🔗 Share this article

It has been that horrific attack of 7 October 2023, an event that profoundly impacted Jewish communities worldwide unlike anything else since the establishment of Israel as a nation.

For Jews the event proved deeply traumatic. For the state of Israel, the situation represented a significant embarrassment. The entire Zionist project had been established on the presumption that the Jewish state would prevent similar tragedies from ever happening again.

Military action seemed necessary. Yet the chosen course undertaken by Israel – the obliteration of Gaza, the casualties of tens of thousands of civilians – represented a decision. This selected path made more difficult the perspective of many US Jewish community members understood the attack that set it in motion, and currently challenges the community's remembrance of the day. How can someone honor and reflect on an atrocity affecting their nation during devastation experienced by a different population in your name?

The Challenge of Remembrance

The challenge surrounding remembrance exists because of the fact that no agreement exists as to the significance of these events. Actually, among Jewish Americans, the last two years have experienced the breakdown of a half-century-old unity on Zionism itself.

The origins of Zionist agreement among American Jewry extends as far back as a 1915 essay written by a legal scholar subsequently appointed Supreme Court judge Louis D. Brandeis named “The Jewish Problem; Addressing the Challenge”. Yet the unity truly solidified subsequent to the Six-Day War in 1967. Before then, American Jewry housed a vulnerable but enduring coexistence across various segments that had a range of views regarding the need for Israel – Zionists, neutral parties and anti-Zionists.

Previous Developments

Such cohabitation endured through the post-war decades, within remaining elements of leftist Jewish organizations, in the non-Zionist Jewish communal organization, in the anti-Zionist religious group and comparable entities. In the view of Louis Finkelstein, the head of the Jewish Theological Seminary, pro-Israel ideology was more spiritual rather than political, and he forbade performance of the Israeli national anthem, Hatikvah, during seminary ceremonies during that period. Nor were support for Israel the centerpiece for contemporary Orthodox communities prior to the 1967 conflict. Different Jewish identity models coexisted.

But after Israel defeated its neighbors in the six-day war in 1967, occupying territories including Palestinian territories, Gaza, the Golan and East Jerusalem, the American Jewish connection with the country evolved considerably. The military success, along with longstanding fears about another genocide, led to an increasing conviction regarding Israel's critical importance for Jewish communities, and created pride regarding its endurance. Rhetoric about the remarkable aspect of the victory and the “liberation” of territory gave the Zionist project a theological, almost redemptive, meaning. In those heady years, a significant portion of the remaining ambivalence about Zionism vanished. During the seventies, Writer Norman Podhoretz declared: “We are all Zionists now.”

The Unity and Restrictions

The pro-Israel agreement left out Haredi Jews – who largely believed a nation should only emerge by a traditional rendering of redemption – yet included Reform, Conservative, contemporary Orthodox and most non-affiliated Jews. The common interpretation of this agreement, identified as progressive Zionism, was based on a belief in Israel as a progressive and democratic – while majority-Jewish – country. Countless Jewish Americans saw the occupation of local, Syria's and Egyptian lands after 1967 as not permanent, believing that a solution was imminent that would ensure Jewish population majority in Israel proper and regional acceptance of the state.

Two generations of American Jews grew up with support for Israel a core part of their Jewish identity. Israel became a central part in Jewish learning. Israeli national day turned into a celebration. Blue and white banners were displayed in religious institutions. Youth programs became infused with Israeli songs and education of the language, with visitors from Israel and teaching US young people Israeli culture. Visits to Israel grew and peaked through Birthright programs in 1999, offering complimentary travel to Israel was provided to young American Jews. The state affected nearly every aspect of the American Jewish experience.

Shifting Landscape

Interestingly, in these decades following the war, US Jewish communities became adept at religious pluralism. Tolerance and communication among different Jewish movements grew.

Yet concerning support for Israel – that’s where tolerance found its boundary. Individuals might align with a rightwing Zionist or a liberal advocate, yet backing Israel as a Jewish state was a given, and challenging that position positioned you beyond accepted boundaries – outside the community, as one publication labeled it in a piece that year.

Yet presently, during of the devastation in Gaza, food shortages, dead and orphaned children and outrage over the denial by numerous Jewish individuals who avoid admitting their responsibility, that unity has collapsed. The centrist pro-Israel view {has lost|no longer