Sunday, November 28, 2010

WHAT IF THEY REALLY CARE?

OMG, the Forward reported on September 10 that research conducted by the Brandeis University's Cohen Center for Modern Jewish Studies among 1200 interviewees concluded that "[A] majority of American Jews feel attached to Israel and the overall level of attachment has remained stable for nearly a quarter of a century." Further, as Forward reporter Gal Beckerman wrote: "The study...did show generally lower lower levels of 'connection to Israel' among those younger than thirty...these numbers are not surprising. Every generation goes through a normal 'life-cycle...' which grows as people get older; in similar studies over the past 20 years, these researchers say, the ratio of younger people who don't feel an attachment to Israel has remained constant. Instead, the research points to a steady number: the 63% of all respondents who say they feel 'very much' or 'somewhat' connected to Israel and the 75% who say that Israel is an important part of their identity." (emphasis added)

This is a Hillel-Shamai debate of sorts. You have Beinart and his ilk citing Luntz surveys that young people in America care less about Israel today and, now, a broader survey evidencing that they care...as much as previous generations. Beinart, of course, expresses pessimism because the Brandeis survey would in many ways undermine his narrative; the leaders of the Brandeis research find many reasons for optimism.

The implications of the Brandeis study seem obvious -- all of the hand-wringing about the "NextGen" might have been for naught. Our federations and JFNA, rather than arguing that this generation "having no direct connection to the Holocaust, the birth of the State, the Six Day War" and more, and, therefore, need new connections, "events" like Tribefest (which JFNA, in its way, claims in a story in JTA that it already has 1,600 "registrants" even though no Registration was possible at the time of the story).

There appears to be no comprehension at JFNA that the emerging generation of men and women who will be and, in so many instances, are our leaders are serious, caring people. So, failing to understand, the leaders of JFNA pander and engage in frivolous activities without meaning or real purpose. "If we build it, they will come" seems to be the operating mantra, never defining what "it" is, what "its" purposes are beyond numbers. So, while JFNA plans casino nights and Las Vegas "events," never is there time to plan activities that connect a younger generation or two to our communities. At the GA's end, Jerry Silverman described a "focus group" process where unaffiliated young men and women were asked, apparently, what might be attractive to them -- from this emerged...Tribefest. Yet, I have seen a list of topics for the GA that a group of the best and brightest of the same generation suggested -- a list that was sent to Jerry long before the final GA program emerged. These were serious topics from serious people. Not one of them made it to the GA Program.

No, the extant leadership would rather believe that the rising generations have no connection to the things we care about. That belief, apparently, justifies toilet-training fund raising and activities and "events" irrelevant to their growing commitment and seriousness. JFNA if it continues with pandering, sure as the sun will rise tomorrow, will drive these leaders away while believing that there is value in numbers alone.

They never learn.

Rwexler

9 comments:

simeonwolf said...

A must read written by those who know from the trenches.
http://www.jewlicious.com/2010/11/will-social-media-save-the-jews/

joebrown42 said...

Funny, I was about to post what Simeon Wolf did.
The JFNA Leadership HAS to include young people, not just have them in the room.

Anonymous said...

Hillel and Shamai debate? maybe, maybe not. A chassidic/mitnaged, lithuanian/galiciana debate ---maybe, maybe yes.

There has always been tensions in our world between those who say "make then cry and they will engage" and those who say "make them think and they will lead". (ok you know now my bias)

Similarly, there are those who sell our beloved Israel by pointing to the venal activities of our real enemies (taking unique and perverse glee in finding a small handful of them inside our minyanim) and those who inspire and bring others into our tent by promoting the acheivements, hope and promise of zionism and the Jewish state (flaws and unwise policies never brushed under the rug).Again, my biases.

When highlighting fear and the refuge of a stifling faux-patriotism are our only strategies we will not succeed.

Anonymous said...

Richard:

The Brandeis research is deeply, deeply flawed.

Yes, there are younger Jews who care about Israel but there is a growing proportion that does not--and portions of that latter group are systematically excluded from the Brandeis research.

The Jewish community may choose to have its head in the sand here, but it does so at its own peril.

RWEX said...

Anonymous,

Might you be specific as to the "flaws" of which you appear to be so very certain?

Anonymous said...

Richard:

Many scholars have commented on the flaws of the Brandeis research. There are serious questions about, and limitations regarding, the data they use.

For those interested in the minutia, see below:

http://www.contemporaryjewry.org/24.html

Anonymous said...

please share the list of topics that were not included for the GA so that those planning Tribefest may do so...

RWEX said...

Anonymous,

First, according to those who have been quoted in the media and who have posted on YouTube and Twitter, there was NOTHING of substance for them at the GA. But, if JFNA/Tribefest leaders are looking for substance, Jerry Silverman received a ten-part list from young leaders of what they would have wanted to be on the GA Agenda; all he has to do is find that list -- for starters.

joebrown42 said...

Anonymous - where's the ROI showcase? all my friends in Israeli non-profits ADORE the ROI. Why not share with them?