It is difficult to formulate a new Jewish history while looking through the dense prism of Zionism--the light that traverses it keeps breaking into sharply ethnocentric colors.... [T]he Jews have always comprised significant religious communities that appeared and settled in various parts of the world, rather than an ethnos that shared a single origin and wandered in a permanent exile...How can we stop trudging along roads paved mainly with materials forged in national fantasies?
Imagining the nation was an important stage in the development of historiography, as indeed in the evolution of modernity. It engaged many historians from the nineteenth century onward. But toward the end of the twentieth century the dreams of national identity began to disintegrate. More and more scholars began to dissect and examine the great national stories, especially myths of common origin, that had hitherto clouded the writing of history. It goes without saying that the secularization of history took place under the hammer blows of cultural globalization, which continually takes unexpected forms throughout the Western world.
Yesterday's nightmares of identity are not tomorrow's identity dreams. Just as every personality is composed of fluid and diverse identities, so is history, among other things, an identity in motion.
--Shlomo Sand, The Invention of the Jewish People, Introduction
Help to what?
Help to do what?
build tomorrow’s identity dream
visualize your dream for it to materialize. know that who you are and your voice is infinitely as powerful as your ability to conceptualize and communicate. all the voices we are hearing today are building the foundation of tomorrow. a great swelling voice of the diaspora. you empower that voice everyday. you’re already doing it, that’s why i’m listening.
I think the best model for tomorrow’s identity is the composite model suggested by Amin Maalouf – many faceted, but impossible to compartmentalise.
I don’t think the problem is so much building a new kind of identity (I think Phil has already done that), but in learning to deal with the identities that are forced upon us (again Maalouf has answers – must remember to get copy of On Identity back from friend I lent it to).
I’m sorry to say this Mr Weiss, but that sounds spookily like how all this started; Building dreams easily becomes the birthing of nightmares.
When Gordon Brown tried this with his “Britishness” campaign he immediately ran into what I would regard as a similar quandry, what is Britishness? the solution being simple, don’t worry, it is what it is and requires no assistance or definition, have faith.
I think the nature of the task and the inherent questions fall foul of the ‘Observer effect’ , exhibited in the lexicon of physics as Heisenbergs uncertainty principle and other phenomina, and ‘Observer-expectancy’ in realm of psychology.
link to en.wikipedia.org.
I found a good example in Goodhart’s Law (bearing in mind recent economic turbulence):
‘Goodhart’s Law is one of those neat formulations that codifies something I’ve been trying to put my finger on for years: “once a social or economic indicator or other surrogate measure is made a target for the purpose of conducting social or economic policy, then it will lose the information content that would qualify it to play such a role.”
That is, once you start measuring GDP as a way of gauging social welfare, people will start to figure out ways to make GDP go up without improving social welfare (say, by swapping dirty financial derivatives). Once Google starts measuring inbound links as a way of evaluating the importance of web-pages, people will figure out how to increase the inbound links to unimportant pages (splogging, blogspam). And once you measure fat or calorie content as a proxy for the healthfulness of food, manufacturers will figure out how to decrease fat and calories without making the food more healthful (reducing fat by adding sugar, reducing calories by adding poisonous artificial sweeteners).
The law was first stated in a 1975 paper by Goodhart and gained popularity in the context of the attempt by the United Kingdom government of Margaret Thatcher to conduct monetary policy on the basis of targets for broad and narrow money, but the idea is considerably older. It is implicit in the economic idea of rational expectations. While it originated in the context of market responses the Law has profound implications for the selection of high-level targets in organisations.’
link to boingboing.net
Philip – surely you already have an identity. You are an American who happens to follow the Jewish religion just like I’m British and an atheist.
What do you mean by “identity dream”?
I think he’s just saying redefine ‘identity’ outside of nationalism. Maybe on values of universalism and justice.
I’d like to see “identity” defined, let alone re-defined.
identity is like a thumbprint. it is already there and the ink lets us see it. we leave our print on everything we touch and everything we touch reinforces our identity.
It is difficult to formulate a new Jewish history while looking through the dense prism of Zionism
so just don’t look thru the prism.
How can we stop trudging along roads paved mainly with materials forged in national fantasies?
by building new roads.
Sorry. That doesn’t really explain much. “It is already there” suggests some sort of essence. But what sort of essence?
RoHa, I think you are insinuating some sort of genetic component, am I right? This is a moving terrain, and has little to do with identity, I think.
well roha you’ve got me stumped on describing essence. first i tried describing the smell of a rose and find i just cannot yet i know when i smell a rose i smell it’s essence and the essence is already there. better to just smell the rose and write about your experience of the essence.
of course it is very hard to smell a rose w/the stench of death and suffering everywhere but regardless the rose has an essence whether we can smell it or not. sorry, that’s the best i can do.
some sort of genetic component
i didn’t even pick that up. the culmination of many voices creates itself as it compiles…as shmuel says many faceted, but impossible to compartmentalise.
