By Ira M. Sheskin and Arnold Dashefsky
A recent article in eJewishPhilanthropy reprinted an estimate (from Reform Judaism) that 12% of American Jews are “Jews of Color.” This estimate, in turn, came from a report entitled Counting the Inconsistencies: An Analysis of American Jewish Population Studies with a Focus on Jews of Color, which stated that “at least 12-15%” of American Jews are Jews of Color. It is also true that the 2017 San Francisco Bay Area Jewish community study shows that 13% of Jews in the 10-county Bay Area are Jews of Color and the 2011 New York Jewish population study shows that 12% of New York Jewish households are multiracial. (However, this does NOT mean that 12% of New York Jews are Jews of Color. Some multiracial households contain non-Jews who are “of color.”) But San Francisco and New York are special cases and are not indicative of the composition of Jews nationally.
Jews of Color Will Increase but…
We agree that a significant number of American Jews are, indeed, Jews of Color, that this number is likely to increase in the future, and that it is more than unfortunate if even just one person is made to feel uncomfortable in a Jewish setting. But we also have a responsibility to make certain that, in both developing programs for any population subgroup and in evaluating the effectiveness of those programs, we do so based upon accurate information.
The “at least 12%–15%” estimate is substantially higher than the 6% estimate made by the Pew Research Center in 2013. The 6% Pew figure is just about equal to the 7% found in the 1990 National Survey of Religious Identification (NSRI) and the 5% from the 2000–2001 National Jewish Population Survey (NJPS), which indicates that the percentage nationally does not appear to have changed significantly between 1990 and 2013. In addition, the number of Jews of Color in America appears to be relatively stable at about 420,000 between 1990 and 2019. NSRI, NJPS, and Pew are generally accepted as accurate sources of information on the American Jewish community as a whole. The few local Jewish community studies (outside of San Francisco and New York) that have queried race and ethnicity also lend support to the 6% figure. In addition, the 12%-15% figure would imply that almost one of 6 American Jews is a Jew of Color.
Note that the 6% in the 2013 Pew study is comprised of 2% black (non-Hispanic), 3% Hispanic, and 2% other/mixed races. (This adds to 7% due to rounding.) These data are consistent with other Pew surveys of religion among both blacks and Hispanics (www.pewforum.org).
Nevertheless, as intermarriage continues among American Jews at high levels, as Jews adopt children who may be “of Color,” and as non-Jewish persons of color decide to identify as Jewish, the share of Jews of Color in the American Jewish population is likely to increase.
“Jews of Color” or “Diverse Jews”
It should also be noted that many Jews who might identify as Hispanic are, in fact, Ashkenazi and are much less likely to be “of Color.” For example, in Miami, about 60% of Hispanic Jews consider themselves Ashkenazi. In many cases, these are Jews whose parents or grandparents fled the Holocaust to places like Cuba and Argentina and then settled in the US. A similar argument can be made against assuming that all Sephardic and Mizrahi Jews are Jews of Color. It is for this reason that Be’chol Lashon (a Jewish organization that advocates for Jews of Color) uses the term “diverse Jews” and not “Jews of Color.”
Being imperfect, surveys may underestimate Jews of Color. Some observers believe that this sub-population is relatively “invisible” to many members of the Jewish community as well as to researchers. Part of the reason for this “invisibility” may be due to Jews of Color being less likely to participate in the formal Jewish community. On the other hand, Jews of Color may be more likely to participate in surveys because they want to make certain that Jews of Color are not underestimated.
Some signs of recognition of this diversity and the need to be inclusive are evident in the American Jewish community. This subject is also highlighted by the existence of at least four national Jewish organizations devoted to advancing Jewish diversity: the Jewish Multiracial Network, the Jews of Color Field Building Initiative, Jews in All Hues, and Be’chol Lashon. The Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism has also examined the subject, and this subject has received much attention in the Jewish media in recent years.
We agree that significant diversity exists in some communities: The 2014 Miami Jewish community study shows significant diversity: 33% of adults in Jewish households are foreign born and 3% of adults in Jewish households are from the former Soviet Union. Fifteen percent of Jewish adults are Hispanic, 9% are Israelis, and 17% are Sephardic Jews. (These groups are not mutually exclusive.) Recognizing the ethnic and racial diversity of the Miami Jewish population, the Federation has hired an inclusion specialist. In addition, the Miami Federation’s Board of Directors recently approved a Diversity and Inclusion Statement to make an affirmative expression of its commitment to an inclusive and diverse community, one in which all are welcome. Even among Hispanic Jews, significant diversity exists: 24% of Hispanic Jewish adults come from Cuba; 18%, from Argentina; 16%, from Venezuela; 14%, from Colombia; 6%, from Peru; and 40%, from other places in South and Middle America.
Conclusions
Our conclusions are that the percentage of Jews of Color is almost certainly closer to 6% nationally than to “at least 12%–15%;” and this percentage has not increased significantly since 1990, although it is likely to do so in the future. Thus, responsible planning by the American Jewish community demands recognition that not all Jews are of Eastern Europe and Ashkenazi origin; and future research on American Jews needs to be sensitive to discerning Jews of Color.
Ira M. Sheskin (University of Miami) and Arnold Dashefsky (University of Connecticut) are Editors of the American Jewish Year Book.
(This essay is based on information presented in Chapter 5 of the 2019 American Jewish Year Book 2019, eds. Arnold Dashefsky and Ira M. Sheskin., vol. 119, Cham Switzerland: Springer, due out in June.)
Top
One of the main challenges with all studies is getting an accurate sample. If Jews of any particular community are not able to access the community, or made to feel uncomfortable it, they are not on lists that are used for many studies.
Indeed, many of the various Jewish organizations that focus on diversity, inclusion and equity have websites that are not accessible to Jews who are blind and/or have low vision.
Additionally, many groups have now moved all their programs to be virtual, but they are not putting captions on their videos or zoom calls. This means that people who are deaf and/or hard of hearing are cut out.
That is true to Jews of all colors and backgrounds because disabilities don’t discriminate in that all groups are impacted. Please see this study: https://www.respectability.org/2018/09/webinar-2018-jewish-survey/
Jennifer Laszlo Mizrahi
JenniferM@RespectAbility.org
We can have a conversation about Jewish community data, the lack of it, and the reasons why – that’s a legitimate debate where we all can look at numbers, find our arguments and have a healthy debate. I am curious why the authors chose a defensive tone, rather than simply laying out a different interpretation of the data. The fact that more research and data is needed to better understand our population is widely agreed upon. I wonder if the authors could have moved the conversation even further past the conclusions laid out at the end.
