🔗 Share this article

Marking two years after the deadly assault of the events of October 7th, an event that profoundly impacted world Jewry unlike anything else following the founding of Israel as a nation.

For Jews the event proved deeply traumatic. For the Israeli government, it was a profound disgrace. The whole Zionist project was founded on the presumption which held that Israel could stop such atrocities occurring in the future.

Some form of retaliation was inevitable. But the response undertaken by Israel – the widespread destruction of Gaza, the deaths and injuries of many thousands non-combatants – constituted a specific policy. And this choice made more difficult how many American Jews processed the October 7th events that precipitated the response, and currently challenges the community's observance of the day. In what way can people honor and reflect on a horrific event against your people in the midst of an atrocity experienced by another people attributed to their identity?

The Difficulty of Grieving

The complexity in grieving stems from the fact that there is no consensus about the implications of these developments. In fact, within US Jewish circles, this two-year period have seen the collapse of a decades-long unity regarding Zionism.

The origins of pro-Israel unity among American Jewry can be traced to a 1915 essay by the lawyer and then future high court jurist Louis D. Brandeis called “The Jewish Problem; Addressing the Challenge”. Yet the unity really takes hold after the Six-Day War that year. Earlier, Jewish Americans maintained a vulnerable but enduring cohabitation between groups which maintained different opinions about the necessity for Israel – pro-Israel advocates, non-Zionists and opponents.

Historical Context

This parallel existence endured through the post-war decades, through surviving aspects of Jewish socialism, in the non-Zionist US Jewish group, among the opposing Jewish organization and other organizations. In the view of Louis Finkelstein, the chancellor of the Jewish Theological Seminary, the Zionist movement had greater religious significance than political, and he prohibited the singing of Israel's anthem, the Israeli national anthem, at JTS ordinations during that period. Nor were support for Israel the central focus within modern Orthodox Judaism before that war. Different Jewish identity models existed alongside.

Yet after Israel overcame neighboring countries in that war that year, taking control of areas comprising the West Bank, Gaza Strip, the Golan and Jerusalem's eastern sector, US Jewish relationship to the nation changed dramatically. The triumphant outcome, combined with enduring anxieties about another genocide, produced an increasing conviction about the nation's vital role within Jewish identity, and created pride in its resilience. Discourse concerning the remarkable quality of the victory and the reclaiming of territory gave the movement a religious, almost redemptive, importance. In those heady years, a significant portion of previous uncertainty regarding Zionism disappeared. In the early 1970s, Writer the commentator declared: “Zionism unites us all.”

The Unity and Restrictions

The pro-Israel agreement excluded the ultra-Orthodox – who typically thought Israel should only be established through traditional interpretation of the messiah – but united Reform, Conservative, Modern Orthodox and nearly all unaffiliated individuals. The most popular form of the unified position, what became known as liberal Zionism, was established on the idea in Israel as a progressive and liberal – while majority-Jewish – nation. Numerous US Jews saw the control of Palestinian, Syria's and Egyptian lands following the war as not permanent, assuming that an agreement was imminent that would maintain a Jewish majority in Israel proper and Middle Eastern approval of Israel.

Two generations of American Jews grew up with pro-Israel ideology a fundamental aspect of their Jewish identity. Israel became a key component in Jewish learning. Israel’s Independence Day turned into a celebration. Israeli flags adorned many temples. Summer camps were permeated with national melodies and education of contemporary Hebrew, with Israelis visiting educating American youth national traditions. Visits to Israel grew and peaked via educational trips during that year, when a free trip to the nation became available to young American Jews. Israel permeated nearly every aspect of Jewish American identity.

Shifting Landscape

Paradoxically, throughout these years after 1967, Jewish Americans developed expertise at religious pluralism. Open-mindedness and communication between Jewish denominations increased.

Except when it came to the Israeli situation – there existed diversity ended. Individuals might align with a right-leaning advocate or a progressive supporter, yet backing Israel as a majority-Jewish country was assumed, and questioning that perspective categorized you beyond accepted boundaries – a non-conformist, as Tablet magazine described it in an essay recently.

But now, amid of the devastation within Gaza, starvation, child casualties and frustration regarding the refusal by numerous Jewish individuals who avoid admitting their involvement, that unity has broken down. The centrist pro-Israel view {has lost|no longer