![]() |
![]() |
|
|
||||||
| Please click to go
to the following related articles... The Implications are Severe - by Peter Geffen Nothing good will come of this - by Dr. Shaul Kelner The Implications are Severe by Peter Geffen The author, founder of the Abraham Joshua Heschel School in Manhattan and of Kivunim: Directions, responds to questions for the Jewish Agency Education Department's Israel Experience Ideological Forum, October, 2002, in which Melitz representatives participated. The following is excerpted from his response. 1. What in your opinion is the ideological context for the collapse of the "Israel Experience" (youth and student educational short and long term programs to Israel)? What are the implications of this new reality for Israel-Diaspora relations? What are the ramifications in the North American Jewish community of the fact that young people are being deprived from a direct encounter with Israel? I do not think it is ideological, or at least, not directly. The American Jewish community and the American Jewish family are less risk-taking than in past years, primarily because we have become so "rich", both literally and figuratively. We live very protected, soft lives, and they get more so every year. Anything, including Jewish identity, that gets in the way of our "quality of life" is going to become an aversion-object. Israel is perceived as dangerous, violent and unpredictable and therefore must be avoided. That is not ideological, although it may possibly be logical. It is also tragic. It is an historic error that will have countless implications for the future of Jewish life and certainly for Diaspora-Israel relations. We have now broken a chain. The Israel Experience was part of a process of growing up in the Jewish world. It is no longer. To reestablish it will take deep commitment and much unlikely risk-taking on the part of parents and a communal resolve that the Israel Experience is a central and critical element in the education of all Jewish children/young adults (or for at least a steady elite as has been the case for the past 50 years). The implications are severe. If a whole generation has not been in Israel on a powerful, possibly "transformative" peer-group experience, they will not identify with Israel or Jewish nationhood in the same way that has characterized our communal life since the establishment of the State of Israel. The effect must be enormous and I cannot gauge how deep and how wide it will be. I am certain that we are in the midst of something bigger than we appreciate or understand. 2. What short term and long term measures should be taken by the community to confront the new reality? I am bewildered as to what to do. I have suggested to UJA Federation here in New York that we must develop and exploit high quality, state-of-the-art video-conferencing as a means of keeping human and site contact between American Jews and Israel. It is inadequate and in some ways superficial, but it is a real-time way to keep relationships going. Certainly we must continue to fund and encourage all constituencies who will travel to travel, and to encourage them to write and speak about their travels. We also must exploit opportunities and not let them go by unnoticed. As an example, the young people who went on returnee trips this past summer should not be left hanging. They should be brought together and given encouragement and tools to tell of their experience and of its importance and meaning on both sides of the ocean. Leadership must be mobilized to speak about the historic implications of American Jewry turning its back on Israel and its people at this time. It cannot be allowed to go unnoticed. In my own case, I have written to all past Kivunim schools and participants admitting to them the error in my own judgment in canceling last summer's program, even though I would have been left with 10-15 participants out of 120. I am working diligently to recruit and get commitments from schools and teachers at this very moment for summer 2003. I know that leadership is critical here, although people will make decisions based on their own family commitments, other needs and fears, etc. But leadership can and will make a difference, and we have had few voices that have pointed out the significance and importance of rebuilding this physical relationship. Beyond this meager effort, I am hopeful that good minds sitting together will be able to create new ideas and approaches that will help. We need a new "Exodus" the movie that is. * * * Nothing Good Will Come of Thisby Dr. Shaul Kelner The author, of the Cohen Center for Modern Jewish Studies, Brandeis University, responds to questions for the Jewish Agency Education Department's Israel Experience Ideological Forum, October, 2002, in which Melitz representatives participated. The following is excerpted from his response. 