I haven’t read Sand’s book, but I listened to an interview with him on French radio. He seemed to suggest that if you take out the religious and genetic components (passing it down from the mother), well, what’s left? At the same time, he used a genetic “study” as a basis for his argument that what we call Ashkenazi Jews are mostly descendants of some tribes in south eastern Europe (Khazars?), and not the Middle East.
I don’t think that using genetic “analysis” is a good way of rebutting the idea many zionists have of some sort of “homeland”, as they use the same arguments to try to prove their case – does Sand therefore think they all should go back to Ukrania? Of course not. The very idea of a “homeland” is absurd, and can only be posited if one interprets the holy writs (Bible, Torah, etc.) as factual. Which they can’t possibly be, even though a lot of it is beautiful poetry.
In my family, the origins of our ancestors simply were never discussed, as it was deemed unimportant – I had to actually ask once where my grandparents came from, otherwise I wouldn’t have known. Does this mean I have no identity? Of course not. I guess I’m trying to say that to entangle identity with ancestry is pretty questionable, they are two different things ; and if we had to meet our ancestors from centuries before, we probably would have little in common with them. Religion and the written word are two ways of cementing a population, I suppose. They are things that can be passed down.
“the culmination of many voices creates itself as it compiles…as shmuel says many faceted, but impossible to compartmentalise.”
You could say that about anybody, really.
You could say that about anybody, really.
That’s precisely the point. I was just paraphrasing Amin Maalouf, who has many facets to his identity, but being Jewish is not one of them (that I know of).
I see. One can be Jewish like one can be a jokester, or a serious person, or a heterosexual, or a homosexual, or a Republican, or a Democrat. OK.
The problems often seem to come from people who don’t see this as just one of many aspects of their personality, but see it as a defining one, and the most important, such as fundamentalist Christians. On the other hand, there are the ultra orthodox neturei karta who define themselves as anti-zionist, but for religious reasons, and not necessarily for reasons of human rights and justice.
There are different sets and subsets or qualities to how people define themselves, and the religious ones tend to take everything else over, and even when one is no longer religious there is a residue of it left over in the guise of certain “values”. These values need to be detached from religion and rendered “human”, more universal.
Oh goody! I get to quote Chaim Zhitlovsky again:
“The more a man, the more a Jew, the more a Jew, the more a man”
I like that. So, we’re all Jews?
As a thought experiment : If the Palestinians all converted en mass to Judaism, and were honest about it, would there cease to be a conflict?
ask Queen Isabella
LRB,
Zhitlovsky was a universalist, and he was addressing Yiddish-speaking Jews. As a Jew, the more you are a Jew the more your are a man, and the more you are a man the more you are a Jew. The same could be said of any identity (I presume Zhitlovsky’s reference was specifically to cultural identity, as he was neither religious nor a nationalist). In broader terms, one might rephrase: the more you are yourself, the more you are universal; the more you are universal, the more you are yourself.
With regard to your thought experiment, the conflict is not a religious one, and therefore has no religious solution. If by Palestinian conversion you mean becoming Zionists, then it is a tautology: were Palestinians to give up their individual and collective rights there would be no conflict.
With regard to your thought experiment, the conflict is not a religious one, and therefore has no religious solution.
Exactly, but it is tied up with how you define the word Jew, and that IS part of the conflict. If the Palestinians were Jews, would there have been ethnic cleansing and dispossession in the first place? If the definition is simply a religious one, then the conversion would solve the problem (supposing that it were honest) ; the fact that it is more complicated than that means that the definition is somewhat unclear – either a set of traditions passed down from generation to generation, or simply racial (genetic).
On another note, from what I can tell, the movement of zionism is primarily of European origin, and has nothing particularly Jewish about it.
LRB,
You are talking primarily about Israeli legal definitions, which sometimes coincide with religious/traditional definitions, and sometimes don’t. Legal definitions are necessarily clear-cut. Personal definitions can be as vague or even contradictory as one likes. Israeli legal definitions are quite irrelevant – except perhaps as an indication of what to avoid.
A little while ago, I had an exchange with Mooser about whether one can be a “Jew alone” or not. I suspect that Phil is looking for an “identity” that he might be able to share with more Jews than just himself.
Exactly, but it is tied up with how you define the word Jew, and that IS part of the conflict….On another note, from what I can tell, the movement of zionism is primarily of European origin, and has nothing particularly Jewish about it.
a jew, like every other person can be whatever he/she wants. a person creates their identity or reinforces their identity by their own choosing. i am not my history unless i chose to define myself as such. let’s take my identity as a woman. if i am weak i reinforce that image, that identity and it shapes and informs not just me but those around me, same if i am strong. if i go out and drive like a maniac it reinforces my identity. if a jew chooses to identify as a zionist and all the jews around do the same thing it reinforces a zionist identity w/ jews, but it does not ‘become’ jewish. zionism cannot be the same as jewish no more than cream becomes coffee because they go together.
so if one wants a new identity be it, do it and others might too. you define what it is to be jewish, jewish doesn’t define you. therefore if all the jews decide to be zionist they are choosing to define themselves (jews) like that.
religious people are of the same ilk regardless of religion, it is a mental process, a choice. it is how one identifies oneself, it defines them..it is not ‘who we are’.
