by Clive A Lawton
I was a little surprised to read Ariel Beery’s response to The Summer of Change and the JPropel programme that he attended in Uppsala Sweden recently. I was there too briefly and have attended other such events in the past. My abiding feeling on leaving them is a sense of buoyant optimism. So many young enthusiasts from so many walks of Jewish life! In contrast, Ariel’s article seemed to suggest that he felt disheartened at the impression he received of an old guard hanging on with dead man’s grip on the resources of the communities of Europe, while the younger generation became increasingly frustrated with the blocking of their creativity and initiatives so that they would eventually give up and leave.
So why might our responses be so different? I suggest it’s because he’s American and I’m European (oh OK – British!).
In previous writings (eg see my chapter European Models of Community: Can Ambiguity Help? in ‘Turning the Kaleidoscope’ ed Lustig and Levenson) I have suggested that Israel and America, for so long the dominant voices of world Jewry, carved up between them the ideological how-to-be-a-Jew discussion in the 20th century. While Israel ‘nationalised’ Jewish life, America ‘privatised’ it. In Israel, the state managed it for everyone. In America everyone was free to make it up as they chose. For a long while these two thriving centres conducted a dialogue of the deaf as to who was the most likely to survive into the 21st century. The one thing they mostly agreed on though was that Europe was a basket case, either dead or dying, a vast cemetery (or for the positive amongst them – a museum) with a few survivors left over from the Shoah. Both felt justified in the prescience of their forbears for leaving. Jewish life in Europe was always doomed.
But near the end of the 20th century, three startling things happened. America discovered that its system (or lack of it) for securing the future of the Jews wasn’t quite working as it had hoped. The huge upheavals of the Jewish Continuity developments emerged from that. Meanwhile, the Israeli government commissioned the Shenhar Report which found that most Israelis wouldn’t know a Jewish teaching if it bit them on the nose. (Still not quite sure what they’re doing about that!) But the third thing was that suddenly, in the midst of this momentary loss of self confidence on the future-of-the-Jews front, people noticed that Jewish life was not only continuing in Europe, it was actually starting to stir.
Now this might not be the way American Jewish communities do it or Israelis understand Jewish pride or whatever, but stir it most certainly is. Despite Ariel’s strong feeling that most of what happens in Europe is either an imitation or an extension of American or Israeli models, remember that two of the Summer of Change’s three sponsors – London’s JHub and Stockholm’s Paideia – are European initiatives, partnering the undoubtedly important American input and drive from the magnificent Shusterman Foundation.
What’s more, he did not mention the palpable presence of Limmud time and again, in discussions during the programme and in the evidence of what moved the participants. Limmud is of course another European initiative, started in England 30 years ago and now actually exported not only across Europe but also to the Americas and Israel. (Let me state an interest. I’m much involved in Limmud.) When in a session devoted entirely to Limmud the chair asked the audience who had been to a Limmud event somewhere, very nearly everyone present raised their hands. When she asked who had been involved in organising one, about half responded.
Limmud – and several other European Jewish phenomena (for example, Ariel mentions the European Union of Jewish Students – which makes either American or Israeli Jewish students look both amateur and underdeveloped as active forces in their communities) – frequently manifest the European skill or tradition of managing the contested space rather than demanding instant clarity.
It is instructive that Ariel’s later exchange with Jonathan Ornstein, the American who heads the JCC in Krakow, shows two Americans – one living and working in Poland – discussing an obviously unsatisfactory state of affairs in Krakow. But the guy working in Europe seems to have a little more patience and awareness that things move through muddle in Europe. Muddling through is the fuzzy logic system by which Europeans get things done. We have rules and fudge them. We have inclusion and exclude people. We have exclusion and let them in.
Yes it’s true that many of the leaders of some of our communities are innovation blockers. Remember, ‘heritage’ and ‘tradition’ are real words in Europe, not slogans, and someone must stand up for them. But that might only make people try harder and result in more activity, outside the formal space. Is this to be regretted? A recent survey demonstrated that there are far more start-ups in European Jewry than in the US. Our frustrating old guard leaders – and there are fewer and fewer of them anyway – might just be the grit in the oyster.
But back to Limmud. If Ariel is looking for bottom-up, volunteer driven, inclusive, diverse initiatives, not built on the Holocaust and not driven by foreign money (though ‘foreign money’ is always very welcome!) , here it is, and that is maybe why Limmud took off in Europe even before it did in the US. Limmud does not try to ‘scale up’ American ideas nor is it a reaction to the Shoah. Ariel’s comment on that front (the Shoah and its impact on European Jewry’s perspectives) seems particularly unfair. The people who most frequently try to keep Europe in its Holocaust phase are the Americans and Israelis. Even the older leaders of European communities know that things need to move forward, though many of them are not sure how.
A key point is mentioned in passing. Much of this conflict in places like Poland are about real estate and restituted (or not!) property. Limmud – and the many exciting social entrepreneurs who were present in Sweden and weekly develop new initiatives across European Jewry – tend to avoid the business of buildings. We invest in people and ideas. We value each person for what they can bring and do not believe we have to wait for a professionalised workforce to lead us. We flatten hierarchies and do not (or at least try not to!) grovel at the feet of VIPs.
