For the second time in a year, a study has come out showing that young American Jews don’t care about Jewishness and Israel nearly as much as the last generation. Chaim Waxman, a Rutgers professor of sociology emeritus, presented a paper at the recent Jewish People Policy Planning Institute conference (hope I got that right) in Israel. It says that Jews are growing alienated from their communal leadership and names a few factors, including the internet, which allows people to associate in new ways, and more important, the changing understanding of identity in America in which young people see their identities as "pluralistic and fluid" and don’t see ethnic identity as holding great value.
The Obama Effect, writ large. "The fluid state of identity," he wrote in his first book, marks "modern life."
Professor Waxman’s response is a conservative one; he wants to "charge up" young Jews by getting them to join birthright trips, the free trips to Israel available to Jews-only, up to age 26 (one of my relatives who went on this trip was encouraged to join the Israeli army). Cohen and Kelman made the same point in their landmark (and parochial) study of last year: that "ethnic cohesion (Jews relating to Jews)" was needed to strengthen Jewish identity and support for Israel. Alas, 62 percent of Jews under 35 are marrying non-Jews. Charles Bronfman, who underwrote that study, called the study’s findings "disheartening" and also called for more birthright trips.
My first thought was that these studies are reactionary. Young Jews are distancing themselves from Israel for progressive reasons: antisemitism is all-but meaningless in their professional and social realities, meanwhile the Jewish state forces millions of Arabs under occupation to use separate road systems and uproots their olive trees and poisons their goats and pours raw sewage on their land.
I talked to my (non-Jewish) wife about it over dinner and she said I was being too hard on the studies. Of course religious groups will do such things when they see their numbers falling. "It would be shocking if they didn’t respond that way." I guess she’s right. Then she said: "Why don’t the ‘birthright’ people let anyone go on the trip for free? Maybe that would work better." I said, "But see, you are the kind of person who would have leapt at the chance; and they don’t want gentiles riding the buses with Jewish kids for two weeks, then marrying them."
My wife, who majored in anthropology, said that tribal affiliation is a comfort in life. Recently a childhood friend of hers from Chestnut Hill (a WASP section of Philly) moved to our area, and my wife hangs out with her. "It’s so easy," she says. Their manners are so similar. "It’s easier than hanging with you," she said. Our manners are different. Lately, for instance, my wife found herself, in a conversation with her mother, asking her persistent questions to get at specific points her mother was raising. "Who is doing that? What did they say?" she asked; and her mother was a little taken aback, and my wife thinks that this is my Jewish manner that has rubbed off on her. In the culture she grew up in–of "vodka and needlepoint," she puts it– if you are having a conversation and miss something, or someone is vague, you just let it pass and try and figure it out, or not, as the conversation goes on.
My wife doesn’t regret marrying me; what I find so interesting is the complexity of these relations. Affluent Americans have great freedom. We can visit Africa, visit Europe, even visit our roots, and then go back to associating as equals with other multicultural half-rooted empowered people. That’s how things have worked out in the blue states. A remarkable thing about Obama’s progress is that fluidity. His first book (1995) was all about his blackness. The book honored the black side of his family more than the white side; in one scene he all but mocked a stepbrother he met in Kenya, also half-white, who didn’t feel very black and was trying to make it in a white world. Obama then worked alongside Rev. Jeremiah Wright as a community organizer of poor blacks. And he married a black woman who in college in 1985 had written angrily against "assimilation," saying it was a chimera that actually kept her at the "periphery" of society.
Well, society changed. Michelle Obama is not at the periphery. Obama’s speeches now mention his white ancestors more than his father. And when the Obamas are in the White House, they will be both black and not black, and their White House won’t discriminate on that basis.
I am trying to say that fluid identity is a bewitching byproduct of American meritocracy, affluence, and multiculturalism. Yes, it is assimilation, but a new kind. The Bronfmans and Waxmans are, maybe understandably, trying to get the toothpaste back in the tube. The way to reinvigorate American Jewish identity is for American Jews to acknowledge the Nakba and stop thinking of themselves as the foreign ministry of a state that practices apartheid with 3 million people under its power.
And let gentiles take the "birthright" trip too. Who knows what would happen.
(Thanks to Richard Silverstein, who has a link to the full Waxman paper here. And note that Norman Finkelstein has observed the same trend as the sociologists, but identified its progressive basis: "I think you see the erosion in particular among college students because they study and they’re better informed, and they see that all of this stuff Israel is doing has now become morally indefensible. And so there’s some who are just embarrassed, and they have become, as it were, indifferent; and then there are those who have become completely hostile, in an active way.")
Related posts:
- The Obama Effect: Is It Possible to Have a ‘Diverse’ Social Life and Be a Zionist?