so no, the conflict is not tied up with how you define the word Jew unless you choose it to be. iow it may be for you but it isn’t for me at all no more than the battle of fallujah is tied up in the way you define me. of course if i identify myself with the battle of fallujah then yes, it is tied up w/how you define me.
the extent to which the conflict defines jewishness is limited or empowered to the extent and way jews choose to relate to the conflict. therefore, as a jew, the extent one rejects the conflict defines jews in exactly the same way the extent that one embraces or empowers the conflict defines jews..
the conflict is a result of zionism, not jewishness.
each and every jew defines jewish identity by their own choice. so if you want a new dream identity embrace it and reinforce it and others will follow. jews are not zionism. zionists just choose to make it so to empower their movement w/the backing of world wide jewry. all you have to do is reject it and the more you reject it people will understand it is separate from jewishness and a choice some jews have made and identify with.
the conflict is a result of zionism, not jewishness.
This is obvious, but always good to point out, thanks Annie.
I’m reminded of something N. Chomsky said in an interview once, roughly – that notions of common sense fall away rather quickly once you start investigating things in a scientific way, and the results it can lead you to can seem counterintuitive – This is especially true in physics. When you really press the question hard enough, you can come to some surprising results, and you always have to question preconceived notions. This common sensical view of what a “Jew” is seems to me to be a little like that. It’s very large and vague. I think myself that continuing the teachings, certain lessons and values is a good thing. At the same time, labeling people separates them.
Shmuel, those legal definitions are the ones that are causing harm to the Palestinians, and as legal definitions go, I think that they are an attempt at approaching some sort of reality – once you try to get your hands on it, you realize that it’s pretty slippery, and there is room for much interpretation, and just pure invention. Nevertheless, it’s those decisions that are translated into the everyday reality of life, not vague notions.
In the same way, I think the word “American” or “French” means almost nothing, insomuch as it’s an accident of birth. “Christian”, however, implies some sort of choice at some age, even though most are born into it too.
” I had to actually ask once where my grandparents came from, otherwise I wouldn’t have known.”
I tried that once, and my Mom slapped me, hard, and sent me to bed with no supper. And as I went upstairs, she was screaming: “Young man, there are some things decent people just don’t talk about, and besides nobody ever proved anything,”
I don’t get it, Shmuel. I’m all Jew, so how come I’m not all man?
The more a man, the more a Palestinian, the more a Palestinian, the more a man? The more a man, the more an Aryan, the more an Aryan, the more a man? How connected is universalism to any
division other than man, a human?
Identity reeks of ethno-centricism. Because American Jews have a largely (Eastern) European background, they mix Judaism and ethnicity. Judaism is a religion, not an ethnicity. A starting point for American Jews is the history of Jews in America. The quest for identity reminds me of Ann Landers’ discouragement of people from going back too far in your family. Don’t confuse doing history with doing the family tree.
I did a thorough genealogical study on my family, and I think we can lay an unchallenged claim to an amazing record of political consistency. We have betrayed every country which has let us in, at one time or another!
It should be made clear: we don’t do this because we are Jewish, it’s just a family tradition.
What about a family with the contrary political consistency? Many Americans have that. The German American Bund furnished nearly all their young men to the US military in WW2; as they had furnished an earlier young generation to Lincoln, or the Kaisers.
I don’t know what “identity” is supposed to mean here.
Is it self description ? (E.g. “I am a left handed Latvian spokshaver’s assistant”)
Is it a “this how others classifiy me” concept? (E.g. “I am classed as Welsh by society.”)
Is it some idea an eternal essence that is there regardless of what I or others think?
And why is it such a big deal?
It is a big deal. Jews have always bet set apart, and have also set themselves apart, from societies they have joined, making Jewish identity a strong one. And the modern Jewish identity is wrapped in an ideology that is imploding as we speak (Zionism, especially liberal Zionism). That leaves Jews, I believe, quite adrift. It’s scary. Take the “Jewish” out of “Jewish author,” “Jewish activist,” “Jewish comedian,” “Jewish mother,” and what do you have? Just regular old “author,” “activist,” comedian,” “mother.” Not so special. Like the rest of us.
Jethro,
A classic Yiddish (one of many Jewish cultures) answer to your comment would be: “you should only be so special”.
Seriously though, I don’t think Phil views his Jewish identity as something that makes him “special” in the sense of being better than “regular” folk, although he has pointed out that others in his circle seem to feel that way. In fact, the question he poses here is how to construct an identity that is honest, consistent and enriching. “Tribal” self-aggrandisement is none of those things.
Whether it’s a curse or a blessing (or both), it’s special. And thus hard to lose.
Jethro,
Aren’t all identities (first and foremost, as an individuals) “special”? What’s different about being Jewish? Identities are precisely what makes us us and nobody else.
“And the modern Jewish identity is wrapped in an ideology that is imploding as we speak (Zionism, especially liberal Zionism). “
Fort some of them. For many more Zionism is really just a sentimental attachment.
Think of it this way Jethro; if the whole Jewish community was indeed concerned with Israel, and concerned with Zionism as an ethical proposition, Israel would get fixxed, and goddam fast.
