🔗 Share this article

Two years have passed since the mass murder of 7 October 2023, which profoundly impacted global Jewish populations more than any event following the creation of the state of Israel.

Within Jewish communities it was shocking. For the Israeli government, it was a profound disgrace. The entire Zionist project was founded on the presumption which held that the nation would ensure against things like this occurring in the future.

A response appeared unavoidable. Yet the chosen course Israel pursued – the comprehensive devastation of Gaza, the casualties of tens of thousands ordinary people – represented a decision. This selected path complicated the perspective of many American Jews understood the initial assault that precipitated the response, and presently makes difficult their remembrance of the day. How does one grieve and remember a tragedy against your people during a catastrophe done to another people in your name?

The Complexity of Remembrance

The difficulty surrounding remembrance exists because of the fact that no agreement exists as to what any of this means. Actually, for the American Jewish community, the last two years have witnessed the collapse of a fifty-year agreement about the Zionist movement.

The origins of a Zionist consensus within US Jewish communities extends as far back as an early twentieth-century publication written by a legal scholar subsequently appointed high court jurist Justice Brandeis called “The Jewish Problem; How to Solve it”. However, the agreement truly solidified subsequent to the 1967 conflict during 1967. Earlier, Jewish Americans housed a vulnerable but enduring parallel existence among different factions which maintained different opinions concerning the necessity of a Jewish state – pro-Israel advocates, non-Zionists and opponents.

Previous Developments

This parallel existence persisted throughout the mid-twentieth century, within remaining elements of Jewish socialism, within the neutral Jewish communal organization, in the anti-Zionist religious group and similar institutions. For Louis Finkelstein, the head of the Jewish Theological Seminary, Zionism was primarily theological rather than political, and he forbade singing Hatikvah, the Israeli national anthem, during seminary ceremonies in those years. Furthermore, Zionism and pro-Israelism the main element of Modern Orthodoxy until after the six-day war. Jewish identitarian alternatives existed alongside.

Yet after Israel routed neighboring countries in that war in 1967, occupying territories comprising Palestinian territories, Gaza Strip, Golan Heights and East Jerusalem, the American Jewish relationship to the nation evolved considerably. The military success, combined with persistent concerns regarding repeated persecution, produced a growing belief about the nation's critical importance for Jewish communities, and generated admiration for its strength. Rhetoric about the remarkable nature of the outcome and the freeing of areas assigned the movement a religious, potentially salvific, significance. During that enthusiastic period, much of the remaining ambivalence toward Israel dissipated. During the seventies, Publication editor the commentator stated: “Everyone supports Zionism today.”

The Unity and Its Limits

The unified position excluded Haredi Jews – who typically thought a Jewish state should only be ushered in by a traditional rendering of the Messiah – however joined Reform, Conservative, contemporary Orthodox and the majority of non-affiliated Jews. The predominant version of the consensus, what became known as liberal Zionism, was founded on a belief in Israel as a democratic and democratic – though Jewish-centered – state. Many American Jews considered the administration of local, Syria's and Egypt's territories post-1967 as provisional, assuming that an agreement would soon emerge that would guarantee a Jewish majority in Israel proper and neighbor recognition of Israel.

Two generations of US Jews grew up with Zionism a fundamental aspect of their identity as Jews. Israel became a key component in Jewish learning. Israeli national day evolved into a religious observance. Blue and white banners adorned most synagogues. Youth programs were permeated with Hebrew music and learning of the language, with Israelis visiting and teaching American teenagers Israeli culture. Trips to the nation increased and achieved record numbers via educational trips during that year, providing no-cost visits to the nation was offered to US Jewish youth. The nation influenced virtually all areas of the American Jewish experience.

Changing Dynamics

Ironically, throughout these years post-1967, US Jewish communities grew skilled in religious diversity. Acceptance and discussion between Jewish denominations expanded.

Yet concerning Zionism and Israel – that’s where pluralism ended. You could be a conservative supporter or a progressive supporter, yet backing Israel as a majority-Jewish country remained unquestioned, and criticizing that perspective categorized you outside the consensus – a non-conformist, as one publication described it in an essay in 2021.

However currently, during of the ruin in Gaza, starvation, young victims and anger about the rejection within Jewish communities who refuse to recognize their complicity, that unity has collapsed. The centrist pro-Israel view {has lost|no longer