What's this? Jews fighting about "Who is a Jew?" I can't believe it.rs
Ruling due on school racism claim
2 days ago
A High Court judge is due to rule whether a Jewish school racially discriminated against an 11-year-old boy.
The boy, identified in court only as "M", applied to attend the Jewish Free School but was declared "not an 'approved' Jew".
His father said he was "appalled" by the decision of the north west London school, which gains some of the best academic results in the country.
In a case with serious implications for other religious schools, his lawyers are asking Mr Justice Munby to declare the school's admissions policy was unlawfully based, in part, on "ethnic origins - rather than faith or religion".
Dinah Rose QC, representing M's family, told a previous hearing the boy's application was rejected by the over-subscribed state-maintained school, which gives preference to children whose "Jewish status" is confirmed by the United Synagogue (US).
A child's Jewish identity is inherited through the mother, but the US did not accept that M's mother was Jewish. She was born a Roman Catholic, but converted to Judaism before her son's birth, although not the Orthodox movement.
M's parents are now divorced and the boy lives with his father, with whom he is an active member of the local synagogue and of the Masorti, a "progressive traditional" Jewish movement. However, other children were given preference by the school as the US did not consider the boy to be Jewish, because his mother was not accepted as Jewish.
Ms Rose claimed that amounted to racial discrimination, as other children were given preference if their mothers were Jewish by birth, even if they were "committed atheists".
Ben Jaffrey, appearing for US, previously said there would be "very serious potential consequences" if M and his father win the case. He said it would affect not only the JFS but over 20 other schools and other Jewish organisations providing services in the community.
The British Humanist Association is supporting M's application for judicial review. The decision is to be handed down by Mr Munby, sitting at the Cardiff Civil Justice Centre.
Showing posts with label Jewish culture. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Jewish culture. Show all posts
04 July 2008
ISRAEL'S PECULIAR POSITION
View from the booth: What has changed in 40 years?
ISRAEL'S PECULIAR POSITION By Eric Hoffer (LA Times 5/26/68)
The Jews are a peculiar people: Things permitted to other nations are forbidden to the Jews.
Other nations drive out thousands, even millions of people, and there is no refugee problem. Russia did it. Poland and Czechoslovakia did it. Turkey threw out a million Greeks, and Algeria a million Frenchmen. Indonesia threw out heaven knows how many Chinese--and no one says a word about refugees.
But in the case of Israel, the displaced Arabs have become eternal refugees.
Everyone insists that Israel must take back every single Arab. Arnold Toynbee calls the displacement of the Arabs an atrocity greater than any committed by the Nazis. Other nations when victorious on the battlefield dictate peace terms. But when Israel is victorious it must sue for peace. Everyone expects the Jews to be the only real Christians in this world.
Other nations when they are defeated survive and recover, but should Israel be defeated it would be destroyed. Had Nasser triumphed last June, he would have wiped Israel off the map, and no one would have lifted a finger to save the Jews. No commitment to the Jews by any government, including our own, is worth the paper it is written on. There is a cry of outrage all over the world when people die in Vietnam or when two Negroes are executed in Rhodesia. But when Hitler slaughtered Jews no one remonstrated with him.
The Swedes, who are ready to break off diplomatic relations with America because of what we do in Vietnam, did not let out a peep when Hitler was slaughtering Jews. They sent Hitler choice iron ore and ball bearings, and serviced his troop trains to Norway.
The Jews are alone in the world. If Israel survives, it will be solely because of Jewish efforts and Jewish resources.
Yet at this moment Israel is our only reliable and unconditional ally. We can rely more on Israel than Israel can rely on us. And one has only to imagine what would have happened last summer had the Arabs and their Russian backers won the war to realize how vital the survival of Israel is to America and the West in general. I have a premonition that will not leave me; as it goes with Israel, so will it go with all of us. Should Israel perish, the holocaust will be upon us.
*****************
Eric Hoffer was an American (Jewish) longshoreman/social philosopher. Hoffer lived from 1902 until 1983. He wrote nine books, countless columns, and hundreds of essays. He was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom.
http://www.nycat.org/
ISRAEL'S PECULIAR POSITION By Eric Hoffer (LA Times 5/26/68)
The Jews are a peculiar people: Things permitted to other nations are forbidden to the Jews.
Other nations drive out thousands, even millions of people, and there is no refugee problem. Russia did it. Poland and Czechoslovakia did it. Turkey threw out a million Greeks, and Algeria a million Frenchmen. Indonesia threw out heaven knows how many Chinese--and no one says a word about refugees.
But in the case of Israel, the displaced Arabs have become eternal refugees.
Everyone insists that Israel must take back every single Arab. Arnold Toynbee calls the displacement of the Arabs an atrocity greater than any committed by the Nazis. Other nations when victorious on the battlefield dictate peace terms. But when Israel is victorious it must sue for peace. Everyone expects the Jews to be the only real Christians in this world.
Other nations when they are defeated survive and recover, but should Israel be defeated it would be destroyed. Had Nasser triumphed last June, he would have wiped Israel off the map, and no one would have lifted a finger to save the Jews. No commitment to the Jews by any government, including our own, is worth the paper it is written on. There is a cry of outrage all over the world when people die in Vietnam or when two Negroes are executed in Rhodesia. But when Hitler slaughtered Jews no one remonstrated with him.
The Swedes, who are ready to break off diplomatic relations with America because of what we do in Vietnam, did not let out a peep when Hitler was slaughtering Jews. They sent Hitler choice iron ore and ball bearings, and serviced his troop trains to Norway.
The Jews are alone in the world. If Israel survives, it will be solely because of Jewish efforts and Jewish resources.
Yet at this moment Israel is our only reliable and unconditional ally. We can rely more on Israel than Israel can rely on us. And one has only to imagine what would have happened last summer had the Arabs and their Russian backers won the war to realize how vital the survival of Israel is to America and the West in general. I have a premonition that will not leave me; as it goes with Israel, so will it go with all of us. Should Israel perish, the holocaust will be upon us.
*****************
Eric Hoffer was an American (Jewish) longshoreman/social philosopher. Hoffer lived from 1902 until 1983. He wrote nine books, countless columns, and hundreds of essays. He was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom.
http://www.nycat.org/
16 June 2008
Changing Jewish Communities
Changing Jewish Communities
No. 31, 15 April 2008 / 10 Nissan 5768
The Jewish Communities of the Western United States
Steven Windmueller
Twenty-five percent of all American Jews live in the Western United States. They represent a distinctive and growing voice within Jewish life.
Different types of Western Jewish communities have emerged, reflecting unique economic and social factors. Western Jews have taken on many of the attributes associated with their region. They are struggling with the core issues of low affiliation, high intermarriage, and limited financial participation.
The pioneering and independent spirit of the region has also fostered special Jewish communal and religious models. Experimentation has typified Jewish life in this part of the world. In some cases, rabbis have played a key role in developing mega-congregations and forming innovative cultural and political institutions.
Distance from the "capital" of American Jewry, New York, has led to institutional conflicts that have further separated Western Jewry from the rest of the community.
Twenty-five percent of all American Jews live in the Western United States, representing a distinctive and growing voice within Jewish life. Participation and identity in these communities show different features from the rest of American Jewry, in part reflecting the social mores of the West. A lack of longstanding communal histories and established behaviors has also made it easier for Western Jewry to develop special creative aspects.
Clearly, not all Jewish communities in the West are the same. The histories and communal cultures of the San Francisco, Seattle, and Portland communities differ from each other to varying extents. As more established centers, these cities show characteristics both consonant with the national Jewish patterns and distinctive to the West. In turn, the communities of the "sun," including Las Vegas, Los Angeles, Phoenix, and San Diego, are more notably marked by attributes that separate Western Jewry from the rest of the nation:
1. The pioneering and independent spirit of the West, affecting Jewish contributions and choices
2. The special histories of Western communities
3. "Distance" from other centers of Jewish life as a factor in shaping Western Jewish behavior
4. The impact of the "wide open spaces" on the building of communities
5. The unique role of leaders, especially rabbis, in shaping Western Jewish life
6. The West as an alternative lifestyle model, affecting communal affiliation and participation
The Statistical Picture
The key Western Jewish communities that were considered in this study include:
Las Vegas 67,500 (2005)
Los Angeles (metropolitan area) 519,200 (1997)1
Phoenix 82,900 (2002)
Portland 31,858 (2000)
San Diego 89,000 (2003)
San Francisco (metropolitan area) 390,800 (2004)2
Seattle 37,200 (2000)
Total 1,218,458
Individual Western Jewish communities were among the largest growth areas reported by the American Jewish Year Book (2006):
Las Vegas 55,000 (1995) to 67,500 (2005)
Phoenix 45,000 (1984) to 106,900 (2002)3
San Diego 70,000 (1990) to 89,000 (2003)
San Francisco 119,000 (1986) to 228,000 (2004)4
(metropolitan area)
Each of these communities is currently reporting that its population continues to grow, exceeding the last official numbers available.
Los Angeles, the nation's second largest city with 3,849,378 people, had a population of just over 100,000 in 1900. San Diego and San Jose, California, each had fewer than 100,000. Phoenix, which one hundred years ago was not even among the country's one hundred most populous cities, grew by more than 40,000 residents during the twelve months ending 1 July 2006. Phoenix thus passed Philadelphia, which has lost about 70,000 residents during the 2000s, to become the fifth largest American city.5 From July 2005 to July 2006, the two fastest-growing communities in the country were Gilbert, Arizona, a suburb of Phoenix that grew by 73.9% to 191,517 and North Las Vegas, Nevada, whose population increased by 71.1% to 197,567.6
As many as 10,000 new residents are arriving each month in the Phoenix metropolitan area. The 2002 Greater Phoenix Jewish Community Study found a total of 44,000 Jewish households in Greater Phoenix. This is an increase of 138% from 1984 and considerably greater than the 78% growth of general households within Greater Phoenix in the same period.7 The Phoenix study also found that "nearly half of Jewish households have lived in Greater Phoenix less than 10 years; 23%-10,000 households-have lived in the Valley five years or less."8
California is the third largest U.S. state by land area and ranks among the 10 largest economies in the world. Were it a separate country, the Golden State would be the world's thirty-fourth most populous, just behind Poland. Washington State has a GDP of $268.5 billion and ranks fourteenth in the nation. Major business interests within the state include the design and manufacture of jet aircraft (Boeing), computer software development (Microsoft, Amazon, Nintendo), electronics, biotechnology, aluminum production, lumber and wood products, mining, and tourism. Oregon with an economy of $132.7 billion is twenty-seventh in the nation.
These statistics reinforce one of the central features of Western communities in general and Western Jewish communities in particular: the absence of an indigenous population base. Few individuals can trace their family ties beyond one or two generations. This leads to a weaker role for religious institutions and other social infrastructures, and, in turn, a lack of leadership and commitment. As a result, communal and religious organizations constantly struggle to recruit new participants and to identify and engage new leadership.
The Pioneering and Independent Spirit
In the various periods of rapid growth, many new residents were immigrants seeking to make a new start. With these and other immigrants who had more commercial motives, the area developed a strong individualistic ethos. Communities were created whose residents shared no prior connection or allegiances. The open land allowed people to live much farther from neighbors than had been possible in Eastern cities, and an ethic of tolerance for others' values and goals emerged. California's state constitutions of 1849 and 1879 were largely drafted by groups concerned about personal property rights and freedom, arguably at the expense of ideals fostering civic community.
The region's distance from historical power centers in the East, and the celebrated "frontier spirit" of its settlers account for the West's independent, heterogeneous politics. Historically, the West was the first region to institute widespread women's suffrage. It birthed both the property rights and conservation movements and spawned such phenomena as the Taxpayer Revolt and the Berkeley Free Speech Movement.
Libertarian political tendencies, even if not labeled as such, are clearly evident in the region. For example, most of the Western states have legalized medicinal marijuana (all but New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming) and some forms of gambling (except Utah); Oregon has legalized euthanasia. Utah had a long history of polygamous territorial leaders; most counties in Nevada have legalized prostitution. There is less resistance to same-sex marriage: California and Hawaii recognize it, and only 28% of all Western residents oppose legal recognition compared to 48% in Southern states. California and Washington have moved to limit affirmative action.
The Impact of Western Jewry
Western Jewry is best defined in terms of various "pioneering" experiences. Jews were among the original pioneers who during the Gold Rush era helped settle the Western United States and launch the development of key cities such as San Francisco or Carson City, Nevada. Successful businesses and industries were established by Jews over time. In the nineteenth century, for example, the Levi-Strauss Company was formed in San Francisco and has continued to play an important role in the American clothing industry. More recently Starbucks Coffee, a Seattle-based corporation, has revolutionized American consumer habits. Jews were also among the first to make Las Vegas a gambling and entertainment center.
Ava Kahn and Marc Dollinger note regarding California's Jews:
Jewish immigrants to California took advantage of its physical environment, ethnic diversity, and cultural distinctiveness to fashion a form of Judaism unique in the American experience. California Jews enjoyed unprecedented access to political power a generation earlier than their New York counterparts. They thrived in the multicultural mix, redefining the classic black-white racial binary by forging relations with a variety of religious and ethnic groups in both San Francisco and Los Angeles.9
Jews were the driving force behind the Hollywood entertainment industry. Jews are also major players throughout the larger Western communities in the real estate and construction industries. They are often responsible for technological innovation, including in Silicon Valley. In the area of medical research, eight universities and teaching hospitals in the West that rank among the top in the nation have a significant presence of Jewish physicians, faculty, and researchers.
Political activism is also a trademark of Western Jews. Two of the centers of American Jewish liberalism are in the West, namely, the Bay Area and West Los Angeles. Large communities of Iranian and Russian Jews have supported pro-Israeli and hawkish political candidates. As in other areas of the United States, Jews in this region have been active in both political parties and for particular candidates and high-profile issues. Ever since settling in the West, Jews have served in public office at all levels.