Jennifer, we should do all we can to make certain that all groups are included. Ira
Abby,
I do not think we took a defensive tone. In fact our article was reviewed by several experts to make certain that our facts are correct and that the tone was correct. Our concern is that the data out there be correct. 12-15% vs. 6% is not a matter of interpretation. The report that put 12-15% out there did not even reference the 6% figure is of concern. Certainly, no study before or after Pew 2013 was done so well. And that 12-15% keeps showing up in lots of things. Proper planning takes proper data.
Thanks for your comments. If this article leads to better planning for Jews of Color it will have served its purpose.
The point of the “Counting the Inconsistencies” and similar efforts is to highlight the existence and experiences of Jews of color. Such highlighting is sometimes about celebration, but all too often shines a spotlight on the invisibility of and discrimination against Jews of color by established institutions and the majority of North American Jews. A methodological critique without acknowledgment of structural bias in the Jewish community perpetuates this bias. In the Reconstructionist movement and across the Jewish social justice sector, we are focusing on studying how unconscious racial bias has infused our efforts to build just, caring and inclusive communities, working to dismantle it, and trying to center the experience of Jews of color. To correct past wrongs, we know our communities must change in ways that may initially be uncomfortable for some folks. We are willing to do the hard work and curious and excited about actively creating just and inclusive communities.
I would like to hear more about the authors intention in publishing this piece. While their conclusion is that we have a diverse Jewish community and planning should take that into account, are they concerned that using the 12-15% number might mean too much attention might be paid to Jews of Color? Or that their perception of inaccuracy in the data will somehow otherwise lead us astray? Or do they want to remind us that intersectional identities such as Hispanic Jews from Ashkenazi heritage exist in our community?
Regardless of the author’s intent, the American Jewish community has much work to do to create a community that is welcoming and celebratory of all of its members. This work includes examining our own assumptions about who is or isn’t Jewish, confronting the racism we have embedded in our own, figuring out what teshuva / reparations might look like, and more.
I am excited about following the lead of, and partnering with, Jews of Color to build a more just and equitable Jewish community and world.
Do I understand correctly that the outcome of this research study was to show that some people think that there are half the number of JOC there are currently believed to be…others say it’s an undercount, we can’t be certain, but that, regardless, the number is growing and therefore it might not be long until the numbers are actually what they are thought to be now? Whether the correct number is 6% or 12%, why shouldn’t we focus just as eagerly on reducing racism and increasing inclusion within the Jewish community? Do we only start to care about JOC when the number reaches 12%? Is that when a Jewish sub-population “earns” the right to receive acknowledgment and funding? Donors need to stop funding research like this and start funding projects that move the needle in measurable ways to improve our collective Jewish future.
Are you kidding me?
Seriously?
We’re out here leaving the community on mass because everyone is so damn racist, and then you publish this. This, which has literally NO good thing to contribute to helping keep JOCs in the Jewish community. Instead, it just makes us want to leave even more, because more white Jewish men have decided there’s “probably even less” of us.
Thought: Maybe that number is going to keep trending down because you act like this, and publish things like this.
Jennifer: NJPS 1990, NJPS 2000-01, and Pew 2013 DID NOT use any lists of Jews. They were all done with RDD, which means that anyone with a phone (including cells in 2013) had an opportunity to participate.
The local studies cited, including SF, NY, and Miami all had RDD (or ABS) random components. They did some sampling from lists, but weights were used to properly adjust biases that might have been introduced by the lists.)
Thanks for your interest.
Deborah,
“A methodological critique without acknowledgment of structural bias in the Jewish community perpetuates this bias.”
This is a short piece with a methodological focus to make certain the best information is out there. Getting involved with the structural bias in the Jewish community was simply not a purpose of this piece. If I were writing a book about the issue, there would be a whole chapter (or more) on structural bias.
Ira
Rabbi Silverstein,
We are not concerned that 12-15% might mean too much attention AT ALL. Did we not say that “it is more than unfortunate if even just one person is made to feel uncomfortable in a Jewish setting” ?
And yes, using the 12-15% number might lead us astray. We need to know how many, and WHERE, Jews of Color live. 6% means about 400,000. 15% means more than 1 million. Imagine you were putting together a program designed to involve Jews of Color and were putting together a list to allow invitations about events. If you get 40,000 people on that list and there are 400,000 JOC, your effort could be considered pretty good. If there are 1,000,000 people, then not so good.
As social scientists, we believe that having accurate data helps in planning. It is the reason so much money is spent nationwide on data collection for both Jewish groups and the general public. It is the reason it is important to complete the Census and the American Community Survey.
Thanks for your comments.
Evelyn,
Of course we should be concerned if even one person is made to feel uncomfortable in a Jewish setting and said so in the article.
NO DONOR FUNDED OUR RESEARCH. What we did in this piece was to simply collate information from three national studies (done by JFNA and Pew) and some local Jewish community studies that asked appropriate questions. We did this collation for free. We are social scientists and try VERY HARD to keep bias out of our research. (If we have any bias in this case, it is toward JOC.) Our only bias here is that we should have correct numbers.
In fact, the report that came up with the 12-15% figure CALLS FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF MORE FUNDS on such research.
Dee,
Thank you for your comments.
Our intentions here are only good. As social scientists, we believe in data driven decision making. Better data, better decisions.
The Jewish Field Building Initiative (an advocacy group for JOC) funded the original Jews of Color report (from which the 12-15% derives) (www.jewsofcolorinitiative.org) to figure out what percentage of Jews are JOC!
IF A MAJOR ADVOCACY GROUP FOR JOC IS FUNDING RESEARCH TO FIGURE OUT HOW MANY JOC THERE ARE, IT OCCURS TO ME THAT THE NUMBER MATTERS. AND IF THE NUMBER MATTERS, THEN IT MATTERS IF IT IS RIGHT OR NOT. We presented evidence that more than suggests that the number is lower than that report suggests.
Please ask yourself:
Had the original JOC report suggested it was 6% and we came forward with considerable evidence that it was actually 12-15%, would you have had the same reaction?