As Ariel rightly concludes, the reason why it matters that European Jewry survives is not just because it’s here and will be here for a long time but also because it has something to teach the newer Jewish worlds of America and Israel about how to cope with arguments and live through them. So Polish Jewry is arguing. Welcome back! Argument is the life blood of people and it will make both sides stronger. Or maybe it won’t, but it’s too early to call yet. You see, sometimes European Jews seem old, faded and jaded, but at other times they are just refreshingly mature.
Clive A Lawton is Senior Consultant: Limmud and Scholar in Residence: London Jewish Cultural Centre.
Send to Kindle
I was dismayed by Ariel’s article. His conclusion about ‘young Jews returning to innovation-blocking communities’ does not tally with my own (admittedly limited) experience setting up new charity projects in England.
I cannot speak for other initiatives in Europe, but my projects are certainly neither a reaction to the Holocaust nor a desire to scale American or Israeli innovation. They are borne out of a desire to celebrate Judaism and unite the Jewish community.
While there are some divisions within our community (and, I suspect, in every community in every faith around the world) I have received nothing by support for my initiatives from both the ‘Old Guard’ and ‘New Guard’, (if such simplistic groups even exist).
Ariel speaks of ‘a vacuum of vision’ that is nonsense. Having spent time with determined, intelligent and inspiring individuals from around Europe, both Jewish and non-Jewish, I am filled with optimism. And looking forward to Limmudfest next weekend too.
I’ve been very lucky over the past year to work with young leaders in their teens from 18 different countries across Europe and the FSU. In this age group there isn’t an immediate expectation or desire to take over at the top, just a lot of enthusiasm to learn from each other, change and make a difference. There are no doubt many older leaders who will block progress of some young leaders but in some smaller communities they have no choice and have even made it a priority to include them and in many, especially FSU countries the leadership is already young. If older communities die off because of their unwillingness to change it won’t mean the young disappear but will be faced with the challenge of expanding and meetings needs themselves. Emigration will be an issue but more to London, Paris and other Jewish hubs rather than the USA or Israel but with an increasingly mobile EU population young Jews (and no doubt Israelis) will move the other way too. Limmud is doing a fantastic sideline in bringing together young community leaders worldwide and though it is often the same faces that pop up that’s not a bad thing as long as those faces are good leaders and bring in more faces!
I would like to give here my experience as the founder of Limoud in France.
Europe is definitely changing and has a way of looking at itself which has nothing to do with Israelis and Americans.
If I take the example of Limoud, I have been the one with the vision to implement it in France. I was determined to create it, checked what was already existing in France and found out that no same project had been launched already. When I publicised the fact that I was beginning to work on it, I received the help of the old guard. Not much to begin with, but it was definitely important for me to include from the beginning some of the key people in the organised Jewish community. We were all here for Limoud, for the French Jewry, for what could be the best to renew and attract the younger generations together with the older, in a cross-communal way. I was the entrepreneur, everything was held on my shoulders, and it was part of my responsibility to engage the older generation.
Now, some bought it, some did not. Some explained me it was way too “anglo-saxon” and that such a project would never work in France. As always. Keep on the good work with those who believe in the project and go for it. You don’t expect recognition right away. Definitely not from the institutions. You have to prove your right to exist. To show that you are here. At some point, people look at you and say, “oh, Limoud, I heard it was a great success”, then you smile and you keep on working. It’s on the way.
I gave myself 10 years for Limoud to be fully recognized in France. When I left my position as chairman, there were enough good people in the team to completely take it over, we had organised training to train the new leaders and the new comers, no matter their age, and most of the people who volunteercipate to Limoud come from mouth to ear. We had this year a nice letter from the Chief Rabbi of France (Rabbin Gilles Bernheim) supporting Limoud and ackowledging its importance in the French Jewry. Léat léat.Don’t rush, but be on the field and build!
And I would like to add that being part of worldwide networks of young Jewish leaders help. Help in keeping your vision and expectations high, help in invigorating yourself. When you give all what you are to your team and your project, you need to have sources where you can drink to renew yourself. KolDor has been helping for that. Opening new horizons, new understandings. Israel Connect also, in a different way, and definitely to meet great young jewish leaders in Europe, building a friendship inspiring and being inspired to create new things. To sum-up, you get the inspiration or the strength from outside, and you build inside your comunity.
Thanks to Clive for talking tachlis. As pres. of Limmud in Germany, and its chief fundraiser, I can definitely say that we get both financial and emotional support from many Jewish communities in Germany as well as the Jewish umbrella organization in Germany. And their involvement is growing. They understand that we are reaching out to all Jews, not just community members. And they see the importance of supporting that, with no strings attached. That said, we also get support from Jewish organizations abroad – and they, too (whether in Israel or the USA), want to support today’s Jewish life in the Diaspora. They are not trying to turn “Us” into “Them.” They have certain priorities, which reflect ours: wanting to encourage Jewish identity and learning on all levels and from all directions, to encouraging meetings between Jews of different (religious, political, social) orientations, wanting to cross age and cultural boundaries. They also, thank Gd, are proud to be supporters of their sisters and brothers “abroad.” By the way, I am not sure whether one can eschew American-style autonomous structures in Jewish life. I have been witness to an incredibly vibrant Jewish community growing in the small Massachusetts town where my paternal grandfather was once the only rabbi (traditional). And positive developments have a ripple effect, as we see with Limmud. I think, as in many other realms, the result very much depends on the quality of the teacher – the rabbi – the Limmudnik…who empowers others and shares their wisdom without being imposing. Let’s take Clive, for example