Judaism, Jewish, Jewish community, all those things have much less protection than a registered trademark.
Of course, if you have some evidence that a central Jewish authourity adopted Zionism as a Jewish ideology and decreed that all Jewish education would be centered around inculcating it in Jews, I’d love to see it.
not so sure about that Mooser.
No patent lawyer I know has ever lifted a paintball gun, with or without pepperspray, much less lobbed a missile or dropped a bomb to defend a patent.
Er, Mooser, Zionism is Judaism.
This lady says so, and she is a professor!
link to youtube.com
“construct an identity that is honest, consistent and enriching.”
If you can fake sincerity, you got it made!
“Whether it’s a curse or a blessing (or both), it’s special.”
Compared to what, life as a left-handed Latvian spoke-shaver’s assistant?
Actually this is really funny, because, and I swear this is true, when I was growing up, I used to think to myself: “Oy, I’m an American Reform Jew, from New York, on the lower edge of the middle class, BORING!! Lord, why couldn’t I have been somebody special, somebody unusual?”
I thought it was the most mundane thing in the world.
Amd Jesus, it wasn’t even really New York, as in New York City, it was Lon Guyland! As far as I knew I was just like everybody else. What the hell was so special?
We all want to be unique, just like everyone else.
You mean like the church lady (Sat Nite Live, ages ago) saying, “Isn’t that special?”
Perhaps an Israeli can help you here, Mooser.
You mean, Shmuel, like being in a specific labor union?
In the USA we used to say e pluribus unum. Now we glorify pluribus and belittle unum. The melting pot yields to the Tower of Babel.
“Latvian spoke-shavers assistant” Lulz!
Phillip,
I can sympathize with your plight because mine is similiar. Let me explain. I grew up and live in the Deep South of the U.S.(american like you) I was raised to believe that Israeli and my country could do no wrong. And in Church every Sunday Israeli would always be mention at least once and always in the context of the Chosen People and he who bless thee will be blessed and he that curse thee will be cursed(Does that apply to Jesus and Paul too?) The religion is Christian Zionism and if you think the ethnic tribal mentatility is strong with Jewish people you haven’t seen anything. Christian Zionism demands allegiance and one step out of line and you are ostrazied out of the community. Well thats me. Any honest reading of history and of the New Testament not the Old clearly implicates that the Christian Zionist has lost his mind. But it’s still lonely. Out of the 50,000 people in my county there are 49998 Christian Zionists and 2 Christians(me and my mom). And if you think having a conversation in the Jewish American community is hard about Zionism you haven’t seen nothing. There is no debate down here and don’t think I haven’t tried subtly. My only convert is my mom and I’m not quit sure she is telling me the truth. As for your predicatement. I have never been more proud as an American to see many young and some not so young(sorry) Jewish Americans writers finally say enough is enough and call for an honest dialogue. The opportunity lies with you Jewish Americans to be truly the Greatest Generation of American Jewry. With the pen mightier than a sword you and your fellow brethren can bring world peace because peace in the Middle East runs through Jerusalem and the fight must be fought here in America against the far right powerful Zionist who have hijacked our countries foreign policy, not that it’s any thing to brag about, but you Jewish Americans have always been at heart progressives and that’s why I love you so dearly. And yes it will take Jewish Americans to solve this because let’s face it nobody else has the power too. And in conquering this last obstacle to peace in the middle east you will go down in American History books as the Greatest Generation of American Jewry and free me and my mom from the open air cult we live down here in the Old Confederacy.
Conrad… “But it’s still lonely.”
This medium allows for finding “virtual communities” (this place is one of them).
It is a very moving post, by the way, Conrad. Given your very conservative evangelical protestant background, you might want to check out “Sojourners”, a community of evangelical protestants with a deep commitment to social justice. (link to sojo.net)
I am Catholic, by the way. But I have always been very impressed by the Sojourners group. Not my place to give advice; that is not the intent.
Just thought if you were not already aware it might be of interest to you.
ooops…meant to include this link; it allows you to search for evangelical churches connected to Sojourners, in every state.
link to sojo.net
Your situation sounds like a much more extreme version of my life a few decades back. Not that my immediate family were strong Christian Zionists and I don’t remember hearing that term growing up, but we’d read “The Late Great Planet Earth” (the bestselling 1970′s nonfiction book which presented the whole Rapture/Tribulation/Antichrist theme with Israel at the center of it all) and just took for granted that the Israelis were the good guys, even if they hadn’t accepted Jesus, and the Arabs were bad. The founding of Israel in 1948 was seen as a miracle, with tiny little Israel somehow achieving victory over 200 million Arabs (you’d think they all came marching in from the way it was described). And secular reading just confirmed that. There was a Reader’s Digest condensed book I still remember reading which portrayed Israel’s history in an utterly heroic light. A British nutcase (who I’ve seen in other histories since) named Wingate back in the 30′s who was very pro-Zionist was portrayed as a hero.
I’m mostly out of those circles now , though I still have friends who think that way.
I’m mostly out of those circles now , though I still have friends who “think” that way.