- Study: Intermarried American Jews With ‘Personalized’ Identity Are Abandoning Israel
- Obama Puts an End to Identity Politics
- Blacks Reassess Their Identity in Light of Obama Victory. Ergo…
- Memo to Bad Jews: Time to reclaim your Jewish identity and save the world
{ 12 comments }
Phil, how do working class and lower middle to middle class American people fit in your commentary here? I'm curious and Obama does have a small problem with those groups (unless they happen to be black). In my own experience in working class places, if you want to avoid a fist fight, or at least a lot of hollering at each other, and hard feelings, you don't challenge the apparent main host(s) if he/she or they happen to spout off on what are political issues. You might grumble at bit, or whisper to somebody, somebody you take to be a kindred spirit. If you're really enoyed, you just make up an excuse and leave early. In the lower-to-middle class places, there's usually an accepted norm, which you are quickly reminded of if something
pops up with obvious political issues (instead of say sports); that is: "We don't discuss religion or politics with guests. Mind your manners, please."
In other class environments, I usually see a blend of your approach and your wife's, usually depending on the character of the individual in question. When it comes to I-P conflict, most ignore it. Earnest folks on this issue are not welcome.
What is happening to Jews in America (assimilation with other races) is what left-liberal Jews, Marxist Jews and Neocon Jews have been working towards for gentiles with glee for decades. They used white male Christians as the “Nazi” bogeyman to accomplish this (the irony being the Nazis were anti-Christian). But now that organized Zionist-Judaism has been identified in the same vein as Nazism and diaspora Jews are leaving it in droves, suddenly it wants to "get the toothpaste back in the tube.”
Organized Judaism made a huge philosophical, moral and strategic error by demonizing Christians. Christianity is really the only force that is ever going to unite a multi-racial, multi-cultural, polarized society. Left-liberals dream that the State can accomplish this by buying everybody off and coercing them into behaving with the threat of force, but, as the Soviet Union demonstrated, this ends at the gulag, and bankruptcy.
Organized Jewry has tried to address this by promoting and allying with Christianity’s evil twin, “Christian” Zionism,” but this is only making matters worse, as Christian Zionism is a freak amalgamation that attracts the worst elements of Christianity.
Again, the worst of both religions are rallying around Zionism, and Zionism is trying to pass this off as "Western civilization."
Zionism shouldn’t be confused with a gasp of Western civilization, which will be stronger than it has been in decades once the truly nasty Zionists have bled away.
“Birthright Israel” for gentiles indeed — send the “Christian” Zionists there as well — just don’t bring them back.
In my opinion, the kind of Christians Ed sees as the only hope of
uniting a diverse nation are the kind, for example, that believe in
the just war theory, rather than the preemption theory currently operative here and in Israel. Due to the advances in technology, the shrinking of the world in terms of speed of information transmission, weapons of war, etc, there's less time to make decisions, though more objective information is available unless one chooses to ignore it. The just war theory handles preemption by looking at threatening signs on the distant horizon–problem is, such clouds looming are no longer revealed by, e.g., the flash of armies on the ridge.
The problem with preemption as currently practiced is nobody's home to effectively monitor the special interests cherry picking
and stove-piping pretextual justification for whatever action they
wish to do "in the best interest of the people."
An analogy may be the debate strict constructionist versus living law constitutionalists. The former is said to not bend with needed change, and at times there's some truth to that, and the latter is said to have no brakes except as applied at the whim of the ruling class and always mainly in its own best interest.
Who actually decided that the U.S. has to be diverse and welcome everyone who can make it to our shores, or across the border? Who decided that we have to accept multiculturalism?
Immigration, multiple ethnicities and multiculturlism haven't done much positive for the average American in blue or red states. All of the above may make ethnic-types and immigrants feel more comfortable, but each has done little more than erode the interests of the majority.
I find talk of an Obama effect being postracial or positive for all as naive or dishonest. Just look at Obama's own words and the words of his associates. If talk of punishing noecons and Israel-firsters sticks out to Jews, the words of Obama and his associates should raise eyebrows to the majority of americans.
Now this is really interesting Ed!!! Let me see if I get this right?
So the left, Marxist and neocon Jews have all advocated a merry interracial union; and the only ones not invited into this happy-together were white males?
But the problem is that this left-to-extreme-left-to-neocon-Jewish-union never realized that this happy multi-racial multi-cultural happiness can only be accomplished under the cross, has in fact always been a purely Christian meme that cannot be cloned?
And now organized Jewry aware that only Christianity can bring about this multi-racial happy utopia manipulated a couple of Christians into a Christian Zionist Armageddon cult and together with the left-extreme-left-&-neocon-ex-Trotzkist-Jews they are trying to get the "toothpaste back into the tube"?
While the white males are still lonely sitting on the fence waiting for them all to leave so the ultimate Christian nation can rise to its final Christian purity and glory …
In case I misunderstood something: I am only here English to learn, tomorrow I start Kentucky Steak house.