Yet, while many Jews of the West are highly successful and well educated, the National Jewish Population Survey (NJPS)10 reveals that overall, Jews in this part of the country fall somewhat short of levels elsewhere. Fifty-six percent have a college degree compared to the national American Jewish average of 61%. Fifty-three percent of the West's Jews reported having an income above $50,000 compared to rates of about 60% of Jews in the Midwest and the Northeast.
Jews of the West turned out to have lower level levels of religiosity. Only 5% indicated that they were Orthodox compared to 14% of Jews in the Northeast. Thirty-five percent of Western Jews described themselves as Reform, 19% as Conservative. Among Midwestern Jews, 46% considered themselves Reform and 25% as Conservative.11
By all standards of affiliation and participation, Jews of the West rank lowest. They are also least likely to contribute to federation campaigns or other Jewish causes. Only 22% donate to federation campaigns and only 39% to any Jewish cause. In the Midwest, more than 37% of Jews give to federation campaigns and 48% to other Jewish causes.12
Israel is another measure of Jewish engagement. One can define "emotional attachment" as significant engagement with Israeli peoplehood and its political situation, economic support, and travel to Israel. Only 29% of Western Jews have traveled to Israel compared to 35% of American Jews generally and 49% of those in the Northeast. When asked about their emotional attachment to Israel, Western Jews are tied with Southern Jewry (29%) as having the lowest, compared to Northeastern (61%) and Midwestern (59%) Jewry who rank higher than any other American geographic region. In addition, only 50% of Western Jewry ranked Israel's need for U.S. financial support as very important. This was the lowest rate for the country; Southern Jewry led with 61%.
Jews of the West also give the least to all causes, Jewish and non-Jewish combined. Whereas 78% of Midwestern Jews, the highest givers in America, report giving to all causes, the figure for Western Jews is 69%.
"Using the Internet for Jewish purposes" produced a higher score among Western Jews (41%) than any other regional cohort except Midwestern Jews (46%). In contrast, Jews of the West were the least likely to read Jewish newspapers or magazines (62%); Midwestern Jews were the most likely (72%).
Western Jews are among the nation's wealthiest based on a number of business surveys, including the Forbes 400 where a significant percentage of all Jews mentioned reside in the West. At the same time, data from both the NJPS (2001) and local community studies show a higher percentage of Western Jews living in poverty. The NJPS (2001) found 46% of elderly Jewish households in the West with incomes under $25,000 compared to the national Jewish average of 37%.13
Various community population studies conducted in key Western Jewish communities point to a set of defining social characteristics. The key elements are lower affiliation patterns and a larger percentage of adults compared to other regions of the country.14
The Distinctive Histories of Western Communities
Although the West is perceived as a single region, its Jewish communities have had distinctive histories.
In Northern California, the Gold Rush brought Jews who became prospectors and businessmen. To Arizona and Southern California came Jews who were merchants and traders. Among the earliest Jewish settlers in the Seattle area were Sephardic Jews, and they remain a significant part of that community. In general, the early Jewish settlers also became leaders in the public sector. "Between 1915 and 1931, Jews were elected to the governorships of Idaho, Utah, New Mexico, and Oregon...."15 In the Northwest, both "Christians and Jews...have shaped the region through engaging in politics, providing social services, establishing educational and health-care institutions and myriad other ways."16
The years surrounding World War II reshaped the Western communities. A population explosion enhanced the role and prominence of the Western cities and, in turn, their respective Jewish communities.
The history of Tucson's Jewish community reflected these developments:
Many immigrants [both Jewish and non-Jewish] who moved to Tucson in the '40s were military men who had been stationed at [the nearby] Davis Monthan [air force base] and fell in love with the Old Pueblo, parents to whom the dry desert climate had been recommended for their asthmatic children, or adults plagued with arthritis.
Following WWII, housing was very scarce; who could forget living in a converted chicken coop for several years? Employment was also a big problem. Teenage babysitters made 35 cents an hour, and there were few other jobs available to teens. Adults also found making a living a problem. On the bright side, newcomers were pleasantly surprised to find that Tucson had been a viable community for several hundred years, mostly populated by Indians and Hispanics. By 1948 [Tucson's Jews] had three thriving synagogues-Temple Emanu-El, Anshei Israel and Young Israel, several kosher butchers, a variety of Jewish organizations. The town had a community symphony, local theatrical groups and the University of Arizona. Tucson had always been the cultural star of Arizona and there was always a great feeling of personal pride in our community.17
Western Jewish communities are particularly proud of their pioneering pasts and in many cases have created historical societies and museums. Examples include the Arizona Jewish Historical Society; the Oregon Jewish Museum and the Jewish Genealogical Society of Oregon; the Jewish Historical Society of Southern California and the University of Southern California's Casden Institute on Jews in American Life; and the Western Jewish History Center in Berkeley.
San Francisco's Jewish community is marked both by its old wealth and its newly emergent wealth. The San Francisco Jewish Community Endowment Fund responds to emergencies and provides seed monies for innovative programs to ensure a Jewish future. "It consists of unrestricted, restricted and designated funds, over 880 donor-advised funds, and over 72 supporting foundations.... With more than $2.8 billion in assets, the Endowment Fund is a vital community resource and is one of the country's most successful Jewish foundations."18 Two other primary San Francisco Jewish resources are the Koret Foundation, which supports organizations and initiatives in the fields of education, economic development in Israel, and strengthening Bay Area communities, and the Jim Joseph Foundation, which supports programs to enhance identity and engagement among Jewish youth.
The Factor of Distance from Other Jewish Centers
Being far from the "capital" of American Jewry, New York has had a profound psychological and functional impact on Western Jewry. The greater the distance from the center of Jewish power, the greater the institutional tensions. Many national institutions have had difficulties in organizational relationships with their West Coast affiliates. Western regional structures of synagogue movements, membership organizations, and policy groups have sometimes struggled with their central administration over questions of autonomy and proportional representation within these national systems.
An example is the 1995 decision by the Conservative-affiliated University of Judaism-now the American Jewish University-based in Bel-Air, California, to separate itself from the Jewish Theological Seminary in New York. Similarly, Hadassah in the Pacific Southwest area has created a different organizational and governing model than that prescribed by the national administration.
A 2002 Los Angeles Times article, "American Jews Face East-West Power Struggle," highlighted the dismissal of the Anti-Defamation League's (ADL) longtime Los Angeles director David Lehrer. The story noted: "Among some Jews here, the brouhaha has reignited long-simmering resentment over the way national Jewish organizations in New York still treat Los Angeles as ‘a colony,' as one put it. The same kind of tension-often between national headquarters and regional offices-has surfaced in other American Jewish organizations in recent years."
As Lehrer put it, "my ouster is in part a reflection of the East-West divide in American Jewry. I hope the Los Angeles Jewish community continues to assert its independence and uniqueness."19
Western federations, for example, have complained that their communities are underrepresented on national policy boards of the federated system and other governing bodies.20 In turn, organizational representatives have argued that the leadership in the West has failed to accept greater responsibility for actively participating in these national bodies. Other critics of Western Jewry have pointed to a longstanding absence of committed leaders from these communities who could play major roles in the national agencies.
Indeed, compared to other regions of the country, fewer national Jewish leaders emerge from Western communities. This is true of other Western religious communities as well. Correspondingly, fewer national political candidates emerge from Western states than other regions. Senator John McCain is the only current presidential candidate from a Western state, and thus far there have been only two Western presidents, Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan.
The Impact of the "Wide Open Spaces" on Community Construction
Geographic distance plays an important role in the West. For example, it is 1064 miles (1713 kilometers) from San Diego to Seattle, or 652 miles (1049 kilometers) from Phoenix to San Francisco. These territorial challenges affect efforts to build or serve a community. Thus, Los Angeles County comprises 4000 square miles, 81 cities, and a population of 9.5 million people. If one includes the Greater Los Angeles area, then there are five counties (Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino, Riverside, and Ventura) encompassing 33,953 square miles and a population of over 17.5 million.
The San Francisco Bay area comprises 7000 square miles, nine counties, 101 cities, and a population of 7.2 million. Seattle, which is the fifteenth largest metropolitan area in the nation, has 5894 square miles with 3.2 million residents, and incorporates the primary cities of Tacoma and Bellevue along with Seattle.
Western Jewish communities, then, face difficulties in creating shared points of connection and providing social and educational services. As a result, Jews who wish to escape the pressures associated with communal participation or synagogue membership can, in many Western communities, move outside the more densely settled and identified Jewish "neighborhoods." Second, since Western communities experience significant population movement, it is difficult for religious and communal structures to define population trends or strategically position core Jewish services.
Unique pockets of Jewish life are another distinguishing feature of the West. These include Hollywood with its high proportions of Jewish actors, writers, directors, and producers, and Silicon Valley with its many Jewish "techies" and entrepreneurs who have helped develop the hi-tech and biotech fields. Jews are also strongly represented in the growing financial sector and in the land development/real estate industry.
The West and Communal Participation
Climate as a Factor in Institution Building
Institutions in the West not only compete with other types of organizational entities for affiliation but must also contend with the climate. Although this is often not understood outside the region, the physical factor is a significant social and even cultural force in determining lifestyle choices, including where one chooses to live or the recreational pursuits available to individuals or families. Beachfront living, mountain settings, desert communities, and city-dwelling are a few of the residential "lifestyle" options available to Westerners. Emulating these patterns, Jews have adopted these same options.
New Communities
Unlike Jewish communities elsewhere in the United States, many West Coast communities are experiencing significant growth. San Diego's recently completed demographic study reveals certain patterns:
Only one in 10 respondents was born in San Diego County, one in four in California.
Nineteen percent of the respondents were born outside the United States.
Fifty-four percent of Jewish adults have lived in San Diego for less than 20 years, 19% for less than five years.21
But in San Diego, as in many other Western locations, rapid growth and geographic sprawl are accompanied by low rates of engagement in the organized Jewish community:
Only three out of 10 Jews report that they belong to a synagogue or temple.
Only 46% report participation in organized Jewish activities.
Thirty-five percent feel "not at all connected" to the San Diego Jewish community.22
Diverse Immigrant Communities
The West has always been receptive to immigrants. Los Angeles and other parts of the West have become new population centers for Iranian, South African, and Latin American Jews. Significant numbers of Israeli23 and Russian Jews have also found the West to be welcoming. In earlier times Sephardic Jews settled in Portland, Seattle, and the Los Angeles. Today, Los Angeles is home to one of the largest Israeli communities outside of Israel.
These communities often create distinctive institutional structures, for example, in the cases of the Sephardic, Russian, and Iranian Jews. Synagogues have been established to serve these constituencies; social and fraternal groups provide various support services; in some cases, umbrella representative bodies address shared concerns and financial priorities. For example, some 20 smaller organizations affiliate with the Iranian American Jewish Federation in Los Angeles. Similarly, Bay Area Russian Jews have created their own communal infrastructure that enables them to meet their specific needs. There are smaller pockets of Egyptian, Syrian, Iraqi, and Moroccan Jews in the Los Angeles area as well.
The Psychological Factor of Moving West
Some Jews come to the West to avoid the burdens of communal participation. They feel they have "done their Jewish thing somewhere else" and, once in the West, steer clear of the formal obligations associated with being a community participant or synagogue member. The results are seen in the extraordinarily low rates of affiliation and giving among Jews.
Alternative Models of Community
Jews take on the characteristics of others living in the West, often seeking alternative lifestyle options. There is a high degree of experimentation with Jewish religious and social practice. Beyond the core denominational movements, throughout Western communities one finds Jewish Renewal, Humanistic Judaism, and an array of unaffiliated synagogues. The Aviv of Arizona organization, located in the Phoenix area, serves gay and lesbian Jews. The Jewish Community of Sedona and the Verde Valley (Arizona) is a nonaffiliated congregation that, similar to Ikar in Los Angeles, describes itself as "creative, spiritual, and egalitarian, welcoming people of diverse backgrounds."24
Although many Jewish communities now sponsor film festivals, nearly every Western Jewish community holds annual Jewish or Israeli film festivals including San Francisco, San Diego, Palm Springs, Orange County (California), Phoenix, Sacramento, Seattle, and Los Angeles. Other communities, such as Tucson, sponsor Jewish art festivals.
With new residents regularly arriving, most Western communities also have some type of welcoming system. Examples are "Shalom San Diego"; "Get Connected," a series of programs sponsored by the Jewish Federation of Greater Seattle; or "Jewish Newish," a project of the Jewish Federation of Greater Phoenix.
Although, as noted, New York remains the center for most national Jewish institutions, increasing numbers of groups have made the West their locus for organizing. Maintaining their home offices in Los Angeles are: Mazon, the Jewish Response to Hunger;25 the Simon Wiesenthal Center (see below); the Kabbalah Centre;26Jewish World Watch, "established in October, 2004 as a Jewish response to horrors perpetrated by human beings against others";27 and Jews for Judaism, "an international organization that provides a wide variety of counseling services, along with education, and outreach programs that enable Jews of all ages to rediscover and strengthen their Jewish heritage."28
The liberal magazine Tikkun is headquartered in the Bay Area. Toward Tradition, a conservative Jewish-Christian organization founded by Rabbi Daniel Lapin, is based in Seattle.29
Jewish culture as an organizing theme has led to the establishment of Jewish museums, theaters, and arts programs. The Skirball Cultural Center in Los Angeles and the Contemporary Jewish Museum of San Francisco, which is scheduled to open in June 2008,30 reflect this focus on making Jewish arts and culture a centerpiece of Western Jewish life. Similarly, the Brandeis-Bardin Institute (BBI) in Simi Valley, California, is a model of melding Jewish camping and culture.31 Recently, BBI merged with the University of Judaism to create the American Jewish University.