I do know that if a Jew of Color came to my synagogue and was made to feel uncomfortable, I would be the first to say that i want to serve on an inclusivity committee. And I am proud that the Greater Miami Jewish Federation (I have been a “member” since 1978) has taken significant steps concerning inclusivity.
http://www.ejewishphilanthropy.com should be congratulated for publishing this piece.
I wish you the best and I hope that the Jewish community makes significant progress in this area.
Ira
It’s shameful that this was printed here. At a time when people of color and Jews of color are being disproportionately impacted by the virus and the economic downturn, we need to stand up in support of our JOC family and not tear them down.
I understand that in demographic studies, a great deal of attention has to be paid as to who “is” and who “isn’t.” These are complex issues and fraught with all kinds of historical, sociological, economic, and political concerns, which is why most white people–including white Jews–tend to sidestep addressing race head-on.
The plain issue is that many white Jews exhibit the behaviors and attitudes of their white non-Jewish counterparts, making non-white Jews uncomfortable and feeling unwelcome. There is no “but,” as the authors claim throughout the article starting in the second paragraph.
History has shown us that scholarly work to minimize this fact in the name of “accuracy” has always led to sustaining the status quo and has pulled white Jews further into whiteness. Both of these outcomes are unacceptable and concerning.
There is a great deal of work to be done in the Jewish community in the name of Klal Yisrael. I am concerned that using scholarly work to point us away from race in the direction of “feel good” and, honestly, easier to confront issues of “diversity” will continue to mask the difficult work that we as a community have to do around race.
Cindy,
Why would you think that getting the number of Jews of Color correct is at all related to the virus and the economic downturn and is an effort to “tear them down”?
Read the article again, please. We are both strong advocates for this group. Please read some of my other responses above as well. We praise the Miami Federation for its reaction, just as one example. We give the names of various Jewish organizations that are advocates for JOC so that if people want to get involved they can.
Thanks for your comments.
Ira
It concerns me that this piece focuses on questioning the number of Jews of Color rather than on a broader analysis of the racism and lack of equity that persist in Jewish life. The authors’ skepticism about the total U.S. population of Jews of Color reminds of the skepticism behind questions that I and my colleagues at Keshet often hear: “How many LGBTQ Jews are there?” A debate over data that fails to honor the stories of how and why Jews of Color are marginalized is misguided and harmful. There is plenty of work to do to advance racial equity and justice in Jewish life and the broader world. That is what we should focus on together.
Jeremy,
Thanks for your comments. There is absolutely no intention to point anyone away from race. Quite the opposite. The percentage (and number) became an issue when an advocacy group for JOC (Jewish Field Building Initiative) commissioned a report to get us an estimate of JOC. If the number is not important, why did a JOC advocacy group do so? Certainly, they were not trying to point us away from race.
Our effort to correct the number and the fact that the numbers that we found (neither the original report nor our article collected any new data, just reported on existing data) were lower does not point us away from race.
We, as social scientists, have a professional obligation when we see data that we believe are wrong to correct. All we did was follow that obligation. Had the original report said 6% and we had 12% we probably would have been praised by some of the folks condemning us.
I was one of the principal people behind NJPS 1990 and NJPS 2000. Note that both studies (and i helped design the questionnaires) included a race question. I have completed more than 50 local Jewish communities studies for Jewish communities around the country and teach Research Methods and statistics at the University of Miami and know well the issues involved in coming up with such an estimate.
Again, thanks for your comments. May this discussion continue to focus the American Jewish community on this issue!
Idit,
We had 800-1000 words and provided 1,100. There is plenty of room in other articles that will follow for the discussion of the important issues you raise.
Ira, thanks for your reply. I live in Indianapolis, one of your more recent demographic studies, and race was not included on the survey questionnaire.
I am also a social scientist, and my work intersects with race intentionally and frequently. In my training and work, I have learned that as social scientists we have a professional and human obligation to address issues that are bigger than accuracy. Many of the replies to your article here are saying that “accuracy” alone does not help the Jewish community address the issues that we face. In fact, it can sometimes distract us from the work that needs to be done by couching results in narratives that point to more diffuse concepts, perpetrating the status quo.
We as social scientists have to confront our own biases and assumptions.
Thanks for explaining your sample. Did you have any questions on your study to see if people also had disabilities? Is there intersectional data? People who are part of multiple marginalized communities have compounded challenges to face, as I am sure you already know.
Fighting racism in all communities is so important. So too is fighting all kinds of discrimination. Thanks for your work.
Jeremy,
I did suggest that we might want to ask race and Hispanic origin Indianapolis. From about 10 years ago, I have been bringing up the issue as a possible question. (I have completed over 50 studies for federations). In a place like NY and SF, it definitely needs to be asked. And we will ask it in the NY study that will be done after COVID-19.
A generally good rule in survey research is that one asks questions because we do not know whether something is 1% of the population, 10%, or 20%. Not to find out whether it is 1% or 2%.
In the case of Indianapolis, we decided not to ask because it was the feeling of everyone that the percentage of either group (race, Hispanic) was almost certainly less than 2% and probably close to 0%. Asking a question of 800 people to find out that 3 are Jews of Color does not make sense. This would come out 0.4%. If we find 6 JOC, it comes out a 0.8% which is within the margin of error of 0.4%. So the question is probably not worth asking for that reason.
Next, even if we got REALLY surprised and we got 15 JOC, 15, as you know is not enough responses to analyze for just about any reason.
Accuracy is important. It does make a difference if there are 420,000 or over 1 M. If, for example, a JOC effort to put together a mailing list get 40,000 people and that is out of 420,000, it is much more successful than if it is out of 1,000,000. We also need some idea of the geography of this population so programs can be run and efforts concentrated.
I am fully aware of the issue of watching our own biases. I teach a course on Research Methods from a sociology text. If anything, my bias would be toward a larger number. But that is irrelevant. The numbers are what the numbers are. To address the needs, we need the facts.
Thank you for your comments and I hope all is going well in Indy!
Ira
Jennifer,
All of the studies that I have done for federations are attempts to collect data to better serve the population.