Fixed it for you, and with only two scare quote marks!
thankyou for your thought provoking post Conrad and I hope there are some more secret conrads out there in the American South.
I have to say there is a malevolance in Christian Zionism that seems about on par with Al-quaida, at least the Jewish Zionists have an inherent desire to actually live in Israel, with CZ it seems everybody dies on the whim of those comfortably out of range (and out of their minds!?!).
my background is more genteel CofE, focussed on the ‘do unto others’ bit, which is handy as a Practical Atheist because it concurs with self-evident morality very well.
i agree it is an amazing post conrad.
“but you Jewish Americans have always been at heart progressives and that’s why I love you so dearly.”
“And yes it will take Jewish Americans to solve this because let’s face it nobody else has the power too.”
Conrad, as an American Jew, may I politely ask you to go fuck yourself?
“Greatest Generation of American Jewry and free me and my mom from the open air cult we live down here in the Old Confederacy.”
Not my problem, buddy boy. You fix it. Sorry, fella, you can’t blame the American South on the Jews, there simply aren’t enough of us to screw something up that badly.
You sound like a man of real integrity. Thank you for posting your experiance Conrad.
I t seems that it will path the way to identify with the true facts of what is and what is made up, and to come out with a better vision in the end will take media help or at least someone who can bring it to all the public to see too.
it would possible allow the two states to form, but then I still haven’t had any coffee this morning, and am in a dream realm. The media is obviously in part some of the problem towing the governments lines unfeathered by the truth or their concious. Lets not forget all those settlers whom evidently believe a god really gave it to them, especially after so much hog wash that back it up being more of the same hog wash from the start. Media resources are needed to help everyday, three or more times a day, the truths must get out.
they have been brainwashed for so long their needs to be a real backround exsposed for them to relate to?
Phil,
Not sure if you’ve seen the latest study by the AJHG, but this pretty much refutes the Khazarian myth championed in Sands book. Anyone who bought it should ask for their money back!
link to cell.com
yonira, do you get an extra allotment of fingers to plug all the holes in the dike?
Yonira: Um, it really doesn’t.
If you want me to get into the allele-based details of the thing, I will. But in vague terms, it just shows that Ashkenazis are of broadly post-Neolithic Middle Eastern origin- as are most Europeans East of, say, Zurich.
You’ll notice that the released diagrams show the Ashkenazim clustering with Greeks and Turks rather than any Middle Eastern populations: link to 3.bp.blogspot.com
This is entirely consonant with what we know (and what Sands wrote about, if you actually read his book) of Jewish evangelism in the Hellenistic Near East (think Septuagint…).
Also, the authors of the above study specifically stated that:
“Admixture with local populations, including Khazars and Slavs, may have occurred subsequently during the 1000 year (2nd millennium) history of the European Jews. Based on analysis of Y chromosomal polymorphisms, Hammer estimated that the rate might have been as high as 0.5% per generation or 12.5% cumulatively (a figure derived from Motulsky), although this calculation might have underestimated the influx of European Y chromosomes during the initial formation of European Jewry. Notably, up to 50% of Ashkenazi Jewish Y chromosomal haplogroups (E3b, G, J1, and Q) are of Middle Eastern origin,15 whereas the other prevalent haplogroups (J2, R1a1, R1b) may be representative of the early European admixture. The 7.5% prevalence of the R1a1 haplogroup among Ashkenazi Jews has been interpreted as a possible marker for Slavic or Khazar admixture because this haplogroup is very common among Ukrainians (where it was thought to have originated), Russians, and Sorbs, as well as among Central Asian populations, although the admixture may have occurred with Ukrainians, Poles, or Russians, rather than Khazars.”
Regarding Phil’s ethnodilemma, surely he’s a Yiddischer-American. Isn’t that enough? Americans agonize too much about this stuff…
Thanks!
The way that study was reported in the Huff, it made it sound as though Jews were so closely related to each other that the Jewish National Home should have been founded in Arkansas.
link to huffingtonpost.com
Phil or Adam,
could you please email me explain my new censorship?
You’re not censored, you’re on probation for posting tripe, garbage, lies and personal attacks. I would speculate.
Just as I’m on probation for having the necessary ferocity to pick up your trash and fling it right back at you.
How does this probation work, Chaos? Are you sent an email advising you about it ? What form does it take?
“new censorship?”
How are you censored since you’re posting still?
“Phil or Adam,
could you please email me explain my new censorship?”
Since Phil or Adam aren’t around, I’d be happy to explain it to you, Yonira. It works like this: You post any more crap and your dick falls off, and there goes your dream of having (and I quote you ver-frickin-batim, Yoni) “my Jewish children”.
So why take a chance at losing your boyhood? Would “my Jewish children” ever forgive you? I doubt it!
>> I don’t know what “identity” is supposed to mean here. … And why is it such a big deal?
Yeah, I don’t get the point, either. Letting a faith define your life is bad enough, but when you add tribal/national identity to the mix, like Judaism does, it becomes a real mind-f*ck.