Numerous institutions related to health, spirituality, and Judaism can be found in the West including the Bay Area Jewish Healing Center and the Kalsman Institute on Judaism and Health, which is based at the Los Angeles campus of Hebrew Union College. There is also much institutional innovation among Western communities, as in these examples:
The Lehrhaus Judaica Library is a five-thousand-volume circulating academic Jewish-studies library, serving the Bay Area community from its facilities in Berkeley.
The Progressive Jewish Alliance (PJA) was established in 1999 to assert an authentic progressive Jewish presence in the campaigns for social justice in Southern California, home to the nation's second largest city and second largest Jewish community. PJA educates, advocates and organizes on issues of peace, equality, diversity and justice, as a progressive voice in the Jewish community and a Jewish voice in the progressive community. Over the past six years, PJA has created a new model of Jewish community organizing, and has reinvigorated the progressive Jewish landscape in Los Angeles. In February 2005, PJA opened a San Francisco Bay Area chapter-our first expansion.32
Bashert, a Seattle-based program, reaches out to lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender Jews in that community "in order to build a stronger, more inclusive Jewish community. This initiative creates opportunities for Jews to come together, celebrate, and explore their Jewish identities in a welcoming environment."33
Similar organizations and synagogues dedicated to specific Jewish constituencies operate in other Western communities, including J-Pride (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender) in San Diego and the Institute on Judaism and Sexual Orientation, located on the Los Angeles campus of Hebrew Union College.
The Role of Leaders in Shaping Western Jewish Life
Lay leaders operate as kingmakers in controlling the distribution of power and personnel. In their history of the Jews of Los Angeles, Vorspan and Gartner identify several generations of such elites.34 Two social clubs, Hillcrest in Los Angeles and the Concordia-Argonaut in the Bay Area, have generated the key Jewish leadership for these two premier Western communities. However, the peer economic and social relationships that sustain Jewish giving and engagement elsewhere in the United States are absent in many of these Western communities. This hinders building a culture of support for Jewish causes and a tradition of communal leadership. Outside of Los Angeles and San Francisco, this region's lay leadership has not shown the quality, depth, and capacity for cohesion found in the rest of the nation.
Indeed, rabbis play a far greater role in shaping Western Jewish public life than in any other region. Congregations and, more directly, their rabbinic leadership have emerged as key institution builders and community spokespersons. For example, Rabbi Isaiah Zeldin was the founding rabbi of the Stephen Wise Temple (Reform) in Los Angeles. Considered today to be America's largest congregation, it serves more than ten thousand individuals and nearly 3000 families through its various schools and programs.
Other Western rabbis have played significant roles beyond their own spheres. Rabbi and author Harold Schulweis (Conservative) helped form the havurah (small Jewish collectives) movement, established the abovementioned Jewish World Watch, and introduced innovative religious practices. Rabbi and author David Wolpe (Conservative), named one of the 50 most influential American Jews by the Forward, has been invited to teach at a number of universities. Rabbi Steven Weil (Orthodox) is senior rabbi of Congregation Beth Jacob in Beverly Hills, the largest Orthodox congregation outside the New York metropolitan area, and is also an accomplished writer and lecturer.
Other rabbis across the West have had a profound influence on the public square. Rabbi Elliot Dorff (Conservative), rector and Sol and Anne Dorff Distinguished Service Professor in Philosophy at the American Jewish University, has played a significant national role in the debate over medical and social ethics. In Phoenix, rabbis such as Albert Plotkin and A. Lincoln Krohn (Reform) not only helped develop local Jewish religious life but also helped shape the larger community's civic culture by supporting the establishment of the Phoenix Symphony, the city's art museum, and its United Way structure, while also advocating for Indian rights.
Some of the main communal-institution builders have been rabbis. For example, Rabbi Uri Herscher is founding director and CEO of the Skirball Cultural Center in Los Angeles and Rabbi Brian Lurie, who is active in various civic causes, was executive director of the San Francisco Jewish Community Federation and later national director of the United Jewish Appeal. Rabbi Marvin Hier established the Simon Wiesenthal Center and the Museum of Tolerance in Los Angeles. Rabbi Hier's contributions include the visibility and popularity of the Museum of Tolerance as well as the national and international growth of programs on the Holocaust, tolerance, and counteracting anti-Semitism that originate in the Wiesenthal Center.
Western Jewish politicians have long played a prominent role on both the local and national levels. Jews have also served over time as city-council members, mayors, and state officials throughout the West. Currrently seven members of the House of Representatives and two U.S. Senators are Western Jews, including both Senators from California, Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein.
Summing Up
Jews of the West represent a new breed of American Jewry. Despite such challenges as low affiliation patterns, high intermarriage rates, and limited financial participation, Western Jewry has generated new organizational models. The Western pioneering spirit seems to have made its mark on Jewish communities as well and inspired their leadership.
Some critics have suggested that some of the West's problems of affiliation and participation will become more prevalent among American Jewry in general. But as the Western communities grow, some of their new institutional and religious models are also likely to find their way to other regions.
Los Angeles and San Francisco anchor and dominate West Coast Jewish life through their financial prowess, institutional creativity, and distinctive cadre of Jewish leaders. Los Angeles in particular, given its size and its status as an entertainment and media center, will continue to influence American Jewish culture overall.
The distance from New York means Western Jews will continue to struggle with questions of autonomy and control. Regarding the special character of the West's Jews, it has been noted that: "There is a solid tradition of outdoorsy Jews who have abandoned their synagogues for the mountains."35 To some extent both a new type of Jew and a different type of Jewish community are emerging in the West. A distinguishing feature is the alignment of this emergent Judaism with the arts and culture, and with the environment and social justice concerns.
Western Jewry shows the characteristics of the Western United States in general, including innovation, cultural diversity, and mobility. At the same time, the West Coast institutional models in particular integrate traditional Jewish tenets of tzedakah (charitable giving), gemilut hasadim (generosity and kindness), and avodah (worship).
Prof. Ava Kahn's words about California relate to Western Jewry generally:
"There's an idea this is the promised land, with the same climate. I think California has always been a place people can reinvent themselves.... And I think Jews are a part of this. People can come out from wherever they were in the world to California and start over."36
The story of Western Jewry is still unfolding and is one of the most challenging and interesting American Jewish experiences.
* * *
Notes
1. This figure is based on the last community study undertaken by the Jewish Federation of Los Angeles.
2. This figure encompasses the Greater Bay Area Jewish community. The 2004 study by the Jewish Community Federation of San Francisco, the Peninsula, Marin and Sonoma Counties projects that a comparative population increase occurred in the other federated communities of the Bay Area, namely, the Jewish Community Federation of Silicon Valley and the Jewish Community Federation of the Greater East Bay. If so, the Bay Area would represent the third largest metropolitan Jewish population in the United States (behind New York and Los Angeles).
3. www.jewishaz.com/jewishnews/021206/booms.shtml.
4. www.sfjcf.org/aboutjcf/localcommunity/study/highlights.asp.
5. Les Christie, "The fastest growing U.S. cities: From the Empire State to the Lone Star State-the cities that are growing the most," CNNMoney.com, 28 June 2007.
6. Ibid.
7. www.jewishaz.com/jewishnews/021206/booms.shtml.
8. Ibid.
9. Ava Kahn and Marc Dollinger, eds., California Jews (Hanover, NH: Brandeis University Press, 2003), www.upne.com/1-58465-060-5.html.
10. National Jewish Population Survey (hereinafter NJPS), United Jewish Communities, 2000-2001.
11. www.pascalsview.com/pascalsview/2006/07/when_people_tal.html.
12. NJPS.
13. Ibid.
14. The 2002 Tucson Jewish Community Study, Jewish Federation of Southern Arizona, November 2002; Greater Seattle Jewish Population Survey, 2000, Jewish Federation of Greater Seattle, 2000; 2004 Jewish Community Study, Jewish Community Federation of San Francisco, the Peninsula, Marin, and Sonoma Counties, May 2005.
15. Moses Rischin, ed., The Jews of the West: The Metropolitan Years (New York: American Jewish Historical Society, 1979).
16. Patricia Killen and Mark Silk, eds., Religion and Public Life in the Pacific Northwest: The None Zone (Lanham, MD: AltaMira Press, 2004), www.whitworth.edu/News/2003_2004/Spring/SodenReligionNorthwest.htm.
17. Lori Olshansky Sobel, "Tucson was a wonderful place to grow up in the 40's and 50's," Arizona Jewish Post, January 2008.
18. www.sfjcf.org/resources/guide/chapter.asp?ZipRegions=&Chapter=Agencies+%26+Organizations.
19. Teresa Watanabe, "American Jews face East-West power struggle," Los Angeles Times, 6 January 2002.
20. Ibid.
21. http://sandiego.ujcfedweb.org/page.html?ArticleID=47077.
22. Ibid.
23. www.israelisinamerica.org/articles/launch.html.
24. www.ikar-la.org/.
25. www.mazon.org/.
26. www.kabbalah.com/.
27. www.jewishworldwatch.org/.
28. www.jewsforjudaism.org/web/mainpages/mission.html.
29. www.towardtradition.org/.
30. www.jmsf.org/.
31. http://bbc.ajula.edu/.
32. www.pja.org.
33. www.jewishinseattle.org/JF/Connect/Bashert/Bashert.asp.
34. Max Vorspan and Lloyd Gartner, History of the Jews of Los Angeles (San Marino: Huntington Library, 1970), 218.
35. www.jew-ish.com/index.php?/stories/item/493.
36. www.jewishsf.com/content/2-0-/module/displaystory/story_id/990/edition_id/8/format/html/displays
* * *
Dr. Steven Windmueller is dean of the Los Angeles campus of Hebrew Union College-Jewish Institute of Religion. Before his twelve-year tenure at the College-Institute, he served for ten years as director of the Jewish Community Relations Council of the Los Angeles Jewish Federation and as director of the Greater Albany Jewish Federation. A fellow of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, he has written extensively on political matters and communal trends. Dr. Windmueller holds a PhD in international relations from the University of Pennsylvania.
No. 31, 15 April 2008 / 10 Nissan 5768
The Jewish Communities of the Western United States
Steven Windmueller
Twenty-five percent of all American Jews live in the Western United States. They represent a distinctive and growing voice within Jewish life.
Different types of Western Jewish communities have emerged, reflecting unique economic and social factors. Western Jews have taken on many of the attributes associated with their region. They are struggling with the core issues of low affiliation, high intermarriage, and limited financial participation.
The pioneering and independent spirit of the region has also fostered special Jewish communal and religious models. Experimentation has typified Jewish life in this part of the world. In some cases, rabbis have played a key role in developing mega-congregations and forming innovative cultural and political institutions.
Distance from the "capital" of American Jewry, New York, has led to institutional conflicts that have further separated Western Jewry from the rest of the community.
Twenty-five percent of all American Jews live in the Western United States, representing a distinctive and growing voice within Jewish life. Participation and identity in these communities show different features from the rest of American Jewry, in part reflecting the social mores of the West. A lack of longstanding communal histories and established behaviors has also made it easier for Western Jewry to develop special creative aspects.
Clearly, not all Jewish communities in the West are the same. The histories and communal cultures of the San Francisco, Seattle, and Portland communities differ from each other to varying extents. As more established centers, these cities show characteristics both consonant with the national Jewish patterns and distinctive to the West. In turn, the communities of the "sun," including Las Vegas, Los Angeles, Phoenix, and San Diego, are more notably marked by attributes that separate Western Jewry from the rest of the nation:
1. The pioneering and independent spirit of the West, affecting Jewish contributions and choices
2. The special histories of Western communities
3. "Distance" from other centers of Jewish life as a factor in shaping Western Jewish behavior
4. The impact of the "wide open spaces" on the building of communities
5. The unique role of leaders, especially rabbis, in shaping Western Jewish life
6. The West as an alternative lifestyle model, affecting communal affiliation and participation
The Statistical Picture
The key Western Jewish communities that were considered in this study include:
Las Vegas 67,500 (2005)
Los Angeles (metropolitan area) 519,200 (1997)1
Phoenix 82,900 (2002)
Portland 31,858 (2000)
San Diego 89,000 (2003)
San Francisco (metropolitan area) 390,800 (2004)2
Seattle 37,200 (2000)
Total 1,218,458
Individual Western Jewish communities were among the largest growth areas reported by the American Jewish Year Book (2006):
Las Vegas 55,000 (1995) to 67,500 (2005)
Phoenix 45,000 (1984) to 106,900 (2002)3
San Diego 70,000 (1990) to 89,000 (2003)
San Francisco 119,000 (1986) to 228,000 (2004)4
(metropolitan area)
Each of these communities is currently reporting that its population continues to grow, exceeding the last official numbers available.
Los Angeles, the nation's second largest city with 3,849,378 people, had a population of just over 100,000 in 1900. San Diego and San Jose, California, each had fewer than 100,000. Phoenix, which one hundred years ago was not even among the country's one hundred most populous cities, grew by more than 40,000 residents during the twelve months ending 1 July 2006. Phoenix thus passed Philadelphia, which has lost about 70,000 residents during the 2000s, to become the fifth largest American city.5 From July 2005 to July 2006, the two fastest-growing communities in the country were Gilbert, Arizona, a suburb of Phoenix that grew by 73.9% to 191,517 and North Las Vegas, Nevada, whose population increased by 71.1% to 197,567.6
As many as 10,000 new residents are arriving each month in the Phoenix metropolitan area. The 2002 Greater Phoenix Jewish Community Study found a total of 44,000 Jewish households in Greater Phoenix. This is an increase of 138% from 1984 and considerably greater than the 78% growth of general households within Greater Phoenix in the same period.7 The Phoenix study also found that "nearly half of Jewish households have lived in Greater Phoenix less than 10 years; 23%-10,000 households-have lived in the Valley five years or less."8
California is the third largest U.S. state by land area and ranks among the 10 largest economies in the world. Were it a separate country, the Golden State would be the world's thirty-fourth most populous, just behind Poland. Washington State has a GDP of $268.5 billion and ranks fourteenth in the nation. Major business interests within the state include the design and manufacture of jet aircraft (Boeing), computer software development (Microsoft, Amazon, Nintendo), electronics, biotechnology, aluminum production, lumber and wood products, mining, and tourism. Oregon with an economy of $132.7 billion is twenty-seventh in the nation.