Many questions get asked about disabilities. If you go to http://www.jewishdatabank.org and go to local studies and the latest Detroit questionnaire, you will find those questions, about both adults and children. In communities with large elderly populations there is also a battery of questions on ADLs. In communities where race/ethnicity is asked, intersectionality can be analyzed, but in many cases, the sample would probably be too small.
Thanks for your comments. Ira
I appreciate the measured responses here and hope they will be convincing for those who tend to discount emotional ones. Like this. I am incensed to see this piece here and would make a case that as written that even in a more narrow professional forum this article proved more about what voices are missing than anything about demographics. Jews of color are not the subject of Jewish sociological analysis but the authors of Jewish life. Where is that authorial voice? Is there no one else who can think through an article entitled “How Many Jews of Color Are There” than two men, neither of who after among that number? And yes, the authors here do show there bias in the way they take for granted that many Hispanic Jews cannot be counted because they are Ashkenazi. So Jews are not White™ but White passing Jews are not People of Color? Again, even if this work us deemed appropriate in a particular context, it had no business being put forward here.
Ravbernstn,
Thank you for your comments, although I am not all that certain what some of them mean. I will respond to a couple of points that I do follow.
We did not say that Hispanic Jews who are Ashkenazi cannot be counted as JOC. Quite the opposite. Our point, and I live in Miami so I do have a feel for this, is that many Jews who would answer YES to the Hispanic question would answer no if you asked them if they consider themselves to be Jews of Color. Within reason, people can identify with the groups they want to identify with.
You state your concern that two men would address this issue. I will assume you meant “white men” since i do not know what gender has to do with it. I am not certain why being a white male should mean we cannot do research on JOC. (I am not Hispanic, but have done some research on Hispanics.) This is not an advocacy piece, but a piece looking at demographics. The Jewish Field Building Initiative (a JOC advocacy group) was the one who commissioned the report with the 12-15% figure to start with. So numbers must be of interest to advocates. But, I agree we should see articles on this topic by JOC and, in fact, there have been quite a number recently.
We are advocates for Jews of Color ourselves. We wrote this article so that the community uses correct data. In the article we state (not in these words) that whether the number is 6% or at least 12-15% that even one person who feel uncomfortable in a Jewish setting is too many. We give the names of four JOC advocacy groups, We praise the Miami Federation.
Thank you again for your comments. I have made a number of comments to others above that you might want to read.
Ira
Ira, I have to provide one more reply, and then I have to stop. Try to hear what you are saying through the ears of a Jew of Color in a place other than San Francisco or New York City.
To me it sounds like you are saying Jews of Color really only matter in San Francisco or New York City because they are outliers everywhere else.
From my experience, Jewish orgs know their donors best and are fairly blind to people who fall outside that constituency.
I am trying to make a point on the local scale where demographic studies are being used to set agendas and programming priorities, not just at the national scale. Whether it’s one person or a hundred people or a million people, when one scales down these Jews of Color are often ignored and not included in planning priorities. Demographic studies can help change that, and while accuracy is important, it is not the end.
Jeremy,
Jews of Color matter wherever they are and should be welcomed wherever they are. It is just that a survey question in a place where Jews of Color are almost certain to be a REALLY small percentage of the population is not going to yield useful information. Survey research has significant limitations. The limitations of a research technique are unrelated to whether or not a group should be considered, etc.
Professors —
I see that you have been answering comments here, which is honorable of you. So, my thoughts, for what it’s worth:
You most certainly know more about the science of Statistics than I do. But why this article in this forum? This isn’t “ejewishdemography” or “ejewishstatisticalmodels” — this is a blog about Jewish philanthropy. Given that you’re writing on such a blog, of course readers assume that you are cautioning funders not to “overspend” on initiatives that serve Jews of Color. Even if that wasn’t your intention, how could you not have anticipated that outcome?
Those of us who are white, Ashkenazi Jews need to consider how our words and actions are going to impact Jews of Color — who are most certainly doubly-targeted in the United States in 2020. You write “it is more than unfortunate if even just one person is made to feel uncomfortable in a Jewish setting.” Your piece, appearing in a forum intended for a general Jewish readership, has done just that.
Jews of Color should feel confident that the organized Jewish community celebrates their participation and inclusion in American Jewish life. Perhaps you could write another piece grappling with your struggle to do that? I imagine that would be incredibly valuable coming from scholars such as yourselves.
Kol tuv,
R. Mike Rothbaum
Acton MA
Rabbi Rothbaum,
Thank you for your comments. ejewishphilanthropy has always printed lots of articles about issues not directly related to philanthropy. I would have to ask Dan Brown, but i think it probably started out as a website only about philanthropy, but for years it has been covering all kinds of issues. The reasons it went to them are twofold: 1) We have an arrangement with ejewishphilanthropy to publish some short pieces based upon chapters in the American Jewish Year Book. In fact we have one on the number of Jews in the US and another on the Jewish vote that are almost done and will probably be published this summer. 2) Just last week they published another article that stated that “at least 12-15%” of American Jews are Jews of Color. Since we very much believe that that number is wrong, and we are professional social scientists, we have a responsibility to correct it.
We are not cautioning anybody about anything. We are simply stating facts. Note that we also give the names of several Jewish organizations that advocate for JOC and we praise the Miami federation for their efforts at inclusion.
I have no conception how anything we wrote would make a Jewish person feel uncomfortable. We stated some facts and basically said that that should not matter to how the community proceeds in terms of inclusion. Whether there are 400,000 JOC, or 1 million does not matter in terms of how we treat one another.
If you have been following the Jewish press and Internet, you would have seen that there have been a multitude of articles about the inclusion of Jews of Color over the past couple of years.
I only write about things about which i have some significant expertise. That includes statistics and demography and not “another piece grappling with the struggle to do that”? Many people with much more expertise in institutional behavior will write such pieces.
I repeated the argument that the Jewish Field Building Initiative commissioned a study to get a number. If it was important enough to advocates to get a number, then it is important that the number be correct.
Thanks again for your comments.
Ira
Ira:
Be honest: Would you have felt it such a necessity to publish this piece if your research had, instead found the opposite? That JOC account for 20-30 percent of the population? I doubt it.