"In my opinion, the kind of Christians Ed sees as the only hope of
uniting a diverse nation are the kind, for example, that believe in
the just war theory…The just war theory handles preemption by looking at threatening signs on the distant horizon–problem is, such clouds looming are no longer revealed by, e.g., the flash of armies on the ridge."
Charles, I interpret this as: “We have no time to sort out right from wrong; in the modern world, we have to act — and act fast — or we’re dust!!!!”
This is hysterical, woman-like nonsense. Panic. This is the stuff of Jewish/Neocon hysteria. The “call at 3 A.M.,” or the “ticking time bomb” scenario. “The sky is falling!!!”
People, calm down.
The same laws of common sense and that applied 2,000 years ago apply today: treat decent people decently, and they will respond in kind.
Those indecent people who treat decent people indecently are the ones trying to whip up hysteria — for fear of suffering the consequences of their malevolence. If we are hysterical about the 'other,' we have no time or desire to study the malevolent within. How convenient for the malign.
"And now organized Jewry aware that only Christianity can bring about this multi-racial happy utopia manipulated a couple of Christians into a Christian Zionist Armageddon cult and together with the left-extreme-left-&-neocon-ex-Trotzkist-Jews they are trying to get the "toothpaste back into the tube"?"
Why thank you, LeaNder. I couldn't have put it better myself. But it's more than "a couple" of Christian Zionists, and no, they are not permanently allied with the Left, which despises all religions, but Christianity most, and Judaism and Islam less than Christianity. But indeed, Judaized “Christians,” Leftists, and organized Jewry are perfectly capable of conspiring to annihilate Christianity. Haven’t you ever heard of the Soviet Union? Didn’t the Communists murder millions of Christians? Wasn’t Stalin, a convert to Jewish Bolshevism, educated in a Christian seminary? Substitute Communism for Zionism, and you will understand what Judaized “Christian” Zionists and Leftists are capable of doing to Christians.
"Why thank you, LeaNder."
It sure was a pleasure, Ed. ;)
I am still wondering though, if our dear Pearlman/sword does really like to push "the toothpaste back into the tube" together with Phil, of all human beings out there? Methinks he may protest??? But strictly I would locate Phil in the first group and Pearlman somehow in the last:
"left-liberal Jews, Marxist Jews and Neocon Jews"
But then, what do I know.
"Charles, I interpret this as: “We have no time to sort out right from wrong; in the modern world, we have to act — and act fast — or we’re dust!!!!”
This is hysterical, woman-like nonsense. Panic. This is the stuff of Jewish/Neocon hysteria. The “call at 3 A.M.,” or the “ticking time bomb” scenario. “The sky is falling!!!”–Ed
"Exactly. I could not agree more. This implemented view is why we are in the pickle we are in.
Allow me to repeat myself:
The problem with preemption as currently practiced is nobody's home to effectively monitor the special interests cherry picking
and stove-piping pretextual justification for whatever action they
wish to do "in the best interest of the people."
I guess I was not clear enough. Sorry. Christian just law theory does speak to preemption. When it originated, it was easier to see attack troops mustering on the horizon. Although info transmission was slower, the eye could see those troops clearly.
Today, despite fast transmission of data, who saw those 9/11 hijackers? They wore no uniforms.
BushCo & the neocons rely on the fact of asymetric warfare not easily traced to any uniformed state enabler. They rely on this reality to instill fear into the American masses. Bush-McCain-Hillary-AIPAC count on this.
How to pragmatically keep alive just war theory in this context is very difficult. For starters, it requires talking to our perceived enemies, not just to chat, and not just behind the back door, but in public and to directly feel them out, something that has not been on the table with, e.g., Iran.
Is it appeasement and giving unwarranted and dangerous prestige to talk in public to Iran, for example, or is it better to just rattle sabers, require as a precondition to talking so at all, that Iran, or Hamas or Hezbollah concede that they have no right to any moral indignation at all?
I know you agree. Again, sorry if I am not being clear. I was trying to get at the smoke and mirrors going on by our politicians–not in long term American interests, or even Israel's.
"BushCo & the neocons rely on the fact of asymetric warfare not easily traced to any uniformed state enabler. They rely on this reality to instill fear into the American masses. Bush-McCain-Hillary-AIPAC count on this.'
And by even talking to, for example, Hamas, they reduce the likelihood of a "terrorist" attack, or of terrorist saber rattling, which is not in their cynical interests. When the politicians operate only on behalf of a narrow elite and against the best interests of the majority, that is called an oligarchy, which is what I believe we are now living in.
I don't disagree at all.
I wouldn't read too much into this survey finding young Jews identify less with their ethnic group than old Jews — it's been that way for a couple of centuries. As Paul Johnson pointed out in his "History of the Jews," it's been common down through the centuries for young atheist intellectuals to become more focused on Jewish ethnic interests as they age, without necessarily becoming theists. Christopher Hitchens, who is barely Jewish in any genealogical sense, yet has become a neocon as he ages would be one of many contemporary examples.
Comments on this entry are closed.