These statistics reinforce one of the central features of Western communities in general and Western Jewish communities in particular: the absence of an indigenous population base. Few individuals can trace their family ties beyond one or two generations. This leads to a weaker role for religious institutions and other social infrastructures, and, in turn, a lack of leadership and commitment. As a result, communal and religious organizations constantly struggle to recruit new participants and to identify and engage new leadership.
The Pioneering and Independent Spirit
In the various periods of rapid growth, many new residents were immigrants seeking to make a new start. With these and other immigrants who had more commercial motives, the area developed a strong individualistic ethos. Communities were created whose residents shared no prior connection or allegiances. The open land allowed people to live much farther from neighbors than had been possible in Eastern cities, and an ethic of tolerance for others' values and goals emerged. California's state constitutions of 1849 and 1879 were largely drafted by groups concerned about personal property rights and freedom, arguably at the expense of ideals fostering civic community.
The region's distance from historical power centers in the East, and the celebrated "frontier spirit" of its settlers account for the West's independent, heterogeneous politics. Historically, the West was the first region to institute widespread women's suffrage. It birthed both the property rights and conservation movements and spawned such phenomena as the Taxpayer Revolt and the Berkeley Free Speech Movement.
Libertarian political tendencies, even if not labeled as such, are clearly evident in the region. For example, most of the Western states have legalized medicinal marijuana (all but New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming) and some forms of gambling (except Utah); Oregon has legalized euthanasia. Utah had a long history of polygamous territorial leaders; most counties in Nevada have legalized prostitution. There is less resistance to same-sex marriage: California and Hawaii recognize it, and only 28% of all Western residents oppose legal recognition compared to 48% in Southern states. California and Washington have moved to limit affirmative action.
The Impact of Western Jewry
Western Jewry is best defined in terms of various "pioneering" experiences. Jews were among the original pioneers who during the Gold Rush era helped settle the Western United States and launch the development of key cities such as San Francisco or Carson City, Nevada. Successful businesses and industries were established by Jews over time. In the nineteenth century, for example, the Levi-Strauss Company was formed in San Francisco and has continued to play an important role in the American clothing industry. More recently Starbucks Coffee, a Seattle-based corporation, has revolutionized American consumer habits. Jews were also among the first to make Las Vegas a gambling and entertainment center.
Ava Kahn and Marc Dollinger note regarding California's Jews:
Jewish immigrants to California took advantage of its physical environment, ethnic diversity, and cultural distinctiveness to fashion a form of Judaism unique in the American experience. California Jews enjoyed unprecedented access to political power a generation earlier than their New York counterparts. They thrived in the multicultural mix, redefining the classic black-white racial binary by forging relations with a variety of religious and ethnic groups in both San Francisco and Los Angeles.9
Jews were the driving force behind the Hollywood entertainment industry. Jews are also major players throughout the larger Western communities in the real estate and construction industries. They are often responsible for technological innovation, including in Silicon Valley. In the area of medical research, eight universities and teaching hospitals in the West that rank among the top in the nation have a significant presence of Jewish physicians, faculty, and researchers.
Political activism is also a trademark of Western Jews. Two of the centers of American Jewish liberalism are in the West, namely, the Bay Area and West Los Angeles. Large communities of Iranian and Russian Jews have supported pro-Israeli and hawkish political candidates. As in other areas of the United States, Jews in this region have been active in both political parties and for particular candidates and high-profile issues. Ever since settling in the West, Jews have served in public office at all levels.
Yet, while many Jews of the West are highly successful and well educated, the National Jewish Population Survey (NJPS)10 reveals that overall, Jews in this part of the country fall somewhat short of levels elsewhere. Fifty-six percent have a college degree compared to the national American Jewish average of 61%. Fifty-three percent of the West's Jews reported having an income above $50,000 compared to rates of about 60% of Jews in the Midwest and the Northeast.
Jews of the West turned out to have lower level levels of religiosity. Only 5% indicated that they were Orthodox compared to 14% of Jews in the Northeast. Thirty-five percent of Western Jews described themselves as Reform, 19% as Conservative. Among Midwestern Jews, 46% considered themselves Reform and 25% as Conservative.11
By all standards of affiliation and participation, Jews of the West rank lowest. They are also least likely to contribute to federation campaigns or other Jewish causes. Only 22% donate to federation campaigns and only 39% to any Jewish cause. In the Midwest, more than 37% of Jews give to federation campaigns and 48% to other Jewish causes.12
Israel is another measure of Jewish engagement. One can define "emotional attachment" as significant engagement with Israeli peoplehood and its political situation, economic support, and travel to Israel. Only 29% of Western Jews have traveled to Israel compared to 35% of American Jews generally and 49% of those in the Northeast. When asked about their emotional attachment to Israel, Western Jews are tied with Southern Jewry (29%) as having the lowest, compared to Northeastern (61%) and Midwestern (59%) Jewry who rank higher than any other American geographic region. In addition, only 50% of Western Jewry ranked Israel's need for U.S. financial support as very important. This was the lowest rate for the country; Southern Jewry led with 61%.
Jews of the West also give the least to all causes, Jewish and non-Jewish combined. Whereas 78% of Midwestern Jews, the highest givers in America, report giving to all causes, the figure for Western Jews is 69%.
"Using the Internet for Jewish purposes" produced a higher score among Western Jews (41%) than any other regional cohort except Midwestern Jews (46%). In contrast, Jews of the West were the least likely to read Jewish newspapers or magazines (62%); Midwestern Jews were the most likely (72%).
Western Jews are among the nation's wealthiest based on a number of business surveys, including the Forbes 400 where a significant percentage of all Jews mentioned reside in the West. At the same time, data from both the NJPS (2001) and local community studies show a higher percentage of Western Jews living in poverty. The NJPS (2001) found 46% of elderly Jewish households in the West with incomes under $25,000 compared to the national Jewish average of 37%.13
Various community population studies conducted in key Western Jewish communities point to a set of defining social characteristics. The key elements are lower affiliation patterns and a larger percentage of adults compared to other regions of the country.14
The Distinctive Histories of Western Communities
Although the West is perceived as a single region, its Jewish communities have had distinctive histories.
In Northern California, the Gold Rush brought Jews who became prospectors and businessmen. To Arizona and Southern California came Jews who were merchants and traders. Among the earliest Jewish settlers in the Seattle area were Sephardic Jews, and they remain a significant part of that community. In general, the early Jewish settlers also became leaders in the public sector. "Between 1915 and 1931, Jews were elected to the governorships of Idaho, Utah, New Mexico, and Oregon...."15 In the Northwest, both "Christians and Jews...have shaped the region through engaging in politics, providing social services, establishing educational and health-care institutions and myriad other ways."16
The years surrounding World War II reshaped the Western communities. A population explosion enhanced the role and prominence of the Western cities and, in turn, their respective Jewish communities.
The history of Tucson's Jewish community reflected these developments:
Many immigrants [both Jewish and non-Jewish] who moved to Tucson in the '40s were military men who had been stationed at [the nearby] Davis Monthan [air force base] and fell in love with the Old Pueblo, parents to whom the dry desert climate had been recommended for their asthmatic children, or adults plagued with arthritis.
Following WWII, housing was very scarce; who could forget living in a converted chicken coop for several years? Employment was also a big problem. Teenage babysitters made 35 cents an hour, and there were few other jobs available to teens. Adults also found making a living a problem. On the bright side, newcomers were pleasantly surprised to find that Tucson had been a viable community for several hundred years, mostly populated by Indians and Hispanics. By 1948 [Tucson's Jews] had three thriving synagogues-Temple Emanu-El, Anshei Israel and Young Israel, several kosher butchers, a variety of Jewish organizations. The town had a community symphony, local theatrical groups and the University of Arizona. Tucson had always been the cultural star of Arizona and there was always a great feeling of personal pride in our community.17
Western Jewish communities are particularly proud of their pioneering pasts and in many cases have created historical societies and museums. Examples include the Arizona Jewish Historical Society; the Oregon Jewish Museum and the Jewish Genealogical Society of Oregon; the Jewish Historical Society of Southern California and the University of Southern California's Casden Institute on Jews in American Life; and the Western Jewish History Center in Berkeley.
San Francisco's Jewish community is marked both by its old wealth and its newly emergent wealth. The San Francisco Jewish Community Endowment Fund responds to emergencies and provides seed monies for innovative programs to ensure a Jewish future. "It consists of unrestricted, restricted and designated funds, over 880 donor-advised funds, and over 72 supporting foundations.... With more than $2.8 billion in assets, the Endowment Fund is a vital community resource and is one of the country's most successful Jewish foundations."18 Two other primary San Francisco Jewish resources are the Koret Foundation, which supports organizations and initiatives in the fields of education, economic development in Israel, and strengthening Bay Area communities, and the Jim Joseph Foundation, which supports programs to enhance identity and engagement among Jewish youth.
The Factor of Distance from Other Jewish Centers
Being far from the "capital" of American Jewry, New York has had a profound psychological and functional impact on Western Jewry. The greater the distance from the center of Jewish power, the greater the institutional tensions. Many national institutions have had difficulties in organizational relationships with their West Coast affiliates. Western regional structures of synagogue movements, membership organizations, and policy groups have sometimes struggled with their central administration over questions of autonomy and proportional representation within these national systems.
An example is the 1995 decision by the Conservative-affiliated University of Judaism-now the American Jewish University-based in Bel-Air, California, to separate itself from the Jewish Theological Seminary in New York. Similarly, Hadassah in the Pacific Southwest area has created a different organizational and governing model than that prescribed by the national administration.
A 2002 Los Angeles Times article, "American Jews Face East-West Power Struggle," highlighted the dismissal of the Anti-Defamation League's (ADL) longtime Los Angeles director David Lehrer. The story noted: "Among some Jews here, the brouhaha has reignited long-simmering resentment over the way national Jewish organizations in New York still treat Los Angeles as ‘a colony,' as one put it. The same kind of tension-often between national headquarters and regional offices-has surfaced in other American Jewish organizations in recent years."
As Lehrer put it, "my ouster is in part a reflection of the East-West divide in American Jewry. I hope the Los Angeles Jewish community continues to assert its independence and uniqueness."19
Western federations, for example, have complained that their communities are underrepresented on national policy boards of the federated system and other governing bodies.20 In turn, organizational representatives have argued that the leadership in the West has failed to accept greater responsibility for actively participating in these national bodies. Other critics of Western Jewry have pointed to a longstanding absence of committed leaders from these communities who could play major roles in the national agencies.
Indeed, compared to other regions of the country, fewer national Jewish leaders emerge from Western communities. This is true of other Western religious communities as well. Correspondingly, fewer national political candidates emerge from Western states than other regions. Senator John McCain is the only current presidential candidate from a Western state, and thus far there have been only two Western presidents, Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan.
The Impact of the "Wide Open Spaces" on Community Construction
Geographic distance plays an important role in the West. For example, it is 1064 miles (1713 kilometers) from San Diego to Seattle, or 652 miles (1049 kilometers) from Phoenix to San Francisco. These territorial challenges affect efforts to build or serve a community. Thus, Los Angeles County comprises 4000 square miles, 81 cities, and a population of 9.5 million people. If one includes the Greater Los Angeles area, then there are five counties (Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino, Riverside, and Ventura) encompassing 33,953 square miles and a population of over 17.5 million.
The San Francisco Bay area comprises 7000 square miles, nine counties, 101 cities, and a population of 7.2 million. Seattle, which is the fifteenth largest metropolitan area in the nation, has 5894 square miles with 3.2 million residents, and incorporates the primary cities of Tacoma and Bellevue along with Seattle.
Western Jewish communities, then, face difficulties in creating shared points of connection and providing social and educational services. As a result, Jews who wish to escape the pressures associated with communal participation or synagogue membership can, in many Western communities, move outside the more densely settled and identified Jewish "neighborhoods." Second, since Western communities experience significant population movement, it is difficult for religious and communal structures to define population trends or strategically position core Jewish services.
Unique pockets of Jewish life are another distinguishing feature of the West. These include Hollywood with its high proportions of Jewish actors, writers, directors, and producers, and Silicon Valley with its many Jewish "techies" and entrepreneurs who have helped develop the hi-tech and biotech fields. Jews are also strongly represented in the growing financial sector and in the land development/real estate industry.
The West and Communal Participation
Climate as a Factor in Institution Building
Institutions in the West not only compete with other types of organizational entities for affiliation but must also contend with the climate. Although this is often not understood outside the region, the physical factor is a significant social and even cultural force in determining lifestyle choices, including where one chooses to live or the recreational pursuits available to individuals or families. Beachfront living, mountain settings, desert communities, and city-dwelling are a few of the residential "lifestyle" options available to Westerners. Emulating these patterns, Jews have adopted these same options.
New Communities
Unlike Jewish communities elsewhere in the United States, many West Coast communities are experiencing significant growth. San Diego's recently completed demographic study reveals certain patterns:
Only one in 10 respondents was born in San Diego County, one in four in California.
Nineteen percent of the respondents were born outside the United States.
Fifty-four percent of Jewish adults have lived in San Diego for less than 20 years, 19% for less than five years.21
But in San Diego, as in many other Western locations, rapid growth and geographic sprawl are accompanied by low rates of engagement in the organized Jewish community:
Only three out of 10 Jews report that they belong to a synagogue or temple.
Only 46% report participation in organized Jewish activities.