The reason I doubt this is that your wording about who the increasing numbers of Jews of color are made of not-so-subtly suggests that you don’t think of most JOC as ‘real Jews, e.g.: “Nevertheless, as intermarriage continues among American Jews at high levels, as Jews adopt children who may be “of Color,” and as non-Jewish persons of color decide to identify as Jewish, the share of Jews of Color in the American Jewish population is likely to increase.” Can you imagine how an adopted POC raised by Jewish parents—someone who’s raised Jewish, with a Jewish identity—might feel reading that? Or how JOC children of intermarriage might feel seeing that? (You also assume that the Jewish partners in said intermarriages are white….)
Ultimately, the point of your piece isn’t to provide ‘accurate’ numbers; it’s to undercut the increased attention and resources JOC have (finally!!!) been given by mainstream communal Jewish institutions. Anyone can see through that.
By the way, I’m one of the folks in the photo at the top, and I’m not feeling happy about having that photo of us attached to this rubbish.
Aaron Chandler
As one of several pieces that ran in ejewishphilanthropy recently, our May 6, 2020 op-ed Yes. Safety, Respect and Equity Count in a Pandemic used the 12-15% estimate for Jews of Color. What stuck out for me in this May 5, 2020 op-ed How Many Jews of Color Are There? was the phrase “it is more than unfortunate if even just one person is made to feel uncomfortable in a Jewish setting.” At its core, this piece highlights a disagreement between demographers over percentages. What is problematic is not the numbers, it is the frame of that one uncomfortable person. This issue is not about just one person and their “comfort”. It is about all of us. It is about how safety, respect, and equity and the lack of them play out each day, in the differentials of health outcomes, incomes and more. Let us just agree on this: We have a vibrant, significant population that identify as Jews of Color in this country, and even more families, including my own, who identify as multiracial Jewish families. Who gets to decide their value and how that value is calculated? Surely our value as a people does not lie in surveys. These should be tools to help us be the best we can be, not go backward. Perhaps the best outcome of this piece is the outpouring of affirmation from communal leaders, funders, and white allies that Jews of Color matter now more than ever.
Elana Wien, Executive Director
Safety Respect Equity Network
Aaron,
Of course we would have published it if the JOC accounted for 20-30% of the Jewish population! Absolutely!!!
We neither like or do not like the results of a study.
We do not publish or not publish because of the result of the study.
We did not do the research that resulted in the 6%. The Pew Research Center did. They are one of the most respected research centers in the world and, in the area of research about religious groups, they are probably (with the PRRI — Public Religion Research Institute), one of the top two research centers on the topic of religion.
All we have done is to publish a figure which the original report on Jews of Color ignored, for reasons unknown.
Aaron, we certainly do not wish to undercut the increased attention. We named four Jewish organizations that advocate for JOC and we praised the Greater Miami Jewish Federation for the actions they have taken.
As to calling this work rubbish, please write to the Pew Research Center and let Alan Cooperman know you think it is rubbish. As to your using a word like that in what should be an intellectual discussion, please write to yourself.
Thanks for your comments.
Ira
Ellen,
Thank you for thoughtful comments. JOC are an important group and I agree that the affirmation of this importance is one good outcome of this discussion.
Whether there are 400,000 or 1 million, the Jewish community needs to address this group!
Apparently, the Jewish Field Building Initiative thinks the number is important and that is why they commissioned a study. If they feel the number is important, then the number should be correct.
If there is a study out there (Pew 2013), done by probably the most prestigious religion research group in the country that says the % of JOC is 6%, why did this study not at least report these results, even if they thought that at least 12%-15% is correct?
Ira
The article criticizes the 12-15% estimate put forth by “Counting the Inconsistencies” (CTI). That estimate is largely based on estimates by the American Jewish Population Project (AJPP), while yours are largely based on the 2013 Pew Survey.
Both your article and CTI seem to be basing the estimate of the fraction of Jews of Color on estimates of the fraction of American adults that identify as Jewish by religion, and also identify as something other than white non-Hispanic.
AJPP estimates that number (white non-Hispanic) to be 88.7% in 2019, 88.9% in 2015, and 89.1% in 2012. Pew estimated the fraction to be 95% in 2013. The difference is beyond reported margins of error.
This article ignores the discrepancy, making it impossible to evaluate its conclusions. Why should one believe the Pew numbers over the AJPP numbers?
AJ,
Thank you for your comments.
Why believe Pew?
Pew DOES interview both Jews by Religion and Jews of No Religion. AJPP is a meta-analysis of tens of surveys not done for the purpose of estimating the Jewish population, but are simply surveys that happened to ask a religion question. So, they miss Jews of No Religion.
Next the AJPP analysis says there are more Jews in NC than CT. It says there are 14,000 Jews in Arkansas, a state with 2 synagogues and a Chabad. The American Jewish Year Book’s number of 1,725 (which as one of the editors I can tell you is almost certainly wrong), still has to be closer to the truth than AJPP.
The Pew Research Center is probably the number one place in the world for research on religion and everyone says that the Pew 2013 study is the best study done of the American Jewish community. They spent a lot of money on this and the 6% checks out with other surveys they have done of people of color.
Now, let’s think about the following: If 15% of American Jews are Jews of Color, that means that 1 out of 6 Jews in this country are black, Hispanic, or Asian. Does that really seem likely to you?
So, yes 6% seem much more likely that “at least 12-15%.”
If you take the statistical margin of error into account and concede that perhaps Jews of Color were less likely to participate, it might be 8%, but it is NOT “at least 12-15%”
Thank you for your interest in our work
Ira
Dear Professors Sheskin and Dashefsky: Thank you for this thoughtful and illuminating look at Jewish demographics. Unlike many of the commentators, I wish to publicly state that I stand with accurate data- period.
What we do with that data is the realm of morality and policy, and it’s a shame that those attacking you probably know that but feel they have to take a stance against a straw man that you never argued. It’s sad to me that in the year of the American census, which is so important to get right, people are attacking demographers rather than looking at what we can do together for our suffering community.
Ira,
You conclude that the estimate of Jews of Color accounting for 12 – 15% of the American Jewish population occurs in part “as non-Jewish persons of color decide to identify as Jewish.” Yet, you present no evidence of this being an actual thing. Do you believe there is also a sizeable percentage of non-Jewish Whites who decide to identify as Jewish? If anything, it would seem more likely that non-Jewish White would “decide to identify as Jewish. After all, whereas a Jew of Color is likely to have someone question his or her Jewishness, a non-Jewish White who decides to identify as Jewish faces far less scrutiny.