To the best of anyone’s knowledge (not faith, knowledge) we have only one life to live. Given that, I don’t understand why people don’t just try to live – to the best of their financial/intellectual/emotional/other abilities – good, happy, interesting and satisfying lives. Why expend energy trying to define your life in terms of mytho-religious dogma, especially if it interferes with your ability to enjoy your life?
Be a good person. Be happy in your environment. If you don’t like your environment, find a different one. And have a good life. :-)
eljay,
I think identities are a part of living a good life – understanding who you are, what you believe in, where (physically and metaphysically) you belong. My background is quite different from Phil’s, but speaking for myself, being Jewish is a part of who I am. It’s there, and I have to deal with it, or risk anxiety and conflict that will not contribute to my own happiness or to the ways in which I can contribute to the groups of which I am a part (the ultimate source of individual happiness, if you want to be Epicurean about it).
when I was divorced I went into a deep, deep tailspin; my identity had been entirely submerged into that of my ex. Separate from the spouse, I had no unique existence, no memory well, no individual identity. I had to build an identity and a personality. The process involved taking stock in a brutally realistic fashion of what I had ACTUALLY done with my life so far, what skills I ACTUALLY had, what good I had ACTUALLY DONE, not the adolescent fantasies of my “dream” identity. Now, I see myself as having a prosthetic personality. It may be plastic and clumsy but it’s realistic, it’s authentic, and it’s all mine.
I think Phil is making a fundamental mistake in seeking to “build tomorrow’s identity dream,” and if you’ll forgive me saying so, it’s the very mistake the Hebrews made in Babylon when they shaped their narrative with a view to assuaging their sense of anomie at having been exiled from Jerusalem, the place where they felt they belonged, that made their lives make sense.
Jews have created and recreated and re-recreated “identity dreams” to once again assuage the pain of being cut off from the substrate of their identity. The very concept of Hasbara suggests that Jews seek to convince the world — but themselves most tragically of all — that they are something that they are not, that their identity is a dream.
It’s painful, Phil, but I suggest that if Jewish people wish to live finally, fully, and authentically in the present world, instead of creating a new “identity dream,” create a brutally honest mirror: look at yourself, confront who you really are, not who you want the world to think you are so that the world will either admire or pity you.
Mooser has confronted the greatest fear that many Jews attempt to “dream” away: the recognition that Jews are just like everybody else, except moreso.
‘Jews are just like everybody else, except moreso.’
and so sayeth our moosiah – amen
“Mooser has confronted…”
I brand that, in plain words, an unmitigated prevarication! And anybody who knows me, and will admit to it, would tell you the same.
Unless, of course, by “confronted” you mean “yelled something unintelligible over his shoulder as he ran like hell in the other direction.”
Oh crap, PG, now you’ve done it, my wife’s seen it! She’ll be laughing about this for days, and asking me what joke “Mooser has confronted” is the punchline to.
“when I was divorced I went into a deep, deep tailspin;”
Me too, me too, and that last beating from my ex-wife didn’t help.
Sounds like just another claim to flattering exceptionalism based on something other than one’s individual acts, this “Jews are just like everybody else, except moreso.” Just a man. Just a more manly man.
>> … being Jewish is a part of who I am. It’s there, and I have to deal with it, or risk anxiety and conflict that will not contribute to my own happiness or to the ways in which I can contribute to the groups of which I am a part …
Being Croatian (my dad), Italian (my mom) and Catholic was all part of who I was at one time. Over time, I realized that I wasn’t anything other than Canadian, and I outgrew Catholicism – and the need for religion in general – in the same way that I outgrew Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny.
Once those “identities” no longer pertained to me, I stopped trying to live my life as though they did. I stopped trying to (re-)define my life in terms of them. I stopped being part of those “communities” because they weren’t not relevant to me anymore. No anxiety, no conflict and no guilt.
:-)
eljay – Can your dad stop being Croatian, or your mom Italian (or whatever region she comes from – which is often more important in Italy)? I left the religious stuff too, but am culturally Jewish, whether I like it or not. My daughter is far more Italian than she is Jewish, and may abandon the Jewish part of her identity altogether, or decide to explore it and strengthen it. There is nothing inherently positive about abandoning aspects of your identity. Hell, Jews have been doing it ever since there were Jews. It’s personal, and can be either positive or negative. Either you feel it’s an important part of who you are, or you don’t.
>> Can your dad stop being Croatian, or your mom Italian (or whatever region she comes from – which is often more important in Italy)?
My mom (who was from a small town outside of Rome) had Italian friends, but she never had any interest in the local Italian community or even in Italy in general. She was very happy being Canadian. “Identities” *can* change.
>> There is nothing inherently positive about abandoning aspects of your identity. … It’s personal, and can be either positive or negative. Either you feel it’s an important part of who you are, or you don’t.
I agree that one shouldn’t abandon aspects of one’s identity for no good reason. But if aspects of one’s current “identity” are creating dissonance, perhaps it’s better to abandon those aspects rather than attempt to re-adjust one’s entire life around them.