Thirty-five percent feel "not at all connected" to the San Diego Jewish community.22
Diverse Immigrant Communities
The West has always been receptive to immigrants. Los Angeles and other parts of the West have become new population centers for Iranian, South African, and Latin American Jews. Significant numbers of Israeli23 and Russian Jews have also found the West to be welcoming. In earlier times Sephardic Jews settled in Portland, Seattle, and the Los Angeles. Today, Los Angeles is home to one of the largest Israeli communities outside of Israel.
These communities often create distinctive institutional structures, for example, in the cases of the Sephardic, Russian, and Iranian Jews. Synagogues have been established to serve these constituencies; social and fraternal groups provide various support services; in some cases, umbrella representative bodies address shared concerns and financial priorities. For example, some 20 smaller organizations affiliate with the Iranian American Jewish Federation in Los Angeles. Similarly, Bay Area Russian Jews have created their own communal infrastructure that enables them to meet their specific needs. There are smaller pockets of Egyptian, Syrian, Iraqi, and Moroccan Jews in the Los Angeles area as well.
The Psychological Factor of Moving West
Some Jews come to the West to avoid the burdens of communal participation. They feel they have "done their Jewish thing somewhere else" and, once in the West, steer clear of the formal obligations associated with being a community participant or synagogue member. The results are seen in the extraordinarily low rates of affiliation and giving among Jews.
Alternative Models of Community
Jews take on the characteristics of others living in the West, often seeking alternative lifestyle options. There is a high degree of experimentation with Jewish religious and social practice. Beyond the core denominational movements, throughout Western communities one finds Jewish Renewal, Humanistic Judaism, and an array of unaffiliated synagogues. The Aviv of Arizona organization, located in the Phoenix area, serves gay and lesbian Jews. The Jewish Community of Sedona and the Verde Valley (Arizona) is a nonaffiliated congregation that, similar to Ikar in Los Angeles, describes itself as "creative, spiritual, and egalitarian, welcoming people of diverse backgrounds."24
Although many Jewish communities now sponsor film festivals, nearly every Western Jewish community holds annual Jewish or Israeli film festivals including San Francisco, San Diego, Palm Springs, Orange County (California), Phoenix, Sacramento, Seattle, and Los Angeles. Other communities, such as Tucson, sponsor Jewish art festivals.
With new residents regularly arriving, most Western communities also have some type of welcoming system. Examples are "Shalom San Diego"; "Get Connected," a series of programs sponsored by the Jewish Federation of Greater Seattle; or "Jewish Newish," a project of the Jewish Federation of Greater Phoenix.
Although, as noted, New York remains the center for most national Jewish institutions, increasing numbers of groups have made the West their locus for organizing. Maintaining their home offices in Los Angeles are: Mazon, the Jewish Response to Hunger;25 the Simon Wiesenthal Center (see below); the Kabbalah Centre;26Jewish World Watch, "established in October, 2004 as a Jewish response to horrors perpetrated by human beings against others";27 and Jews for Judaism, "an international organization that provides a wide variety of counseling services, along with education, and outreach programs that enable Jews of all ages to rediscover and strengthen their Jewish heritage."28
The liberal magazine Tikkun is headquartered in the Bay Area. Toward Tradition, a conservative Jewish-Christian organization founded by Rabbi Daniel Lapin, is based in Seattle.29
Jewish culture as an organizing theme has led to the establishment of Jewish museums, theaters, and arts programs. The Skirball Cultural Center in Los Angeles and the Contemporary Jewish Museum of San Francisco, which is scheduled to open in June 2008,30 reflect this focus on making Jewish arts and culture a centerpiece of Western Jewish life. Similarly, the Brandeis-Bardin Institute (BBI) in Simi Valley, California, is a model of melding Jewish camping and culture.31 Recently, BBI merged with the University of Judaism to create the American Jewish University.
Numerous institutions related to health, spirituality, and Judaism can be found in the West including the Bay Area Jewish Healing Center and the Kalsman Institute on Judaism and Health, which is based at the Los Angeles campus of Hebrew Union College. There is also much institutional innovation among Western communities, as in these examples:
The Lehrhaus Judaica Library is a five-thousand-volume circulating academic Jewish-studies library, serving the Bay Area community from its facilities in Berkeley.
The Progressive Jewish Alliance (PJA) was established in 1999 to assert an authentic progressive Jewish presence in the campaigns for social justice in Southern California, home to the nation's second largest city and second largest Jewish community. PJA educates, advocates and organizes on issues of peace, equality, diversity and justice, as a progressive voice in the Jewish community and a Jewish voice in the progressive community. Over the past six years, PJA has created a new model of Jewish community organizing, and has reinvigorated the progressive Jewish landscape in Los Angeles. In February 2005, PJA opened a San Francisco Bay Area chapter-our first expansion.32
Bashert, a Seattle-based program, reaches out to lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender Jews in that community "in order to build a stronger, more inclusive Jewish community. This initiative creates opportunities for Jews to come together, celebrate, and explore their Jewish identities in a welcoming environment."33
Similar organizations and synagogues dedicated to specific Jewish constituencies operate in other Western communities, including J-Pride (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender) in San Diego and the Institute on Judaism and Sexual Orientation, located on the Los Angeles campus of Hebrew Union College.
The Role of Leaders in Shaping Western Jewish Life
Lay leaders operate as kingmakers in controlling the distribution of power and personnel. In their history of the Jews of Los Angeles, Vorspan and Gartner identify several generations of such elites.34 Two social clubs, Hillcrest in Los Angeles and the Concordia-Argonaut in the Bay Area, have generated the key Jewish leadership for these two premier Western communities. However, the peer economic and social relationships that sustain Jewish giving and engagement elsewhere in the United States are absent in many of these Western communities. This hinders building a culture of support for Jewish causes and a tradition of communal leadership. Outside of Los Angeles and San Francisco, this region's lay leadership has not shown the quality, depth, and capacity for cohesion found in the rest of the nation.
Indeed, rabbis play a far greater role in shaping Western Jewish public life than in any other region. Congregations and, more directly, their rabbinic leadership have emerged as key institution builders and community spokespersons. For example, Rabbi Isaiah Zeldin was the founding rabbi of the Stephen Wise Temple (Reform) in Los Angeles. Considered today to be America's largest congregation, it serves more than ten thousand individuals and nearly 3000 families through its various schools and programs.
Other Western rabbis have played significant roles beyond their own spheres. Rabbi and author Harold Schulweis (Conservative) helped form the havurah (small Jewish collectives) movement, established the abovementioned Jewish World Watch, and introduced innovative religious practices. Rabbi and author David Wolpe (Conservative), named one of the 50 most influential American Jews by the Forward, has been invited to teach at a number of universities. Rabbi Steven Weil (Orthodox) is senior rabbi of Congregation Beth Jacob in Beverly Hills, the largest Orthodox congregation outside the New York metropolitan area, and is also an accomplished writer and lecturer.
Other rabbis across the West have had a profound influence on the public square. Rabbi Elliot Dorff (Conservative), rector and Sol and Anne Dorff Distinguished Service Professor in Philosophy at the American Jewish University, has played a significant national role in the debate over medical and social ethics. In Phoenix, rabbis such as Albert Plotkin and A. Lincoln Krohn (Reform) not only helped develop local Jewish religious life but also helped shape the larger community's civic culture by supporting the establishment of the Phoenix Symphony, the city's art museum, and its United Way structure, while also advocating for Indian rights.
Some of the main communal-institution builders have been rabbis. For example, Rabbi Uri Herscher is founding director and CEO of the Skirball Cultural Center in Los Angeles and Rabbi Brian Lurie, who is active in various civic causes, was executive director of the San Francisco Jewish Community Federation and later national director of the United Jewish Appeal. Rabbi Marvin Hier established the Simon Wiesenthal Center and the Museum of Tolerance in Los Angeles. Rabbi Hier's contributions include the visibility and popularity of the Museum of Tolerance as well as the national and international growth of programs on the Holocaust, tolerance, and counteracting anti-Semitism that originate in the Wiesenthal Center.
Western Jewish politicians have long played a prominent role on both the local and national levels. Jews have also served over time as city-council members, mayors, and state officials throughout the West. Currrently seven members of the House of Representatives and two U.S. Senators are Western Jews, including both Senators from California, Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein.
Summing Up
Jews of the West represent a new breed of American Jewry. Despite such challenges as low affiliation patterns, high intermarriage rates, and limited financial participation, Western Jewry has generated new organizational models. The Western pioneering spirit seems to have made its mark on Jewish communities as well and inspired their leadership.
Some critics have suggested that some of the West's problems of affiliation and participation will become more prevalent among American Jewry in general. But as the Western communities grow, some of their new institutional and religious models are also likely to find their way to other regions.
Los Angeles and San Francisco anchor and dominate West Coast Jewish life through their financial prowess, institutional creativity, and distinctive cadre of Jewish leaders. Los Angeles in particular, given its size and its status as an entertainment and media center, will continue to influence American Jewish culture overall.
The distance from New York means Western Jews will continue to struggle with questions of autonomy and control. Regarding the special character of the West's Jews, it has been noted that: "There is a solid tradition of outdoorsy Jews who have abandoned their synagogues for the mountains."35 To some extent both a new type of Jew and a different type of Jewish community are emerging in the West. A distinguishing feature is the alignment of this emergent Judaism with the arts and culture, and with the environment and social justice concerns.
Western Jewry shows the characteristics of the Western United States in general, including innovation, cultural diversity, and mobility. At the same time, the West Coast institutional models in particular integrate traditional Jewish tenets of tzedakah (charitable giving), gemilut hasadim (generosity and kindness), and avodah (worship).
Prof. Ava Kahn's words about California relate to Western Jewry generally:
"There's an idea this is the promised land, with the same climate. I think California has always been a place people can reinvent themselves.... And I think Jews are a part of this. People can come out from wherever they were in the world to California and start over."36
The story of Western Jewry is still unfolding and is one of the most challenging and interesting American Jewish experiences.
* * *
Notes
1. This figure is based on the last community study undertaken by the Jewish Federation of Los Angeles.
2. This figure encompasses the Greater Bay Area Jewish community. The 2004 study by the Jewish Community Federation of San Francisco, the Peninsula, Marin and Sonoma Counties projects that a comparative population increase occurred in the other federated communities of the Bay Area, namely, the Jewish Community Federation of Silicon Valley and the Jewish Community Federation of the Greater East Bay. If so, the Bay Area would represent the third largest metropolitan Jewish population in the United States (behind New York and Los Angeles).
3. www.jewishaz.com/jewishnews/021206/booms.shtml.
4. www.sfjcf.org/aboutjcf/localcommunity/study/highlights.asp.
5. Les Christie, "The fastest growing U.S. cities: From the Empire State to the Lone Star State-the cities that are growing the most," CNNMoney.com, 28 June 2007.
6. Ibid.
7. www.jewishaz.com/jewishnews/021206/booms.shtml.
8. Ibid.
9. Ava Kahn and Marc Dollinger, eds., California Jews (Hanover, NH: Brandeis University Press, 2003), www.upne.com/1-58465-060-5.html.
10. National Jewish Population Survey (hereinafter NJPS), United Jewish Communities, 2000-2001.
11. www.pascalsview.com/pascalsview/2006/07/when_people_tal.html.
12. NJPS.
13. Ibid.
14. The 2002 Tucson Jewish Community Study, Jewish Federation of Southern Arizona, November 2002; Greater Seattle Jewish Population Survey, 2000, Jewish Federation of Greater Seattle, 2000; 2004 Jewish Community Study, Jewish Community Federation of San Francisco, the Peninsula, Marin, and Sonoma Counties, May 2005.
15. Moses Rischin, ed., The Jews of the West: The Metropolitan Years (New York: American Jewish Historical Society, 1979).
16. Patricia Killen and Mark Silk, eds., Religion and Public Life in the Pacific Northwest: The None Zone (Lanham, MD: AltaMira Press, 2004), www.whitworth.edu/News/2003_2004/Spring/SodenReligionNorthwest.htm.
17. Lori Olshansky Sobel, "Tucson was a wonderful place to grow up in the 40's and 50's," Arizona Jewish Post, January 2008.
18. www.sfjcf.org/resources/guide/chapter.asp?ZipRegions=&Chapter=Agencies+%26+Organizations.
19. Teresa Watanabe, "American Jews face East-West power struggle," Los Angeles Times, 6 January 2002.
20. Ibid.
21. http://sandiego.ujcfedweb.org/page.html?ArticleID=47077.
22. Ibid.
23. www.israelisinamerica.org/articles/launch.html.
24. www.ikar-la.org/.
25. www.mazon.org/.
26. www.kabbalah.com/.
27. www.jewishworldwatch.org/.
28. www.jewsforjudaism.org/web/mainpages/mission.html.
29. www.towardtradition.org/.
30. www.jmsf.org/.
31. http://bbc.ajula.edu/.
32. www.pja.org.
33. www.jewishinseattle.org/JF/Connect/Bashert/Bashert.asp.
34. Max Vorspan and Lloyd Gartner, History of the Jews of Los Angeles (San Marino: Huntington Library, 1970), 218.
35. www.jew-ish.com/index.php?/stories/item/493.
36. www.jewishsf.com/content/2-0-/module/displaystory/story_id/990/edition_id/8/format/html/displays
* * *
Dr. Steven Windmueller is dean of the Los Angeles campus of Hebrew Union College-Jewish Institute of Religion. Before his twelve-year tenure at the College-Institute, he served for ten years as director of the Jewish Community Relations Council of the Los Angeles Jewish Federation and as director of the Greater Albany Jewish Federation. A fellow of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, he has written extensively on political matters and communal trends. Dr. Windmueller holds a PhD in international relations from the University of Pennsylvania.