Jeff Reiser
Jeff,
Both non-Jewish whites and blacks can decide to be Jewish. I do not think anyone has any data of Jews-by Choice by race. We were listing 3 ways the number of Jews of Color can increase. Certainly, simply converting out of conviction is one way, regardless of race.
Ira
Ira,
I’ve never before heard a Jew by choice identified as “a non-Jew who decides to identify as Jewish.” Your wording classifies a Jew by choice as a non-Jew. Perhaps that is not your intent. But please recognize that is what you have done.
Jeff Reiser
Jeff, will all due respect, that is only the case if one is looking to criticize and i hope your not and have simply misread: by becoming a Jew by Choice of course the person is no longer a non-Jew!
Ira
Ira –
In your response to Jeff, you allege that his response was only possible if he were “lookimg to criticize.” Don’t be disingenuous.
Your entire piece is reminiscent of the view of TERFs—trans exclusionary radical feminists—that transgender women aren’t ‘real’ women. You don’t view Jews-by-choice as ‘real’ Jews. Why else would you use the phrasing of “a non-Jew who decides to identify as Jewish” instead of “a Jew-by-choice”? And, similarly it seems, you don’t view most Jews of color as ‘real’ Jews.
Others in this comment thread are giving you too much respect here. Your work is intentionally harmful. It’s hurtful – not just to the community of Jews of color, but to us Jews of color individually. And, therefore, it’s absolutely rubbish, which is a much kinder way of putting it than the thoughts that crossed my mind when originally reading your piece.
Aaron
Aaron,
Not at all sure how you know from one phrase how I view Jews-by-Choice. There is a time order in my original words in my response. And I do understand that words matter. How about if I said: “a non-Jew who was a non-Jew, but now, either through formal conversion or not, is a Jew.” Help me here. Is this wording OK? (To me, just using the phrase Jew-by-Choice implies the person is a Jew. Seems to me that that is what the phrase means.)
The only problem with my response is that it should have read “you’re” and not “your.” (It was 4:45 am when I wrote so hopefully I can be forgiven this error in grammar!)
As to not accepting Jews of Color as real Jews, you also have no basis for that statement. The Pew Research Center is the one who published the 6%. I just cited it. Doing so does not make anyone a racist, Just a social scientist. As I have said before. Had I corrected the 12-15% to 20% would you be praising me? I would neither want nor expect praise. All we did was report data from what probably is the most reputable outfit in the country doing social science research on religion and ethnicity.
Just as an FYI, because I REALLY do not need to defend myself against baseless charges, I bring up the following with significant trepidation that you will misinterpret my words. I was raised during the height of the civil rights era. One of the first songs I probably sung (after Old MacDonald) was “We Shall Overcome.” I remember very early in my life when my mother told some guy who had a petition to keep a black family from moving on our block to get the hell out of our house (and in that era, my mother never cursed). In a lifetime of activism, I have always stood for social justice and acceptance. In 50 years of teaching and research as a social scientist, I have always tried to advance social justice and acceptance. Dr. Dashefsky because of the nature of the courses he teaches, has done even more of this than I. A few years back my wife and I made a special donation to the Jewish Federation of $5,000 to assist an Ethiopian Jew in Israel to go to college. You should probably think about thinking a little harder. So not only do I accept JOC as “real Jews” I love diversity. I praise diversity. I do not know you and you do not know me, so perhaps you should think about not judging people so harshly.
Please stay healthy during these difficult times.
Ira
excellent article – thank you
I read this article thinking about the thousands of Mizrachi Jews living in the US who identify as Persian Jews, Syrian Jews, Iraqi Jews, Morrocan Jews, etc. I also thought about a recent discussion I had that even Ashkenazi Jews originated in the Levant. More than 1/2 of the Jews in the world live in the diaspora. Many are what some would refer to as “people of color”. Are any of us, even we Ashkenazi, actually not originally “people of color”? Not being a social scientist, I might see it differently. But living in Israel, I really do not see any of us as anything other than non-white, or as is used in some circles in the US, persons of color. Also, agreeing with other commenters, it was concerning that Jews who had converted to Judaism seemed to be disrespected. Another Israeli perspective, we are seeing many Jews who had converted who are African American making aliyah or considering it. Maybe because the comfort and acceptance level here is higher.
Wow. After reading these comments it occurs to me that when we wandered the desert for 40 years the promised land could have been a 10 minute walk…but then we managed to nit-pick one another.
After centuries of being marginalized, persecuted and nearly eradicated we have interchanges like this. Anyone who asks what kind of Jew you are should be ashamed.
Today in 2020 we have a moment in history to show our compassion and strength and this is what we discuss?
We didn’t ask a question about color “because we knew the answer” is why many Jews reject the historic way of engagement.
Fearlessfundras,
Thank you for your thoughts. I too have other things to do. All we did was lay out some facts. Virtually no one is talking about the facts.
If you ever serve on a demographic study committee for a local Jewish community study, you will understand the difficulties in selecting among questions and why some communities do not give high priority to race/ethnic questions.
In the vast majority of communities, we do not ask if anyone is an Israeli, but that does not mean that the community does not care about Israelis!
Thanks again for your interest in our work.
I am an Iranian Jew. Maybe like some of the Hispanic Jews you are referring to, I always thought of myself as being white. My children and many of the younger Iranian Jews I know do not think of themselves as white people. They see themselves as a Jew of color. We Jews need to stop thinking of ourselves as an insular and white group–to realize that the Ashkenazi standard is not the only one. I know you simply wanted to put out accurate data. Instead, you have provided an interpretation of data that for many, reinforces an idea of us being a closed community. The concern is that by not contextualizing what you presented, it helps to create a feeling of other for those already within the community and a barrier for entry for those who might want to join the community.
Ira –
Thank you for responding to comments. I will admit that I’ve only been skimming what has been written in the past 48 hours. However, in your last response you wrote “In the vast majority of communities, we do not ask if anyone is an Israeli, but that does not mean that the community does not care about Israelis!” Most Israelis in the US do face structural oppression in the form of assumptions that all Jews are white, or white supremacy that is inherent to much of American society. This difference is, in my opinion, critical in understanding the broader context of your data and this conversation.
– Becky
Caroline,
Thank you for your comments.
