jews. The state affected virtually all areas of US Jewish life.

Changing Dynamics

Interestingly, in these decades following the war, Jewish Americans developed expertise at religious pluralism. Tolerance and discussion among different Jewish movements increased.

Yet concerning Zionism and Israel – that’s where pluralism ended. One could identify as a conservative supporter or a liberal advocate, however endorsement of the nation as a Jewish state remained unquestioned, and challenging that position categorized you outside the consensus – outside the community, as a Jewish periodical described it in a piece in 2021.

But now, under the weight of the destruction of Gaza, famine, child casualties and outrage regarding the refusal within Jewish communities who avoid admitting their involvement, that consensus has disintegrated. The liberal Zionist “center” {has lost|no longer