30 May 2008
McCain on Israel, Iran and the Holocaust
McCain on Israel, Iran and the Holocaust
30 May 2008 10:03 am
Two weeks ago, I spoke with Barack Obama about the Middle East, Zionism, and his favorite Jewish writers. Since my blog is both fair and balanced, I had a lengthy conversation with Senator John McCain earlier this week about many of the same subjects.
The two candidates, who are scheduled to address the AIPAC policy conference in Washington, D.C. early next week, have well-developed thoughts on the Middle East, and their differences are stark. Obama sees the Israeli-Palestinian dispute as one of America’s central challenges in the Middle East; McCain names Islamic extremism as the most formidable challenge. Obama sees Jewish settlements as "not helpful" to peacemaking between Israel and the Palestinians; McCain does not offer a critique of the settlements, instead identifying Hamas’ rocket attacks on the Israeli town of Sderot as the most pressing problem. And both men take very different positions on the issue of Philip Roth.
In our conversation, McCain took a vociferously hard line on Iran (and a similarly hard line on Senator Obama’s understanding of the challenge posed by Iran). He accused Iran of not only seeking the destruction of Israel, but of sponsoring terrorist groups – Hamas and Hezbollah – that are bent on the destruction of the United States. And he said that the defense of Israel is a central tenet of American foreign policy. When I asked him why he is so concerned about Iranian threats against Israel, he said – in a statement that will surely placate Jewish voters who are particularly concerned about existential threats facing Israel – “The United States of America has committed itself to never allowing another Holocaust.”
Here is an edited transcript of my talk with McCain:
Jeffrey Goldberg: Is the Zionist cause just, and has it succeeded?
John McCain: I think so. I’m a student of history and anybody who is familiar with the history of the Jewish people and with the Zionist idea can’t help but admire those who established the Jewish homeland. I think it’s remarkable that Zionism has been in the middle of wars and great trials and it has held fast to the ideals of democracy and social justice and human rights. I think that the State of Israel remains under significant threat from terrorist organizations as well as the continued advocacy of the Iranians to wipe Israel off the map.
JG: Do you think the Palestinian cause is just?
JM: In respect to people like Mahmoud Abbas, who want to have a peaceful settlement with the government of Israel, to settle their differences in a peaceful and amicable fashion. If you are talking about Hamas or Hezbollah, which are dedicated to the extinction of the state of Israel, then no. It depends on who you’re talking about.
JG: Senator Obama told me that the Arab-Israeli dispute is a “constant sore” that infects our foreign policy. Do you think this is true, and do you think that the Arab-Israeli dispute is central to our challenges in the Middle East?
JM: Well, I certainly would not describe it the way Senator Obama did –
JG: He wasn’t referring to Israel as an “open sore,” he was referring to the conflict.
JM: I don’t think the conflict is a sore. I think it’s a national security challenge. I think it’s important to achieve peace in the Middle East on a broad variety of fronts and I think that if the Israeli-Palestinian issue were decided tomorrow, we would still face the enormous threat of radical Islamic extremism.
I think it’s very vital, don’t get me wrong. That’s why I’ve spent so much time there. The first time I visited Israel was thirty years ago, with Scoop Jackson and other senators, when I was in the Navy. I visited Yad Vashem (Israel’s Holocaust memorial) with Joe Lieberman the last time I was in Israel. So my absolute commitment is to peace between Israel and the Palestinians. But the dangers that we face in the Middle East are incredibly severe, in the form of radical Islamic extremists.
JG: Do you think that Israel is better off today than it was eight years ago?
JM: I think Israel, in many respects, is stronger economically, their political process shows progress – when there is corruption, they punish people who are corrupt. The economy is booming, they have a robust democracy, to say the least. Bin Laden has not limited his hatred and desire to destroy the United States to the Israeli-Palestinian issue, though Israel is one of the objects of his jihadist attitude. What you’re trying to do is get me to criticize the Bush Administration.
JG: No, I'm not, what I'm --
JM: Yeah, you are, but I’ll try to answer your question. Because of the rise of Islamic extremism, because of the failure of human rights and democracy in the Middle East, or whether there are a myriad of challenges we face in the Middle East, all of them severe, all of them pose a threat to the existence to the state of Israel, including and especially the Iranians, who have as a national policy the destruction of the state of Israel, something they’ve been dedicated to since before President Bush came to office.
JG: What do you think motivates Iran?
JM: Hatred. I don’t try to divine people’s motives. I look at their actions and what they say. I don’t pretend to be an expert on the state of their emotions. I do know what their nation’s stated purpose is, I do know they continue in the development of nuclear weapons, and I know that they continue to support terrorists who are bent on the destruction of the state of Israel. You’ll have to ask someone who engages in this psycho stuff to talk about their emotions.
JG: Senator Obama has calibrated his views on unconditional negotiations. Do you see any circumstance in which you could negotiate with Iran, or do you believe that it’s leadership is impervious to rational dialogue?
JM: I’m amused by Senator Obama’s dramatic change since he’s gone from a candidate in the primary to a candidate in the general election. I’ve seen him do that on a number of issues that show his naivete and inexperience on national security issues. I believe that the history of the successful conduct of national security policy is that, one, you don’t sit down face-to-face with people who are behave the way they do, who are state sponsors of terrorism.
Senator Obama likes to refer to President Kennedy going to Vienna. Most historians see that as a serious mistake, which encouraged Khrushchev to build the Berlin Wall and to send missiles to Cuba. Another example is Richard Nixon going to China. I’ve forgotten how many visits Henry Kissinger made to China, and how every single word was dictated beforehand. More importantly, he went to China because China was then a counterweight to a greater threat, the Soviet Union. What is a greater threat in the Middle East than Iran today?
Senator Obama is totally lacking in experience, so therefore he makes judgments such as saying he would sit down with someone like Ahmadinejad without comprehending the impact of such a meeting. I know that his naivete and lack of experience is on display when he talks about sitting down opposite Hugo Chavez or Raul Castro or Ahmadinejad.
JG: There’s no rationale for sitting down with Iran?
JM: Yes. I could see a situation hopefully in the future if the Iranians would change the policies that you and I have just talked about, but there would have to be negotiations and discussions and all kinds of things happening before you lend them the prestige of a face-to-face meeting with the President of the United States of America. As you know, our ambassador in Iraq, Ryan Crocker, has met with the Iranian ambassador in Baghdad on a couple of occasions. Those discussions, according to Ambassador Crocker, have been totally unproductive, because Iran is hell-bent on the destruction of Israel, they’re hell-bent on driving us out of Iraq, they’re hell-bent on supporting terrorist organizations, and as serious as anything to American families, they’re sending explosive devices into Iraq that are killing American soldiers.
JG: Tell me how engaged you would be as President in Israeli-Palestinian negotiations, and give me a couple of names of plausible Middle East envoys.
JM: I would have a hands-on approach. I would be the chief negotiator. I have been there for thirty years. I know the leaders, I know them extremely well. Ehud Barak and I have gone back thirty years. I knew Olmert when he was mayor of Jerusalem. I’ve met many times with Netanyahu. I’ve met with Mahmoud Abbas.
In terms of envoys, there are a large number of people who could be extremely effective, and I apologize for ducking the question, but it would have to be dictated by the state of relations at the time. For example, we know that there were behind-the-scenes conversations Israel was having with Syria. Now it’s broken into the public arena. So it would depend on the state of things. If they were more advanced in talks, which they are not, with Hamas, then you need someone like a mechanic. If it’s someone who needs to lay out a whole framework, it would have to be someone who commands the respect of both sides, someone who has an impact on world opinion.
JG: What is the difference between an American president negotiating with Ahmadinejad and Ehud Olmert negotiating with the Syrians?
JM: You don’t see him sitting down opposite Bashar, do you? (Bashar al-Assad is president of Syria.) I mean, that’s the point here. It was perfectly fine that Ryan Crocker spoke with the Iranian ambassador in Baghdad. The point is you don’t give legitimacy by lending prestige of a face-to-face meeting, with no preconditions.
JG: But Obama has shifted off that position.
JM: Sure, and the next time he sees where he’s wrong, maybe he’ll shift again. The point is is that he doesn’t understand. Look, in the primary, he was unequivocal in his statements. And now he realizes that it’s not a smart thing to say. I didn’t say he wasn’t a smart politician.
JG: Do you think that settlements keep Israel and the Palestinians from making peace?
JM: There’s a list of issues that separate them, from water, to the right of return, to settlements. Look at the Oslo Accords, which basically laid out a roadmap for addressing these major issues. And settlements is one of them, but certainly one of the issues right now is the shelling of Sderot, which I visited. As you know, they’re shelling from across the border. If the United States was being rocketed across one of our borders, that would probably gain prominence as an issue.
JG: Do you believe that Israel will have to go into Gaza in force to deal with the rockets, and if Israel did, would you support it?
JM: It depends on what you mean by force. They’ve responded with air strikes, and identifying Hamas leaders and, you know, quote, responding. Would they respond with massive force? I don’t know. I know from my conversations with them that they are deeply concerned. They’re a democracy. How would an American government, how would American public opinion respond, if there were constant shelling, and kids had fifteen seconds – fifteen seconds – to get into a bomb shelter. I don’t know what the government of Israel is going to do. It somewhat depends on whether these attacks will discontinue or if other things happen. I did get the distinct impression, nothing specific, but I got the impression that the patience of the Israeli government and the people is growing short.
JG: Let’s go back to Iran. Some critics say that America conflates its problem with Iran with Israel’s problem with Iran. Iran is not threatening the extinction of America, it’s threatening the extinction of Israel. Why should America have a military option for dealing with Iran when the threat is mainly directed against Israel?
JM: The United States of America has committed itself to never allowing another Holocaust. That’s a commitment that the United States has made ever since we discovered the horrendous aspects of the Holocaust.
In addition to that, I would respond by saying that I think these terrorist organizations that they sponsor, Hamas and the others, are also bent, at least long-term, on the destruction of the United States of America. That’s why I agree with General Petraeus that Iraq is a central battleground. Because these Shiite militias are sending in these special groups, as they call them, sending weapons in, to remove United States influence and to drive us out of Iraq and thereby achieve their ultimate goals. We’ve heard the rhetoric -- the Great Satan, etc. It’s a nuance, their being committed to the destruction of the State of Israel, and their long-term intentions toward us.
JG: Do you think their intention is the actual destruction of America?
JM: It’s hard for me to say what their intentions are, but the effect – If they were able to drive us out of Iraq, and al Qaeda established a base there, and the Shiite militias erupted and the Iranian influence was expanded, which to my mind is what would happen, then the consequences for American national security would be profound. I don’t know if their intention is to destroy America and what we stand for, but I think the consequences of them succeeding in the destruction of the state of Israel and their continued support for terrorist organizations – all of these would have profound national security consequences.
JG: A question about democratization in the Middle East. Imagine a continuum, Brent Scowcroft on one end, Paul Wolfowitz on the other. Where do you fall on that continuum, five years after the invasion of Iraq?
JM: I think that we’ve got to always balance the realism of a situation with idealism. I’m committed to that fundamental belief that we’re all created equal and endowed with inalienable rights. But there are times when realism has to enter into the equation as well. If you look at Darfur, we don’t want this to go on, but how do we stop it? And what would the consequences of our initial intrusion be? After the initial success, what are the long-term consequences?
I enjoy hearing this debate. There’s no one I love more in the world than Brent Scowcroft. He’s one of the most selfless people I’ve ever seen, never a trace of personal ambition, which is the rarest thing in Washington. But I lean also toward the historic idealism of America. Which means that every situation that confronts us, we have to try to maintain that balance. Have I always been right? No. But I try to learn from the lessons of history.
JG: You bring up an interesting question about the Holocaust, to which you say never again. But do you have an absolute commitment to stop genocide wherever it occurs?
JM: That has to be the fundamental goal, but it has to be tempered by the idea that you have to actually be able to do it, that you can succeed. If you fail in one of these efforts, that encourages others, and increases feelings of isolationism and protectionism in America. It’s hard to convince Americans to send young Americans into harm’s way, as it should be.
JG: It sounds like you’re talking about Iraq.
JM: Well, we haven’t talked about the four years of mishandling this war, which has been devastating, in particular to the families.
JG: A final question: Senator Obama talked about how his life was influenced by Jewish writers, Philip Roth, Leon Uris. How about you?
JM: There’s Elie Wiesel, and Victor Frankl. I think about Frankl all the time. “Man’s Search for Meaning” is one of the most profound things I’ve ever read in my life. And maybe on a little lighter note, “War and Remembrance” and “Winds of War” are my two absolute favorite books. I can tell you that one of my life’s ambitions is to meet Herman Wouk. “War and Remembrance” for me, it’s the whole thing.
Then there’s Joe Lieberman, who lives a life of his religion, and who does it in the most humble way.
JG: Not a big Philip Roth fan?
JM: No, I’m not. Leon Uris I enjoyed. Victor Frankl, that’s important. I read it before my captivity. It made me feel a lot less sorry for myself, my friend. A fundamental difference between my experience and the Holocaust was that the Vietnamese didn’t want us to die. They viewed us as a very valuable asset at the bargaining table. It was the opposite in the Holocaust, because they wanted to exterminate you. Sometimes when I felt sorry for myself, which was very frequently, I thought, “This is nothing compared to what Victor Frankl experienced.”
30 May 2008 10:03 am
Two weeks ago, I spoke with Barack Obama about the Middle East, Zionism, and his favorite Jewish writers. Since my blog is both fair and balanced, I had a lengthy conversation with Senator John McCain earlier this week about many of the same subjects.
The two candidates, who are scheduled to address the AIPAC policy conference in Washington, D.C. early next week, have well-developed thoughts on the Middle East, and their differences are stark. Obama sees the Israeli-Palestinian dispute as one of America’s central challenges in the Middle East; McCain names Islamic extremism as the most formidable challenge. Obama sees Jewish settlements as "not helpful" to peacemaking between Israel and the Palestinians; McCain does not offer a critique of the settlements, instead identifying Hamas’ rocket attacks on the Israeli town of Sderot as the most pressing problem. And both men take very different positions on the issue of Philip Roth.
