🔗 Share this article

It has been that mass murder of 7 October 2023, an event that deeply affected Jewish communities worldwide more than any event following the creation of the Jewish state.

For Jews it was shocking. For the Israeli government, the situation represented a profound disgrace. The whole Zionist project was founded on the presumption which held that Israel would prevent such atrocities repeating.

Some form of retaliation was inevitable. Yet the chosen course undertaken by Israel – the widespread destruction of the Gaza Strip, the killing and maiming of tens of thousands non-combatants – was a choice. This selected path created complexity in the perspective of many Jewish Americans understood the October 7th events that triggered it, and it now complicates their commemoration of the anniversary. How does one mourn and commemorate an atrocity targeting their community while simultaneously devastation being inflicted upon other individuals attributed to their identity?

The Complexity of Remembrance

The complexity in grieving stems from the reality that little unity prevails about the significance of these events. Indeed, within US Jewish circles, the recent twenty-four months have experienced the collapse of a half-century-old consensus about the Zionist movement.

The beginnings of Zionist agreement within US Jewish communities can be traced to writings from 1915 written by a legal scholar and then future supreme court justice Louis D. Brandeis titled “The Jewish Question; How to Solve it”. However, the agreement truly solidified subsequent to the 1967 conflict during 1967. Earlier, US Jewish communities housed a delicate yet functioning coexistence between groups that had diverse perspectives about the necessity for a Jewish nation – Zionists, neutral parties and opponents.

Background Information

This parallel existence persisted throughout the 1950s and 60s, within remaining elements of socialist Jewish movements, within the neutral Jewish communal organization, in the anti-Zionist American Council for Judaism and other organizations. For Louis Finkelstein, the head at JTS, the Zionist movement was primarily theological than political, and he forbade the singing of the Israeli national anthem, the national song, at religious school events in those years. Furthermore, support for Israel the central focus for contemporary Orthodox communities prior to the 1967 conflict. Different Jewish identity models coexisted.

But after Israel overcame its neighbors in the six-day war in 1967, occupying territories comprising Palestinian territories, Gaza Strip, the Golan and East Jerusalem, the American Jewish relationship to the nation changed dramatically. Israel’s victory, combined with enduring anxieties of a “second Holocaust”, resulted in a growing belief regarding Israel's vital role for Jewish communities, and a source of pride for its strength. Rhetoric concerning the remarkable quality of the success and the reclaiming of territory gave Zionism a religious, potentially salvific, meaning. During that enthusiastic period, much of existing hesitation toward Israel disappeared. During the seventies, Commentary magazine editor the commentator famously proclaimed: “We are all Zionists now.”

The Agreement and Restrictions

The Zionist consensus did not include strictly Orthodox communities – who typically thought a Jewish state should only be established via conventional understanding of the Messiah – but united Reform Judaism, Conservative, contemporary Orthodox and nearly all unaffiliated individuals. The common interpretation of the unified position, later termed left-leaning Zionism, was founded on a belief in Israel as a democratic and liberal – though Jewish-centered – state. Numerous US Jews viewed the control of Palestinian, Syria's and Egypt's territories after 1967 as temporary, believing that a solution would soon emerge that would ensure Jewish population majority within Israel's original borders and regional acceptance of the nation.

Multiple generations of Jewish Americans were thus brought up with Zionism a core part of their religious identity. The state transformed into a central part within religious instruction. Israel’s Independence Day turned into a celebration. Blue and white banners decorated most synagogues. Youth programs became infused with national melodies and learning of contemporary Hebrew, with Israelis visiting educating US young people national traditions. Visits to Israel grew and reached new heights with Birthright Israel during that year, providing no-cost visits to Israel was offered to Jewish young adults. The nation influenced nearly every aspect of Jewish American identity.

Changing Dynamics

Ironically, throughout these years post-1967, US Jewish communities grew skilled regarding denominational coexistence. Acceptance and communication across various Jewish groups increased.

Yet concerning Zionism and Israel – that’s where diversity reached its limit. Individuals might align with a right-leaning advocate or a progressive supporter, however endorsement of the nation as a Jewish state was a given, and questioning that narrative positioned you beyond accepted boundaries – a non-conformist, as a Jewish periodical described it in a piece that year.

But now, during of the ruin in Gaza, starvation, child casualties and outrage regarding the refusal by numerous Jewish individuals who avoid admitting their complicity, that consensus has disintegrated. The liberal Zionist “center” {has lost|no longer