I do not think we interpreted anything. In fact your first statement, that some Hispanic Jews would consider themselves to be of color and others would not is just the point. I do not tell people what they are. And I used Hispanic Jews as the example because living in Miami, this is a group i know!
When you have 1000 words and you are already at 1100, you cannot contextualize everything. If i wrote a long chapter on the issue or a book, your criticism would be right on target.
We wrote this piece to bring attention to the issue and to correct some data that are clearly incorrect.
Again, thanks for your comments.
Rabbi Silverstein.
Thanks for your follow up.
I was accused of not caring about JOC because we do not ask questions about JOC in the vast majority of my studies. I will have another op-ed next week in which i deal with this issue.
Note that there are two issues here. 1)A national number (6% vs 12-15) and 2) problems inherent in local Jewish community studies and one has little to do with the other.
So, stay tuned. Briefly, federations decide what questions go on a questionnaire, not the researchers. I was accused of not even thinking about asking race. Such is not true.
Again, thanks for your comments.
Ira
Ira –
Thanks for your response. I want to correct a typo in my comment. I intended to write “Most Israelis in the US do NOT face structural oppression in the form of assumptions that all Jews are white, or white supremacy that is inherent to much of American society.
I hope to read your next piece.
Becky
Rabbi,
That makes a lot more sense!
Hopefully we will get toward a Jewish community that makes everyone comfortable.
Dr. Sheskin:
Your brief piece addressed a reasonable question and employed a fair tone, including emphasizing the need to support members of our community who might feel marginalized. Perhaps most importantly, your responses to the article’s comments have been timely, detailed and kind. Thank you for elevating, rather than debasing the discussion.
Two (admittedly unsolicited) pieces of advice. First, it may have helped to critique, in brief, lay terms, the methods of the “Counting the Inconsistencies” study and argue why their estimate was off. Presenting the lower estimates from other studies put the focus *on* those other studies, leaving the suspect estimate unchallenged. A few years ago, I was involved in another city’s Jewish demographic study that found an alarmingly/dubiously high prevalence of Jewish poverty. Careful review of the methods, however, suggested why the estimate was biased. It may be helpful to do so here as well.
Also, dismissing the prevalence of JOC in New York City and San Francisco as “special cases” may have been a bit off. Together, these cities represent a significant proportion of American Jewry. It may be more accurate to conclude that the proportion of JOC likely varies significantly by community and that we should not shy away from thoughtful, critical discussions of how best to understand them.
In any event, thank you for raising this issue and your patience in acknowledging we can better address it.
Kenny Steinman
Columbus, OH
Kenny,
thanks for your comments.
The Counting the Inconsistencies study did not really do any research other than look at existing reports. They used a number from a report from the American Jewish Population Project. The AJPP looks at (and kind of averages-technical terms is a meta-analysis) the results of dozens of surveys done by governments, private research firms, universities, etc. that ask questions on race and ethnicity. Problem one: they only interview Jews by Religion since all these survey only ask a question like “What is your religion if any? To get an accurate account of Jews, a survey has to include a question that says “Do you consider yourself Jewish for any other reason?” This gets you both Jews by Religion and Jews of No Religion as does the Pew Research Center. Without both groups you cannot get an accurate picture. Second, the AJPP indicates 14,000 Jews in Arkansas. Given information from the Little Rock Federation, there are less than 2,000 Jews in AK, which makes sense since there are only 2 synagogues with rabbis in the whole state. As a second example, they estimate 118,000 Jews in NC, more than in CT. (According to my study of Jews in Charlotte in 1997 , there were 12,000 Jews.) There are other small communities. Even allowing for significant growth in Charlotte since 1997, 118,000 Jews in NC makes little sense.So the AJPP survey has some issues. So i have little trust in “at least 12-15%”
Now, the Pew study was a random digit dial survey (RDD) by the top research outfit for research into ethnic, racial and religious groups. RDD was the gold standard for survey research in 2013. They get both Jews of No Religion and Jews by Religion. The Jewish community has been using the results of this study since 2013 when it came out. It says 6%. Could that have gone up by now to 7% or maybe even 8%, perhaps. But an increase to 8% would be that the number of Jews of Color grew by 33% in 7 years. No population is going to do that.
So, 6% is clearly closer to the truth than “at least 12-15%.” Also, keep in mind that 15% means that almost 1 in 6 Jews in the US are Jews of Color.
NY and SF have, combined about 1.8 M out of about 7M, which is about 25% of Jews. And they are different. In fact, the reason i reported the percentage JOC in those communities is because i am not dismissing them. As an academic, i have a responsibility to present all relevant data whether it agrees with my position or not. (The Jews of Color report did not report the 6% from Pew even though they clearly knew about it since they listed it as a source for their study.)
As a geographer, my specialty is how things vary from community to community.
I think the majority of the comments are addressing the same issue: In this neoliberal era the values of counting, measuring, standardizing, and monetizing everything have led to a devaluation of the beauty, intelligence, and richness that cannot be measured and monetized in our communities/culture locally, nationally and globally. We have seen nothing good come of these efforts to say that what can be measured and monetized is what count, so we are offended to watch another well-educated Jew create another study that reinforces everything positioned to marginalize once again the most hope-inspiring Jewish values of love, humanity, and acceptance. Again, the point is that we see no worth goal to which your study can contribute. We are saying, “Use your good brain to do something to help us address the non-sustainability of our current social and environmental practices which are dominated by measuring, standardizing, and monetizing.” Most interestingly to me, you, yourself, propose no good use of any kind for this data, and further, you even point to its instability. And while you thank contributors for their comments, you give no indication that you can hear anybody who points to the importance of Jews facing our racism, collectively and individually, and how your study can be interpreted to de-value this necessary facing, whether such de-valuing was your intention or not. This is what people mean when they charge you with defensiveness. Stop for a moment in justifying what you are doing and hear the many people who are explaining to you how your work is likely to be used in damaging ways. Then name for us the good uses you foresee and let us weigh the relative worthiness of our lists!
Barbara Regenspan, Ithaca, NY
Dear Ira,
Thank you for taking the time to respond to the comments. Beyond the many valid concerns raised by others in this thread, I would like to raise a concern about your lack of mention in the op-ed and subsequent replies about the AJPP estimate of 11.3% Jews of Color, considering AJPP looks to be the most recent and most accurate source for a national estimate. Their estimate doesn’t seem too far off from the 8% upper bound you say Pew estimates in their study that was conducted 7 years ago, so I’m not sure why you couldn’t see that increase as plausible, especially considering AJPP’s estimate certainly has confidence intervals as well.