In our conversation, McCain took a vociferously hard line on Iran (and a similarly hard line on Senator Obama’s understanding of the challenge posed by Iran). He accused Iran of not only seeking the destruction of Israel, but of sponsoring terrorist groups – Hamas and Hezbollah – that are bent on the destruction of the United States. And he said that the defense of Israel is a central tenet of American foreign policy. When I asked him why he is so concerned about Iranian threats against Israel, he said – in a statement that will surely placate Jewish voters who are particularly concerned about existential threats facing Israel – “The United States of America has committed itself to never allowing another Holocaust.”
Here is an edited transcript of my talk with McCain:
Jeffrey Goldberg: Is the Zionist cause just, and has it succeeded?
John McCain: I think so. I’m a student of history and anybody who is familiar with the history of the Jewish people and with the Zionist idea can’t help but admire those who established the Jewish homeland. I think it’s remarkable that Zionism has been in the middle of wars and great trials and it has held fast to the ideals of democracy and social justice and human rights. I think that the State of Israel remains under significant threat from terrorist organizations as well as the continued advocacy of the Iranians to wipe Israel off the map.
JG: Do you think the Palestinian cause is just?
JM: In respect to people like Mahmoud Abbas, who want to have a peaceful settlement with the government of Israel, to settle their differences in a peaceful and amicable fashion. If you are talking about Hamas or Hezbollah, which are dedicated to the extinction of the state of Israel, then no. It depends on who you’re talking about.
JG: Senator Obama told me that the Arab-Israeli dispute is a “constant sore” that infects our foreign policy. Do you think this is true, and do you think that the Arab-Israeli dispute is central to our challenges in the Middle East?
JM: Well, I certainly would not describe it the way Senator Obama did –
JG: He wasn’t referring to Israel as an “open sore,” he was referring to the conflict.
JM: I don’t think the conflict is a sore. I think it’s a national security challenge. I think it’s important to achieve peace in the Middle East on a broad variety of fronts and I think that if the Israeli-Palestinian issue were decided tomorrow, we would still face the enormous threat of radical Islamic extremism.
I think it’s very vital, don’t get me wrong. That’s why I’ve spent so much time there. The first time I visited Israel was thirty years ago, with Scoop Jackson and other senators, when I was in the Navy. I visited Yad Vashem (Israel’s Holocaust memorial) with Joe Lieberman the last time I was in Israel. So my absolute commitment is to peace between Israel and the Palestinians. But the dangers that we face in the Middle East are incredibly severe, in the form of radical Islamic extremists.
JG: Do you think that Israel is better off today than it was eight years ago?
JM: I think Israel, in many respects, is stronger economically, their political process shows progress – when there is corruption, they punish people who are corrupt. The economy is booming, they have a robust democracy, to say the least. Bin Laden has not limited his hatred and desire to destroy the United States to the Israeli-Palestinian issue, though Israel is one of the objects of his jihadist attitude. What you’re trying to do is get me to criticize the Bush Administration.
JG: No, I'm not, what I'm --
JM: Yeah, you are, but I’ll try to answer your question. Because of the rise of Islamic extremism, because of the failure of human rights and democracy in the Middle East, or whether there are a myriad of challenges we face in the Middle East, all of them severe, all of them pose a threat to the existence to the state of Israel, including and especially the Iranians, who have as a national policy the destruction of the state of Israel, something they’ve been dedicated to since before President Bush came to office.
JG: What do you think motivates Iran?
JM: Hatred. I don’t try to divine people’s motives. I look at their actions and what they say. I don’t pretend to be an expert on the state of their emotions. I do know what their nation’s stated purpose is, I do know they continue in the development of nuclear weapons, and I know that they continue to support terrorists who are bent on the destruction of the state of Israel. You’ll have to ask someone who engages in this psycho stuff to talk about their emotions.
JG: Senator Obama has calibrated his views on unconditional negotiations. Do you see any circumstance in which you could negotiate with Iran, or do you believe that it’s leadership is impervious to rational dialogue?
JM: I’m amused by Senator Obama’s dramatic change since he’s gone from a candidate in the primary to a candidate in the general election. I’ve seen him do that on a number of issues that show his naivete and inexperience on national security issues. I believe that the history of the successful conduct of national security policy is that, one, you don’t sit down face-to-face with people who are behave the way they do, who are state sponsors of terrorism.
Senator Obama likes to refer to President Kennedy going to Vienna. Most historians see that as a serious mistake, which encouraged Khrushchev to build the Berlin Wall and to send missiles to Cuba. Another example is Richard Nixon going to China. I’ve forgotten how many visits Henry Kissinger made to China, and how every single word was dictated beforehand. More importantly, he went to China because China was then a counterweight to a greater threat, the Soviet Union. What is a greater threat in the Middle East than Iran today?
Senator Obama is totally lacking in experience, so therefore he makes judgments such as saying he would sit down with someone like Ahmadinejad without comprehending the impact of such a meeting. I know that his naivete and lack of experience is on display when he talks about sitting down opposite Hugo Chavez or Raul Castro or Ahmadinejad.
JG: There’s no rationale for sitting down with Iran?
JM: Yes. I could see a situation hopefully in the future if the Iranians would change the policies that you and I have just talked about, but there would have to be negotiations and discussions and all kinds of things happening before you lend them the prestige of a face-to-face meeting with the President of the United States of America. As you know, our ambassador in Iraq, Ryan Crocker, has met with the Iranian ambassador in Baghdad on a couple of occasions. Those discussions, according to Ambassador Crocker, have been totally unproductive, because Iran is hell-bent on the destruction of Israel, they’re hell-bent on driving us out of Iraq, they’re hell-bent on supporting terrorist organizations, and as serious as anything to American families, they’re sending explosive devices into Iraq that are killing American soldiers.
JG: Tell me how engaged you would be as President in Israeli-Palestinian negotiations, and give me a couple of names of plausible Middle East envoys.
JM: I would have a hands-on approach. I would be the chief negotiator. I have been there for thirty years. I know the leaders, I know them extremely well. Ehud Barak and I have gone back thirty years. I knew Olmert when he was mayor of Jerusalem. I’ve met many times with Netanyahu. I’ve met with Mahmoud Abbas.
In terms of envoys, there are a large number of people who could be extremely effective, and I apologize for ducking the question, but it would have to be dictated by the state of relations at the time. For example, we know that there were behind-the-scenes conversations Israel was having with Syria. Now it’s broken into the public arena. So it would depend on the state of things. If they were more advanced in talks, which they are not, with Hamas, then you need someone like a mechanic. If it’s someone who needs to lay out a whole framework, it would have to be someone who commands the respect of both sides, someone who has an impact on world opinion.
JG: What is the difference between an American president negotiating with Ahmadinejad and Ehud Olmert negotiating with the Syrians?
JM: You don’t see him sitting down opposite Bashar, do you? (Bashar al-Assad is president of Syria.) I mean, that’s the point here. It was perfectly fine that Ryan Crocker spoke with the Iranian ambassador in Baghdad. The point is you don’t give legitimacy by lending prestige of a face-to-face meeting, with no preconditions.
JG: But Obama has shifted off that position.
JM: Sure, and the next time he sees where he’s wrong, maybe he’ll shift again. The point is is that he doesn’t understand. Look, in the primary, he was unequivocal in his statements. And now he realizes that it’s not a smart thing to say. I didn’t say he wasn’t a smart politician.
JG: Do you think that settlements keep Israel and the Palestinians from making peace?
JM: There’s a list of issues that separate them, from water, to the right of return, to settlements. Look at the Oslo Accords, which basically laid out a roadmap for addressing these major issues. And settlements is one of them, but certainly one of the issues right now is the shelling of Sderot, which I visited. As you know, they’re shelling from across the border. If the United States was being rocketed across one of our borders, that would probably gain prominence as an issue.
JG: Do you believe that Israel will have to go into Gaza in force to deal with the rockets, and if Israel did, would you support it?
JM: It depends on what you mean by force. They’ve responded with air strikes, and identifying Hamas leaders and, you know, quote, responding. Would they respond with massive force? I don’t know. I know from my conversations with them that they are deeply concerned. They’re a democracy. How would an American government, how would American public opinion respond, if there were constant shelling, and kids had fifteen seconds – fifteen seconds – to get into a bomb shelter. I don’t know what the government of Israel is going to do. It somewhat depends on whether these attacks will discontinue or if other things happen. I did get the distinct impression, nothing specific, but I got the impression that the patience of the Israeli government and the people is growing short.
JG: Let’s go back to Iran. Some critics say that America conflates its problem with Iran with Israel’s problem with Iran. Iran is not threatening the extinction of America, it’s threatening the extinction of Israel. Why should America have a military option for dealing with Iran when the threat is mainly directed against Israel?
JM: The United States of America has committed itself to never allowing another Holocaust. That’s a commitment that the United States has made ever since we discovered the horrendous aspects of the Holocaust.
In addition to that, I would respond by saying that I think these terrorist organizations that they sponsor, Hamas and the others, are also bent, at least long-term, on the destruction of the United States of America. That’s why I agree with General Petraeus that Iraq is a central battleground. Because these Shiite militias are sending in these special groups, as they call them, sending weapons in, to remove United States influence and to drive us out of Iraq and thereby achieve their ultimate goals. We’ve heard the rhetoric -- the Great Satan, etc. It’s a nuance, their being committed to the destruction of the State of Israel, and their long-term intentions toward us.
JG: Do you think their intention is the actual destruction of America?
JM: It’s hard for me to say what their intentions are, but the effect – If they were able to drive us out of Iraq, and al Qaeda established a base there, and the Shiite militias erupted and the Iranian influence was expanded, which to my mind is what would happen, then the consequences for American national security would be profound. I don’t know if their intention is to destroy America and what we stand for, but I think the consequences of them succeeding in the destruction of the state of Israel and their continued support for terrorist organizations – all of these would have profound national security consequences.
JG: A question about democratization in the Middle East. Imagine a continuum, Brent Scowcroft on one end, Paul Wolfowitz on the other. Where do you fall on that continuum, five years after the invasion of Iraq?
JM: I think that we’ve got to always balance the realism of a situation with idealism. I’m committed to that fundamental belief that we’re all created equal and endowed with inalienable rights. But there are times when realism has to enter into the equation as well. If you look at Darfur, we don’t want this to go on, but how do we stop it? And what would the consequences of our initial intrusion be? After the initial success, what are the long-term consequences?
I enjoy hearing this debate. There’s no one I love more in the world than Brent Scowcroft. He’s one of the most selfless people I’ve ever seen, never a trace of personal ambition, which is the rarest thing in Washington. But I lean also toward the historic idealism of America. Which means that every situation that confronts us, we have to try to maintain that balance. Have I always been right? No. But I try to learn from the lessons of history.
JG: You bring up an interesting question about the Holocaust, to which you say never again. But do you have an absolute commitment to stop genocide wherever it occurs?
JM: That has to be the fundamental goal, but it has to be tempered by the idea that you have to actually be able to do it, that you can succeed. If you fail in one of these efforts, that encourages others, and increases feelings of isolationism and protectionism in America. It’s hard to convince Americans to send young Americans into harm’s way, as it should be.
JG: It sounds like you’re talking about Iraq.
JM: Well, we haven’t talked about the four years of mishandling this war, which has been devastating, in particular to the families.
JG: A final question: Senator Obama talked about how his life was influenced by Jewish writers, Philip Roth, Leon Uris. How about you?
JM: There’s Elie Wiesel, and Victor Frankl. I think about Frankl all the time. “Man’s Search for Meaning” is one of the most profound things I’ve ever read in my life. And maybe on a little lighter note, “War and Remembrance” and “Winds of War” are my two absolute favorite books. I can tell you that one of my life’s ambitions is to meet Herman Wouk. “War and Remembrance” for me, it’s the whole thing.
Then there’s Joe Lieberman, who lives a life of his religion, and who does it in the most humble way.
JG: Not a big Philip Roth fan?
JM: No, I’m not. Leon Uris I enjoyed. Victor Frankl, that’s important. I read it before my captivity. It made me feel a lot less sorry for myself, my friend. A fundamental difference between my experience and the Holocaust was that the Vietnamese didn’t want us to die. They viewed us as a very valuable asset at the bargaining table. It was the opposite in the Holocaust, because they wanted to exterminate you. Sometimes when I felt sorry for myself, which was very frequently, I thought, “This is nothing compared to what Victor Frankl experienced.”
15 May 2008
The Rise and Fall - And Rise - of "Jewess"
05.14.08The Rise and Fall—and Rise—of “Jewess”
Why are twenty-first-century women reclaiming a derogatory term?by Daniel KriegerIn 1980, Rabbi Jacob Rader Marcus, an octogenarian scholar of Jewish history, decided to title his new book about Jewish women in America “The American Jewess.” His publisher, Ktav, told him that was out of the question because the term “Jewess” was, well, offensive. Marcus, more concerned with historical truth than political correctness, didn’t really care. He compromised on the title, calling his study The American Jewish Woman: 1654–1980, but refused to remove the term from his text. “Many Jews today deem it a ‘dirty word’ and avoid it," he writes in the preface. "I believe it is a neutral descriptive noun and I use it constantly. If for some it has become a term of contempt, it is because Judeophobic Gentiles have made it so. I refuse to bow to their prejudice.”
