🔗 Share this article

It has been that horrific attack of the events of October 7th, an event that profoundly impacted global Jewish populations like no other occurrence following the creation of the state of Israel.

Within Jewish communities the event proved profoundly disturbing. For the state of Israel, it was a significant embarrassment. The entire Zionist project was founded on the belief which held that Israel would ensure against similar tragedies occurring in the future.

A response appeared unavoidable. However, the particular response that Israel implemented – the widespread destruction of Gaza, the casualties of many thousands ordinary people – was a choice. And this choice created complexity in the perspective of many Jewish Americans grappled with the October 7th events that triggered it, and it now complicates the community's commemoration of the anniversary. How does one mourn and commemorate an atrocity affecting their nation during an atrocity done to a different population in your name?

The Complexity of Grieving

The difficulty in grieving lies in the reality that no agreement exists about what any of this means. In fact, among Jewish Americans, this two-year period have experienced the breakdown of a half-century-old agreement regarding Zionism.

The beginnings of pro-Israel unity across American Jewish populations dates back to writings from 1915 written by a legal scholar and then future Supreme Court judge Louis D. Brandeis titled “The Jewish Problem; Finding Solutions”. However, the agreement really takes hold following the 1967 conflict that year. Earlier, US Jewish communities contained a vulnerable but enduring cohabitation between groups holding diverse perspectives regarding the requirement of a Jewish state – Zionists, neutral parties and anti-Zionists.

Historical Context

That coexistence continued throughout the 1950s and 60s, in remnants of leftist Jewish organizations, through the non-aligned US Jewish group, in the anti-Zionist Jewish organization and similar institutions. Regarding Chancellor Finkelstein, the head of the Jewish Theological Seminary, the Zionist movement had greater religious significance than political, and he forbade the singing of the Israeli national anthem, the Israeli national anthem, during seminary ceremonies during that period. Furthermore, support for Israel the centerpiece within modern Orthodox Judaism before the six-day war. Different Jewish identity models remained present.

But after Israel routed neighboring countries in the six-day war during that period, seizing land such as Palestinian territories, Gaza Strip, the Golan and Jerusalem's eastern sector, the American Jewish connection with the country changed dramatically. The triumphant outcome, combined with longstanding fears about another genocide, produced an increasing conviction regarding Israel's essential significance within Jewish identity, and a source of pride regarding its endurance. Rhetoric about the “miraculous” aspect of the victory and the freeing of land provided the movement a spiritual, even messianic, importance. In those heady years, a significant portion of previous uncertainty about Zionism disappeared. In that decade, Writer Podhoretz famously proclaimed: “Everyone supports Zionism today.”

The Agreement and Its Boundaries

The pro-Israel agreement did not include Haredi Jews – who typically thought Israel should only emerge by a traditional rendering of redemption – however joined Reform Judaism, Conservative, Modern Orthodox and nearly all secular Jews. The common interpretation of this agreement, later termed left-leaning Zionism, was established on a belief regarding Israel as a democratic and democratic – albeit ethnocentric – state. Countless Jewish Americans considered the control of Arab, Syrian and Egypt's territories after 1967 as temporary, believing that a resolution was forthcoming that would ensure Jewish population majority in pre-1967 Israel and Middle Eastern approval of Israel.

Two generations of US Jews were thus brought up with support for Israel an essential component of their Jewish identity. The state transformed into a central part within religious instruction. Israeli national day became a Jewish holiday. Israeli flags decorated religious institutions. Youth programs were permeated with national melodies and the study of the language, with visitors from Israel instructing US young people Israeli culture. Travel to Israel increased and peaked through Birthright programs in 1999, offering complimentary travel to the nation was offered to US Jewish youth. Israel permeated almost the entirety of Jewish American identity.

Changing Dynamics

Ironically, in these decades following the war, American Jewry developed expertise in religious diversity. Open-mindedness and dialogue between Jewish denominations grew.

Yet concerning the Israeli situation – there existed pluralism found its boundary. One could identify as a conservative supporter or a progressive supporter, but support for Israel as a majority-Jewish country remained unquestioned, and questioning that perspective placed you outside mainstream views – an “Un-Jew”, as one publication described it in a piece recently.

Yet presently, under the weight of the devastation of Gaza, starvation, dead and orphaned children and frustration regarding the refusal of many fellow Jews who refuse to recognize their involvement, that unity has broken down. The centrist pro-Israel view {has lost|no longer