Tuesday, March 16, 2010

Recreating the Jewish World

by Richard Pearlstone

Many in Jewish organizational leadership have followed a path suggesting that they have the answer to “how to recreate the Jewish world.” They assume that (1) there is such thing as THE Jewish World and (2) some group of people will be able to recreate it. I disagree with these assumptions and I believe that acting on these assumptions will actually keep us from meeting the challenges of this moment.

There is no single Jewish World that can be recreated – instead, there are many different Jewish worlds organized in a variety of institutional and organizational forms. There is the Government of Israel; there are NGO’s, social service organizations, Federations, social justice and advocacy organizations, synagogues, schools, JCCs and many others. There are philanthropic and political organizations as well as foundations with a diversity of missions. Each works for its own constituency and supporters or would not exist. In free societies it is the marketplace, the process of creative destruction, that decides when an organization succeeds or when it goes out of business.

While this may seem disorganized, confusing and often frustrating, this diversity and multiplicity of organizations may be one of the most important strengths of what we call the Jewish World. In other words there is no one person or group of people that can recreate THE Jewish World… creating the World was and is God’s job.

So I want to change the question from “should the Jewish world be recreated” to a question each of us can actually address: What do WE need to recreate in that part of the Jewish world we lead or in which are involved.

In this respect, I can speak about the area I know best which may be the largest most encompassing: Jewish, philanthropic, global, public organizations. There are the three in which I am involved: The Jewish Agency for Israel, the JDC and The Jewish Federations of North America. It is clear we need to recreate this part of our Jewish world.

There is one fundamental challenge at the heart of reorganizing our continental and global public organizations – the question of collective responsibility without which we will have no effective or ennobled continental or global organizations. Are we serious about collective responsibility? Do we believe kol Yisrael Areyvim zeh l’zeh – that each of us is responsible for every other? Can we agree on what our collective responsibilities are and are we prepared to hold ourselves accountable in meeting those responsibilities? If not, can we claim any engagement in the re-creation?

John Ruskay just celebrated a 10 year anniversary of his service as the Chief Executive Officer of the New York UJA-Federation. In an inspiring address at the event that honored, John not only summarized achievement and goals for the future, he held all of us to the highest standard when he said: “But above all, we will continue to hold high the banner of Jewish communal collective responsibility. In a culture too often defined by rampant individualism, including in philanthropy, we affirm that we are indeed a part of a people and community that promotes the axiomatic value of our responsibility for another, of the shared and mutual responsibility of each and every member of the House of Israel. We do this not only because it is the core foundation on which the work of federations rests. We do this because it is a core principle on which the entire enterprise of the Jewish People rests …”

Our non-profits have followed the business world into excess. In our case that excess was evidenced by everyone having their own particular causes – our version of the larger culture’s individualism. Organizations and individuals alike began to “bowl alone” without regard for the destructive impacts of individual decisions on our institutions and on the work to which we are dedicated. As collective responsibility has weakened our continental and global institutions have weakened. We need to ask ourselves seriously what do we, the leaders of these institutions, agree are our collective responsibilities? If we can neither agree upon nor make the case for collective responsibilities then our institutions will continue to weaken to the ultimate point of irrelevancy.

We know what collective responsibility feels like. When we needed to rescue literally millions of Jews we recognized this was a collective responsibility. When Israel has found herself at war and people are endangered, we realize there is a need for collective responsibility. When Jews have faced hunger, we have fed them. These are classic cases of pikuach nefesh – saving a life. Over the years our global institutions have been magnificent at meeting these challenges. But if these are the only needs we really see as our collective responsibilities, then we do not need the type of global institutions we now have.

  • Do we believe that Jews are at risk globally such as the 200,000 elderly Jews that are hungry around the world?
  • Are the 30,000 youth at risk around the world and the 420,000 at risk youth in Israel our collective responsibility?
  • Do we believe that the 40,000 young people brought to Israel on an Israel experience is a collective responsibility?
  • Do we believe that aliyah of choice is a collective responsibility?

Once we agree on our collective responsibilities then we need to decide how to raise money and to execute in the most effective and efficient ways.

However, we have not had this debate honestly since 1939 and 1948 and 1967 and 1990.

To engage in this debate we will need to ask ourselves hard questions. Among them:

  • Can our existing institutions address these collective responsibilities?
  • Do we need new institutions? New mandates? New institutional arrangements?
  • How do we change our cultures to respond to these collective responsibilities we have agreed upon and will we hold ourselves accountable?

We will need to honestly ask each other:

  • Where do each of our institutions have strategic as well as competitve advantage in meeting these collective responsibilities?
  • Where do each of our institutions bring added value?
  • How will each of our global institutions effectively engage donors and their lay leaders?
  • And are we willing to live with the answers to these questions no matter what those answers mean about the power, size and scale of our institutions?