If Marcus had made it to the twenty-first century, he would’ve appreciated the latest chapter in the long and winding history of the word. In recent years, as demeaning “-ess” feminine nouns like “stewardess” and “actress” have continued to fade from use, their sister-term “Jewess” has been making a comeback. It started in 1998, when Ophira Edut created The Jewess is Loose!, a Web site on which she playfully reported the thoughts and adventures of Ophi, “a chunky, funky, quarter-finding, bagel-eating Jew” who finds herself negotiating the foreign world of Duluth, Minnesota. The following year, a heavily tattooed performance artist, the “Jewess Tattooess,” made her debut on the stages of London with a dark, taboo-breaking solo show that incorporated aspects of Yiddish theater and sideshows. Since then, a handful of blogs have popped up with names like Jewesses with Attitude, Barefoot Jewess, Cute Jewess Tells All, and most recently, plain old Jewess—all created by women who embrace their Jewish identities and use the term proudly.
Though some still find the term derogatory and best left in the linguistic dustbin, until the early twentieth century, “Jewess” had no negative connotation. Its 1388 print debut in John Wyclif’s Bible translation inaugurates the mundane, descriptive way it would be used for centuries to come (with a touch of Middle English orthography): “Timothe, the sone of a Jewesse cristen.” In 1526, William Tyndale’s Bible gives us another humdrum example: “Felix and his wyfe Drusilla which was a iewes.” It shows up again in 1613 when the English travel writer Samuel Purchas uses it in his Pilgrimage series: “For the Virgin Mary, say they, wore the Ring on her middle finger, and therefore all Iewesses refuse that, and use the forefinger.”
Things took a turn in 1812, with the publication of Ivanhoe, Sir Walter Scott’s immensely popular novel, which featured the sizzling, raven-haired “Rebecca the Jewess” (played by Elizabeth Taylor in the 1952 movie). Scott used the term “Jewess” seventy-six times, preceding it often with “lovely,” “fair,” and “beautiful.” But Rebecca was ultimately branded a “sorceress” and condemned to burn for “witchery.” Scott also—intentionally or not—evoked then-prevailing stereotypes about Jewish women’s bewitching and exotic sensuality. “The exoticism was part of the way in which Americans in the early nineteenth-century thought about Jews, and it especially applied to Jewish women,” says Karla Goldman, historian in residence at the Jewish Women’s Archive, a nonprofit that explores and records the history of Jewish women in America. Goldman’s 2000 book, Beyond the Synagogue Gallery: Finding a Place for Women in American Judaism, describes the changing roles of Jewish-American women in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, when American Jews began inviting Gentiles to synagogues to give them a taste of Jewish customs. Those interested in the ways of the curious people who hailed from the homeland of Jesus could stop in and check them out, as did Walt Whitman in 1842. Looking up at the gallery of a Manhattan synagogue, he observed that it "was filled with women, dark-eyed Jewesses...We found ourselves casting our glances thither quite frequently.”
But if the nineteenth century was perhaps not the worst of times for Jews in America—in spite of being seen as exotic outsiders—it was also a fruitful one for the sisterhood of words ending in “-ess.” In 1865, Sarah Josepha Hale, the “editress” of Godey’s Lady’s Book—a popular women’s monthly which ran from 1830-1878—argued for employing “-ess” terms whenever possible. “Language is rendered more direct and definite,” she wrote, and recommended fifty-eight words that would benefit from feminine endings, like “doctoress,” “Americaness,” and, of course, “Jewess.” Hale’s words did not go unheeded. In the decades that followed, the term reached peak usage.
A search of nineteenth-century journals, such as Vanity Fair, Appleton’s, and Catholic World, shows it was the preferred term for Jewish women, showing up hundreds of times—while the term “Jewish woman” barely appears—a pattern also found in The New York Times in the same period.
In 1895, Rosa Sonneschein, a protofeminist writer, launched The American Jewess, the first magazine geared toward the interests of Jewish American women. It promoted women's religious and social equality, in the assimilating German-Jewish American community. With a circulation of 31,000 at its height in 1897, prominent activists, rabbis and intellectuals (both male and female) wrote stories about “Jewesses” finding their places within American society and Judaism. “The early contributors had the sense that they were describing a new identity,” says Goldman, “one that they wouldn’t have been able to capture saying ‘American Jewish woman.’”
In 1899, Sonneschein’s failing health forced her to sell The American Jewess, and the new management ran the magazine into the ground. But it might not have made it much further, even in better hands. By the late 1930s, the term “Jewess” had fallen out of vogue, shifting to what Robert Burchfield, lexicographer and editor of Fowler’s Modern English Usage, in the 1996 edition called “the new state of the word,” which was clearly derogatory. This was pointed out in 1937 in The Pittsburgh Courier by George S. Schuyler, an African-American journalist who criticized African-Americans for spurning the word “Negress,” and added, “I understand Jews are similarly unreasonable about the term Jewess.” In The New York Times, use of “Jewess” sharply dropped off in 1936, followed by a steeper decline in the 1940s (as “Negress” was on the same course); use of the term would continue to decline for the rest of the century. In 1945, H.L. Mencken wrote in The American Language that “Jewess” was “vastly disliked by Jews,” having joined the club of full-fledged ethnic slurs.
In the 1960s, with the first wave of modern feminism, “-ess” words, imported from French in the fourteenth century, fell even further out of favor. Dictionaries officially tagged “Jewess” as offensive, a move echoed in John Updike’s 1970 novel, Bech: A Book. In Romania, his protagonist meets a man named Petrecu who tells him, “with a purr,” that the woman Bech has his eye on is “a typical little Jewess.” Bech explains, “In my country, ‘Jewess’ is a kind of fighting word.” Petrecu dismisses Bech's complaint. “Here, it is merely descriptive." For Bech and many Americans, it wasn’t mere description. With the sexist connotation of the 1960s added to the ethnic one of the 1930s, its status as a dual layered offense, a verbal one-two punch, was clinched.
So why are twenty-first-century Jewish women taking it back?
In late January of 1998, Monica Lewinsky became the most well-known and talked about Jewish woman on the planet. Though her Jewishness didn’t get nearly as much media play as her dress and other bizarre particulars of her relationship with Bill Clinton, it certainly made its way into the narrative, which grew to biblical proportions. “Monica helped spark the reclamation of the idea of the ‘Jewess,’ both why it’s appealing and shameful,” says Ruthie Ellenson, editor of The Modern Jewish Girl’s Guide to Guilt. “It’s a no-brainer that it was Monica who gave us this word back,” agrees novelist Lauren Grodstein, author of “The Monica Metaphor,” an essay published in Ellenson’s anthology in which she describes how she was called both “Monica” and “Jewess” in France in the late 1990s. “The idea that a Jewish sexpot can bring down the presidency!”
That same year Ophira Edut launched The Jewess is Loose! “It was a place to make sense of that part of my identity,” says Edut, who was riffing on O.J. Simpson’s sometime catchphrase “the Juice is loose” rather than commenting on the Monica affair. “I thought it was a funny word. So over the top. It cracked me up whenever I heard it, so I thought it would be fun to reclaim it.”
Clearly, she was not alone.
A year and a half ago, Goldman and her colleagues at the Jewish Women’s Archive launched the blog Jewesses with Attitude. The name was chosen as a play on The American Jewess, which the organization had recently archived. As anticipated, response was mixed: “I am a Jewess, hear me roar!” wrote one commenter on the site, shortly after the blog’s launch. “This is a word we have to roll around in our mouths to get used to,” wrote another. Some friends and colleagues were more wary, telling Goldman and colleagues it sounded “weird” and “Jappy” (one word that won’t be up for reclamation anytime soon). One woman couldn’t fathom why they would use it. “The word ‘Jewess,’ in her opinion, connoted something very degrading,” says Judith Rosenbaum, a feminist historian and director of education at the Archive. “The word reminded her of the Holocaust, and she thought it was dangerous to reclaim it when it had been derogatory for so long.”
“We were experimenting with whether or not this is a term that can be reclaimed,” says Rosenbaum. Linguists call this “semantic reclamation,” a phenomenon that Robert Burchfield at Fowler’s considers “one of the paradoxes of the twentieth century.” As Geoffrey Nunberg, a linguist at the University of California, Berkeley, says, “It’s throwing whatever historical stereotypes were associated with it back in the face of the people who used them," like the gay community co-opting “queer” and African-Americans using the N-word. “By reclaiming it and celebrating what’s specific about Jewish women’s experience,” says Rosenbaum, “we can explore and challenge the kinds of stereotypes that exist about Jewish women.”
These stereotypes range from exalting to condescending, from hypersexual to asexual, depending on their origin. “There are a variety of contradictory stereotypes about who and what Jewish women are,” says the feminist journalist Peggy Orenstein, who writes frequently on women and identity. “Historically, the mythology in the Gentile culture has been that Jewish women are earthier and more sexual. But that runs right up against the whole JAP stereotype that says we’re frigid.” Ruthie Ellenson feels that Jewish women are taking back more than a word. “It does something to reclaim Jewish women’s sensuality that’s been denied to them through stereotypes of Jewish-American princesses and Jewish mothers,” she says. While the image of the “sexual Jewess” may be one of the main stereotypes coming from non-Jews, its much more prevalent antithesis was popularized by the literature, TV, and film of the 1960s and 1970s of Jewish men like Phillip Roth and Woody Allen (think Portnoy’s Complaint and Annie Hall) who portrayed Jewish women as loud, overbearing, and a lot less desirable than their Wasp counterparts.
In early 2007, Rebecca Honig Friedman took a job writing for a new blog known simply as Jewess—a part of the religion blog network Canonist—meant to address the concerns of young Jewish women, much as The American Jewess did a century ago. She’d thought the blog’s name was novel but then she started seeing it all over the blogosphere. “It’s a way of saying ‘Screw you’ to those who think poorly of Jewish women,” she says. But Katha Pollitt, the feminist writer and longtime Nation columnist, questions why Jewish women would even bother deploying the term. “This isn’t like other reclamation projects, because people don’t go around calling Jewish women Jewesses,” Pollitt says. “Who is it directed toward? Is it Jewish men? Is it toward some imaginary anti-Semite who might use this antiquated word nobody uses anymore?” To this, Friedman counters, “Anti-Semites certainly use the word ‘Jewess,’ but my inclination is that it’s more about negative stereotypes of Jewish women, which come from a lot of people, including Jewish men and even some Jewish women. It’s a way of expressing pride in being Jewish and in being a woman, and in being a Jewish woman.” In other words, the antique nature of the term is part of what lends its charm.
If Friedman’s readers don’t necessarily agree with her, their objections are quite different from Pollitt’s. The term, for many, still has clearly racist connotations. One commenter on Friedman’s blog wrote, “I object to the use of the term ‘Jewess.’ If you check the OED, you’ll see that it is a pejorative term. We do not say ‘Catholicess’ or ‘Protestantess.’ I am not a ‘professoress,’ but African American women were called ‘Negress.’” (If blogs like Emancipated Negress and Uppity Negress and Kara Walker’s book Narratives of a Negress are any indication, “Negress” too may be in the early stages of reclamation.) Another woman, also a commenter on Jewess, complained that it reminds her of the Nazis calling women “Jewesses” in Holocaust movies. Despite Pollitt’s assertions, this reader has a point: a Google search for “Jewess” turns up anti-Semitic and neo-Nazi sites like Jew Watch, VNN Forum.com, and Stormfront.org, where on discussion boards it’s used among other anti-Jewish lexicon favorites. One commenter on Stormfront.org wrote, “Nancy Pelosi might have been baptized a Catholic, but she shows the character of a Jewess.” Another agreed, “She certainly acts like a Jew.” And that’s a tame post by the standards of such sites.
In spite of anti-Semites claiming it and critics condemning it, the reclamation of “Jewess” is part of a larger quest by American Jews to clarify and update their identities, which is why it’s catching on. “I think I’m going to call my girlfriends ‘Jewesses’ from now on,” says Orenstein, who hadn’t gotten wind of its revival. “I’m going to be spreading it around as soon as I get off the phone.” Though we probably won’t be seeing university “Jewess Studies” departments cropping up anytime soon, the word seems to be making itself comfortable—provided the context and tone are right. Rabbi Jacob Rader Marcus would be pleased to hear that, after a circuitous journey, “Jewess” has at last circled back to its rightful meaning, which he felt evoked the Jewish women whose legacies continue to resonate through Jewish and non-Jewish communities alike. His final word on the subject: “They have invested the word ‘Jewess’ with respect and dignity.”
Daniel Krieger is a writer and English teacher in New York.Illustration by Samantha Hahn.Copyright 2003-2008, Nextbook, Inc.
16 March 2008
Why every Zionist Should Vote Obama
Kindly cc: comments to the blog article found at the following link:
Why every Zionist Should Vote Obama
The following should be enough reason for any Jew to vote Obama:
I currently live in Israel so I am not sure I am supposed to be here, but as a LoveIsrael Jew who is passionately for Obama because paradoxical thought it may seem he is the only political leader in the U.S. or Israel who could nourish a Jewish homeland that opens the path to the third temple as a house of prayer for all nations. This two state stuff is nonsense. I know he can’t say that publicly, but he is smart and visionary and knows that politics is not the only way to achieve change. Arab muslims in our region and Africa need to get their act together and enter the 21st. century in terms of economics, politics, culture and the treatment of women and who better than Obama to assist in opening desperately needed new conversations.
Comment by irene diamond — March 5, 2008 @ 12:18 pm
The status quo is unacceptable. Let us stop this garbage with the pastor. He is yesterday’s news. FYI: this was copied and pasted from the Jews4Obama.net website, which is targeted at American Jews. This is why she is unsure of why she is supposed to “be here”. We need to listen to rational human beings who can shed some rational thought on this raw topic.
Best Regards,
Randy
http://randyscornerdeli.blogspot.com/
Vini Veri Vniversitvm Vivus Vici
"By the power of truth, I who are living will conquer the Universe"
--Shakespeare, from Faust
Randy Shiner0 comments Links to this post 
Best Regards,
Randy
http://randyscornerdeli.blogspot.com/
Vini Veri Vniversitvm Vivus Vici
"By the power of truth, I who are living will conquer the Universe"
--Shakespeare, from Faust
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