Anyway, I’m not trying to stir anything up. I just don’t understand (some) people’s need to cling to identities especially if they are causing them grief. (I’m not suggesting that this is the case with Phil and his need to “build tomorrow’s identity dream” but, if it is, perhaps he should consider leaving behind or stepping away from certain aspects of his current “identity” and retaining the one’s that are essential to him – being a good person, helping others, enjoying life, etc. – and which do not cause him grief or anxiety.)
Perhaps an outcome of simply living beyond the narrow confines one may have been brought up in on every level always requires
readjustment, a growing awareness of one’s likes and dislikes, whether it’s about, say, one’s religion or one’s food, or the differences between living among people of different economic classes, etc. Never in the history of the world have more humans been subjected to comparative cultures given the increasing mobility, if nothing else the inherent difference between one who never left the home town and one who did, often simply due to their parent being transferred or getting a new job. Schmuel talks to his cultural inclination, as distinguished from his daughter’s–partly a result of being of a different generation; this
is something all families experience and is always the talk of the town so to speak. Early imprinting, say of cherished food dishes, is not likely to go away. Schmaltz is common too; as is the fact that we all know some people who chose to cherish certain aspects of their cultural heritage and ignore others, while others
rebel against the whole inheiritance, yet sometimes later return to at least part of the fold after going through evental dissapointment trying on other ways. And so on. Further, some have so little individual self courage/imagination/curiousity they romanticize aspects of
their cultural/ethnic heritage immensely.
Jacques Attali’s Les juifs I thought was quite a good book when I read it, although far too sympathetic to Zionism, in my opinion, once it reaches the 20th century.
Speaking of nationalism/identity issues this is thanks to MJ Rosenberg who quotes George Washington in his 1796 Farewell Address
link to huffingtonpost.com
A passionate attachment of one nation for another produces a variety of evils. Sympathy for the favorite nation, facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common interest in cases where no real common interest exists, and infusing into one the enmities of the other, betrays the former into a participation in the quarrels and wars of the latter without adequate inducement or justification….And it gives to ambitious, corrupted, or deluded citizens (who devote themselves to the favorite nation), facility to betray or sacrifice the interests of their own country, without odium, sometimes even with popularity; gilding, with the appearances of a virtuous sense of obligation, a commendable deference for public opinion, or a laudable zeal for public good, the base or foolish compliances of ambition, corruption, or infatuation.
Les,
Washington had a point, but we all identify with some nation or other (often more than one). Furthermore, we identify with all sorts of groups, on the basis of culture, religion, language, gender, sexual preference, political orientation, class, etc. Yet many of us strive to overcome those specific identities, to find our common humanity (or more, if you’re into “deep ecology”). Maalouf talks the danger of valuing one identity above all others. That’s the problem, not national (or any other) identity per se.
I think, Shmuel, yours is a wise POV, and one very helpful generally.
However, enmeshment is never good for those affected by it.
What do you mean by “enmeshment”, Citizen?
Having an identity is greatly overrated. I’ve been getting along without one for a long time. I don’t have the slightest idea who I am, and probably would be devastated if I knew. How much failure, disease, instability, cruelty, cowardice and criminality would I be heir to?
Well, the ungulate in me is pretty constant, but beyond that, who knows?
If pressed, I would describe myself as “human dust with seasonal antlers”.
Oh jezeez, “human dust with seasonal antlers.”
Thank you for the first out loud laugh of the day.
i share that laugh. it’s great!
You never ask yourself if you are a man or a moose?
You should learn to express your inner ungulate, it’ll impress the hell out of the guys in the Thoreau club.
Overgrown toe nails increase the rate of stride, the better to run away from predators, the better to survive. But who preys on dust and in which season(s)?
And aren’t mice nice?
I’m just me. One more “cell” in the body of humanity, indistinguishable at any distance from any of the other 6 billion plus.
Phil- If your request for help is to “build tomorrow’s identity dream”, I don’t think anyone can be of much help.
It seems to me that you already have defined the Jewish traits that you like or endorse- first of all- the striving for equality and justice embodied by Schwerner and Goodman. You don’t quote Isaiah or Amos, but neither did Schwerner and Goodman, though they were younger than you when they were murdered, but odds are that they wouldn’t have taken to quoting the prophets of the Old Testament if they had not been murdered so young.
(For the record: I too am proud of Schwerner and Goodman and of the justice taught by the prophets and the rabbis.)
Other Jewish traits you like include: brains, irreverence, bookishness. Though you enjoy Jewish society you prefer that when it is diluted by nonJewish society to take the edge off of the Jewish intensity or kvetchiness and certainly to negate the Jewish ethnocentrism.
But once you specify your goal as to build tomorrow’s identity dream, I can’t see it. The Jewish people or the adherents of the Judaic religion have been dealing with the entropy entailed in losing their faith and losing their ethnic identity for somewhere between 130 and 200 years or (maybe since the days of Babylon or Moses). When you speak of “tomorrow’s identity dream” to me it brings to mind the word “continuity” and as such there are two methods: 1. birthing Jewish babies and 2. propagating ideologies that have shown their ability to last. In fact the ideologies that have lasted are Torah and Zionism. Liberalism, irreverence and bookishness are not exclusively Jewish and their universalism makes them superior to the particularist Torah and Zionism. But someone who has a grandfather of their grandmother who was Jewish will not have a Jewish identity and the odds that they will have liberalism, irreverence and bookishness will depend on the Zeitgeist and other factors rather than any identity you can build.
wondering, torah is a lot lot older than zionism. i mean i dont know anything about torah as you observe but
For the record: I too am proud of the justice taught by the prophets and the IDF rabbis.