To truthfully ask these questions and to seriously discipline ourselves to live with the answers will require us all to remember what one of the greatest global Jewish leaders, our beloved Max Fisher, z’l, said in a speech in 1980. To paraphrase Max’s words:

Let the Jewish world understand that when a man or woman is called to serve a global Jewish institution at any level he or she is taking up a post of honor for their people. I have been so called and been so honored and I know only one way to repay for that great distinction – and this is to leave for others global institutions that are stronger better equipped to serve our people in the days ahead.

Let us begin again the process of recreation for klal Yisrael and the generations to come.

Richard Pearlstone is Chairman of the Board, The Jewish Agency for Israel.

He delivered these remarks at the 2009 Israeli Presidential Conference and were updated following the recent dinner in honor of John Ruskay.

Comments

4 Responses to “Recreating the Jewish World”
  1. Josh says:

    I think this piece speaks eloquently to refocusing attention on what we need to recreate rather than the hubris of assuming a single Jewish community that needs recreating. However, one missing priority from your list — which was lightly touched on in reference to Birthright — is the urgency of cultivating vibrant and compelling Jewish cultural and artistic outlets to nurture Jewish indentity amidst an abundance of competing content. In terms of responding to non-crisis communal priorities, these activities have the potential to stengthen the bonds of Jewish identity and peoplehood that erode in a pluralistic and fragmented society.

    I am sure there are others who feel their priorities also belong on this list — but since you asked the question of, “what” I felt compelled to chime in.

    Great thinking piece though!

  2. This is a wonderful piece, and on the heels of John Ruskay’s speech stirs my Jewish heart with its call for Jewish collective responsibility. I devoted a good part of my career to the Jewish Federation movement – and I still believe in the principle of collective decision making.

    However…

    It’s just not working. An appeal for Jewish collective responsibility is not going to resonate with teens and young adults, for whom anything that smacks of particularism is a turn-off. I do think that collective action is desirable – even necessary, but as an outcome, not as a demand. Jewish collective responsibility will emerge from really cool projects that serve as magnets to draw younger Jews into a community framework. Such projects will need to provide Jewish lenses on the big themes that are most relevant for the coming generation, such as interfaith; globalism; environmentalism; social media; arts & culture. What we need is for the major Jewish philanthropic, global organizations to stimulate eye-popping, jaw-dropping, great-big-hairy projects in these areas – a far cry from the traditional federation allocations-based annual fund distribution model. Much easier said than done, I know, but if our major Jewish institutions don’t evolve they will ultimately be replaced.

    The big challenge is not how do we make a case for collective Jewish responsibility, it’s how do we ensure that being Jewish remains relevant in a new world? Solve that question and collective responsibility will be restored.

  3. Gideon Yavin says:

    A question that springs to mind is one of affiliation.

    You have left off the list questions like:
    Is supporting the right wing settlers in the West Bank a collective responsibility?
    Is supporting human rights activists that are fighting for Arab rights a collective responsibility?
    Is supporting the Chareidi population who choose to live in poverty while the bulk of its workforce sit in Yeshivas and study for the benefit of the entire world’s Jewish population a collective responsibility?
    Is supporting the liberal human rights activists that are fighting the Chareidi expansion in Israel a collective responsibility?

    Another example is (and I apologize if people feel that I am abusing the forum), I am looking at putting together an organization that will empower members of the Chareidi community to engage in organic urban gardening to address issues of poverty and food security. I am now weighing up whether to approach individual philanthropists, NGO’s or governmental bodies. Perhaps I should approach companies who would take it as a social responsibility project with press value. Either way, whoever I approach and depending on how I chocolate coat it, will have to pass a value judgment to decide whether it is a just and deserving cause or not.

    Clearly there are many organizations, each believing that they are serving the nation, whose efforts are in conflict with each other. Putting all fund raising bodies together will place the burden of inclusion or exclusion based on ideology or religious grounds. Who will sit on such a bench? How will one raise funds from communities with divergent ideologies? Who will decide how to weald this enormous influence in the Israeli socio-religio-political scene?

    My feeling is that in this current age of confusion organizations should be kept small, specialized and hungry with a special emphasis on transparency and governance.

Trackbacks

Check out what others are saying about this post...
  1. [...] trackback Richard Pearlstone’s remarks were recently posted in ejewish philanthropy http://ejewishphilanthropy.com/recreating-the-jewish-world/. Here is my [...]



Speak Your Mind

Tell us what you're thinking...
and oh, if you want a pic to show with your comment, go get a gravatar!