1. What in your opinion is the ideological context for the collapse of the "Israel Experience" (youth and student educational short and long term programs to Israel)? What are the implications of this new reality for Israel-Diaspora relations? Sadly, the behavior of the youth and their parents is rational, given the context. Unlike previous wars, where the homefront and the front line were clearly distinguished, in this one, the front line is in the centers of civilian life that tourists would normally frequent. As I see it, the basic ideological context is a Diaspora amcha and leadership that has replaced an ethnic allegiance to mythic Israel with a personalized, religion-centered Judaism in which Israel is largely irrelevant. There has been an ideological shift in the purpose of Israel Experience Programs since the short-term programs were first established 50 years ago. Originally, these programs were targeted only to the elite of Diaspora Jewish youth movements, and their purpose was more explicitly Zionist Over the years, the programs have moved away to see themselves as a means of preserving Jewish life in the Diaspora. Reconceived as Jewish education and identity-building programs, Israel became a means to an end rather than the end in itself. This allowed for a huge expansion of the programs to appeal to a mass market. But it also set the stage for what we are seeing now. Outside of Modern Orthodoxy, American Jewish leadership, while firmly pro-Israel, is largely non-Zionist. This trend is on the rise. The more dynamic elements of the Jewish community here are framing Jewishness in religious terms, not ethnic ones. For example, Tu B'Shvat, once the quintessential Zionist holiday celebrated with the blue JNF pushke, is now increasingly celebrated with neo-Hasidic environmentalist seders. American Jewish cultural leaders are focused on adapting Jewish religion to make it meaningful in the American context. In a society that has a made religion a thoroughly personal affair, making Judaism meaningful and relevant is the sine qua non of Jewish existence, and hence the major American Jewish project of the late 20th and early 21st centuries. My sense is that a good portion of American Jewish leadership would say, "If Israel contributes to this, great. If not, so be it. We'll find other ways." But if Israel is on the leaders' radar screen at all, it is because of what Israel can do for American Jewry, rather than what American Jews can do for Israel. I've overstated the case. There remain committed Zionists in important leadership positions. But I see them as one faction among many, and not necessarily the winning faction when push comes to shove 2. What are the ramifications in the North American Jewish community of the fact that young people are being deprived from a direct encounter with Israel? This will perpetuate the trend I described above. The drift form Israel is not just among the amcha, but among the American Jewish leadership as well. This is not for lack of exposure. In fact, the university programs and seminaries that have allowed a good portion of American Jewish leaders to spend significant time in Israel may have been a double-edged sword. Much of Israel's importance to American Jewish in the past rested on its mythic proportions. The intimate knowledge many of our leaders have gained by living in Israel (but on largely Diaspora Jewish programs and Diaspora communities) may have demystified Israel. This makes it easier for American Jewish leaders to claim that their ways of being Jewish are just as good if not better than Israeli ways. The short-term programs do a much better job that the long term ones of conveying the mythic Israel, which is a crucial basis of American Jewish solidarity with Israel. Don't denigrate the importance of myth. It serves a valuable purpose. The Israel programs for youth are a key element of Jewish communal leadership development. I would predict that the drop-off in Israel program participation will have ramifications for every institution that depends on program alumni: in the immediate term, camps will have to figure out what do with their 11th graders, and may find it more difficult to attract counselors; Hillels will likely be deprived of a motivated group of activists; the number of Judaic studies majors might drop; long-term Israel programs for college-age kids won't be able to recruit from among short-term program alumni. A few years down the road, rabbinic schools and graduate programs in Jewish education and Jewish communal service might experience a dearth of applicants. Fewer lay people will be inspired by the testimonials of program returnees, drying up an important reservoir of good will for the programs. I can't imagine anything good coming out of this. It is an important element in an organic system. You can't remove a part without hurting the whole. 3. What short term and long term measures should be taken by the community to confront the new reality? Advocacy, advocacy, advocacy. The key audience right now is not the parents or the kids. As I said before, their behavior is (unfortunately) completely rational under the circumstances. Resources are limited, and efforts on the parents and kids would be largely wasted. The main audience to be concerned about are the communal leaders who have life-and-death power over the Israel programs themselves. They need to be convinced to stay the course, and to keep the programs afloat until they can get back on their feet It is also not easy because the message should not be pro-Israel, but unabashedly Zionist. American Jewish leadership needs to reconnect to the mythic Israel. Sloganeering won't work. They already know enough of the real Israel. Instead, the message will have to be sophisticated and tailored Again, the leadership is the key audience here, not the masses. As long as the leaders are on board, we'll be able to pick up the pieces. * * * Please help Melitz continue to provide programs
and dynamic opinions that deal with issues facing the Jewish world today.
Contributions may be sent to: |
||||||
| © Melitz. Site credits. Contact Us. | ||||||