There you go, Wondering, I fixed it for you.
Wondering you really should stick to sticking up for Israel, and let it go at that. The minute you try to discuss anything further your downright stupidity and inability to organise your thoughts becomes painfully apparent. Really, you don’t have to make it your life’s work to disprove the stereotype of Jewish intelligence.
But of course, if you believe it’s essential to “birth” Jewish babies, we won’t stand in your way. And when the contractions get less than two minutes apart, head for a maternity hospital. Maybe you and Yonira could have “my Jewish children” on the same day!
link to thefreedictionary.com
A good starting point would be for Jews to take credit for their own sins, faluts and crimes without playing the victim or dragging other groups in for comparison.
The part about national identity just sounds like sour grapes. I think most Brits understand what it means to be Brits, as do Han Chinese, Japanese, Traditional Americans, and other successful national groups. Just because Jewish nationalism is a failure it does not mean that other forms of nationalism are invalid, or that the rest of the West has to deconstruct to make Jews and other monority groups more powerful or comfortable.
“A good starting point would be for Jews to take credit for their own sins, faluts and crimes without playing the victim or dragging other groups in for comparison.”
And after doing that the point of being Jewish would be, what, exactly?
I’m livin it baby. I am the embodiment of this sentiment, though, maybe not a very good one. If you care to learn I charge a nominal fee, can be negotiated.
Could be the CABAL,muwahah, could be ad-hoc.
My 56 was in reference to Mooser at 63. This reply system is as mysterious to me as The Holy Trinity.
To me, my identity, is the aggregate of my life experiences. It’s an ever-evolving identity, shaped and molded by the decisions I make and the reality around me. It’s flexible, changing, ever evolving. I have made it mine and no one can it away from me, not a nation, nor a religion or an ethnicity. It’s complex and diverse, and also free.
“It’s complex and diverse, and also free.”
You are lucky, I had to pay the retail price, plus a late fee!
I just bartered away dross to get it.
You guys don’t understand the American-Jewish identity at all! Thank God Phil does! He knows that no matter how bad Zionism and Israel are, no matter how intransigent, how murderous, how criminal, none of that can ever detract from the moral credibility and ethical glory we cover ourselves with by criticising it, or even thinking about criticizing it.
Not to mention how much you owe us for it! And we expect prompt payment!
Help! I’m a victim of Jewish-identity theft!
Madoff was just shown on TV laughing about it.
Well, unless I have missed something, so far no-one has taken up the challenge of defining “identity” in this context, either with a classical necessary-and-sufficient-condition definition or a cluster-concept/family-resemblance list of characteristics.
However, most usage here seems to be something along the lines of “self-concept based on acceptance of a socially-imposed description”. (Yeuchh! Did I just write that?) I regard myself as a left-handed Latvian spokeshaver’s assistant because society calls me that and I agree with society.
On this model, of course, I can change much of my “identity”. I might not be able to stop being left-handed, but I could become a Master Spokeshaver myself, and cease to be an assistant. Or I could renounce Latvia and its spokeshaves entirely (and not a moment too soon) and flee to Bolivia to become a left-handed Bolivian telephone-disinfector.
But I suspect that Philip has no doubts that he is an American Jew. I suspect that what he is really concerned about is the implications of being an American Jew. What is the role he should follow? What should he do as an AJ?
At least some of the answer seems perfectly straightforward to me.
First, he is a human being. Therefore, he should be a decent human being. He should fulfil all the moral obligations that are incumbent on all human beings.
Second, he is an American. He should be a good American citizen. The USA is the society that sustains him, and so that is the society toward which he has responsibilities which are not entailed or particularised by his humanity.
Neither of these have anything to with being a Jew. I am not a Jew, so I don’t really know what obligations a Jew has qua Jew, but if Jewishness involves anything which runs contrary to the first two, then that is immoral; and he must renounce either that part of Jewishness, or give up being a Jew entirely.
For example, Jews are traditionally accused of the following immoral behaviour:
Asking “Is it good for the Jews”, which places interest before principle.
Caring more about foreign Jews than about fellow citizens.
Separating themselves from, and being contemptuous of, their fellow citizens.
They are also accused of whining too much about how badly they are treated, being pushy, peddling vomit-worthy sentimentality, and being generally annoying. (The last two are characteristics they allegedly share with the Irish.) (The French are pretty irritating, too.) (So Irish and French Jews …)
But in accepting the designation “American Jew” Philip is surely not binding himself to conform to music hall stereotypes. He can be the person he wants to be without having to worry about any of that stuff. Or the other stuff.
And Americans certainly do obsess too much about it.
This comment made me laugh in my Email.