As you claim to be focusing on methodology… why, specifically, do you think the AJPP methodology would lead to an overestimate of Jews of Color? I’m not sure what AJPP’s North Carolina, Connecticut, and Arkansas Jewish population numbers have to do with anything (though even your students should be able to point out that the confidence intervals for North Carolina (94,500-132,900) and Connecticut (85,500-128,000) overlap, so the estimates are not significantly different). It also seems that you don’t trust AJPP because some state results don’t match with the population guesses of federations. I hope you realize that not all of Arkansas’s Jews are on the radar of the Federation, and that the staff of the Federation are not demographers. The AJPP lays out some reasons for the discrepancies that you’re noting though, and amusingly, it actually goes into great detail about the discrepancies in North Carolina https://ajpp.brandeis.edu/rdocs/2019/researchnote.pdf. Regardless, none of what you mentioned in the article nor your comments is a critique of their methodology that could likely result in an over-estimation of Jews of Color.
Actually, it seems that you didn’t bother to try to understand AJPP’s methodology at all. They do account for Jews of no religion and children using data from the Pew study and Jewish community studies (either way, you again don’t explain why having estimates for only Jews by religion would inflate rather than deflate their estimated proportion of Jews of Color). I would also have to disagree with your assessment that AJPP is a meta-analysis. A meta-analysis is defined as a statistical analysis of combining the results of studies, but AJPP statistically combines the *data* of 150 surveys, not their results (https://ajpp.brandeis.edu/aboutestimates ).
If you really think AJPP’s 11.3% estimate of Jews of Color is too high, please detail why the methodology would result in an overestimation. Until you do so, it would seem that you excluded AJPP from the op-ed because you don’t care to understand or properly critique their methodology. It also appears that you are dismissing all of their results outright, including their findings on Jews of Color, because they don’t align with your preconceived ideas (ie biases, see below) of the size of Jewish populations.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anchoring_(cognitive_bias)
Jacob
Barbara
Thanks for your comments.
First., if the numbers are not important, then why did the Jewish Field Building Initiative Commission a study, which if you think about it was unnecessary. Pew had just done one!
All we did was correct it.
As to your other comments, the American Jewish community has spent tens of millions of dollars doing studies over the past few decades. And lots of good has come out of it. Just as one example, NJPS 1990 eventually led to Birthright. There are hundreds of other examples out there both nationally and locally. That is why the DataBank has a couple of hundreds studies. Sorry, but you should probably give some further thought to this.
Finally, and this message is to most people above, stop attacking us for things we did not do. We had 1100 words. We were not writing a book. We were merely saying that 6% seems much much closer to the truth.
The state of Jews of Color in this country is a topic that needs more research and we hope to present research on this group in the 2020 AJYB.
Thanks for your comments.
Jacob,
While I have much admiration for some of the things that the AJPP has tried to do, i do not think they would agree that there meta-analysis type study is better than Pew!
Kelman’s estimate of “at least 12-15%” came from taking the 11.4% from AJPP and saying it is wrong and should be “at least 12-15%. You are assuming that the 11% is a more recent figure than the 6% from Pew. It is not. It is based upon data from dozens of surveys (averaged together) from the past couple of decades, I believe.
Yes, seven years later, perhaps the 6% should become 7% at the outside, 8% But 8% is 34% lower than 11% and half of the 15%
I bring up NC only because it shows that AJPP has some issues.
I know that AJPP do account for Jews of No Religion by adding in a factor for that group. That is relevant to their estimate of the overall population. The fact still remains that we do not know the race of even one person who is a Jew of No Religion. If you send me an email at isheskin@miami.edu, i will be happy to provide you with a much longer explanation.
We did not talk much about AJPP since Kelman’s estimate is 12-15% and that is the number that has been floating around the Jewish community, not 11.4%
Thanks for your comments. I do not think I answered all your points, but I have spent at least 20 hours this week on this issue and have other responsibilities.
Ira
Ira,
I do appreciate that you have engaged the comments. I understand that you have defended the premise of your article on the basis of the need to have accurate numbers. I am sure you are aware that in addition to the conversation here, your article has been greeted with a fair amount of criticism and that a large number of people including me have signed on to a letter making the broader point that the essential work of required in Jewish institutions is in ensuring the representation, participation, and leadership of Jews of Color, not dissecting the numbers. Without abandoning your basic premise there anything you would change or see differently after these responses?
I think the article about the number is being burdened by readers with too many projections, wishes that it be something else, or stand for some pole in an argument. Furthemore, if bias and prejudice are to mean anything, then something has to be relatively unbiased and unprejudiced. Wanting goes on in relation to facts, however sophisticated we might be about the construction of facts. Statistical accuracy/truthfulness is important and is involved in the identification of the very unequal impact of Covid 19. I think perhaps one thread in this argument is about liberalism, which is under attack from the urgencies of left and right populist methods. I subscribe, from my albeit comfortable position, to a view of the urgent necessity to defend and reassert liberal gains made over the centuries. These are a platform for going further. Striving for a measure of objectivity, even tho it is not fully realisable, is part of this, and to me means recognizing the relative neutrality of certain domains of facts, to be political about, such as this population’s drinking water is tainted. Why are there no answers to this article from passionate advocates of affirmative action welcoming the possibility of relatively neutral investigation into the number, rather than politicizing determination of the number? Is it always the case that liberal scientists are the ones who took the first step to politicization by not acknowledging it? That way lies madness and charges of fake news.
Rav.
If the petition is as you describe it, i would have no trouble signing it. I have received significant praise off-line from people who are afraid to say it online because they do not want to be treated as I have been. I shall be answering one more email here and then i am done. I have a life outside of answering comments
Mark,
Thank you for your comments.
This is the last comment that I am responding to. I want to thank all of the people who made comments, particularly those who actually addressed the contents of our original op-ed.
I sincerely hope that the Jewish community becomes a much more welcoming place to those of us like my daughter in law and grandchildren who, by the Pew definition, would qualify as Jews of Color.
Signing off. Thanks again. Ira