Re-thinking Here and There: Diaspora Education in Israel

The Israeli educational system has historically affirmed the Zionist doctrine that Jews can only live a physically and spiritually secure life in the State of Israel, minimizing successful Diaspora Jewish communities like those in North America. Indeed, a 2005 report conducted by the American Jewish Committee found that only 14% of Israeli high school teachers said the topic of U.S. Jewry had been taught in their schools during the three years preceding the study. This thinking is still influential among many Israelis, but some are gradually favoring a greater understanding of American Jewry.

Michael Yaron, national supervisor for history at the Israeli Ministry of Education, says the Ministry plans to approve a new history textbook for 11th-grade students in the next six months. For the first time, the textbook will have a full chapter devoted to ties between Israel and Diaspora Jewry, much of which focuses on American Jewry.

The chapter begins with an explanation of different ways to view the connection between the two groups. While earlier generations saw no value in Diaspora Jewish life, the textbook explains, fewer Israelis hold this view today. The chapter gives Israeli students an overview of American Jewish life, explaining religious denominations and the problem of assimilation. Israeli and American Jewry are portrayed as being greatly dependent on each other from the establishment of the State to the present day.

In doing so, the chapter doesn’t shy away from presenting difficulties in the relationship. Most American Jews who aren’t Orthodox, the book says, are furious with the ultra-Orthodox monopoly on Judaism in Israel. It goes on to say that American Jews are often insulted when Israelis denigrate their legitimacy as Jews because they do not live in the Jewish state.

Including this new type of thinking—inherently a rejection of classical Zionism—begs an important question: why modify such a long-held ideology?

Dr. Shlomi Ravid, director of the School for Jewish Peoplehood Studies at the Diaspora Museum, says initiatives like the addition of a new chapter on Israel-Diaspora relations attempt to fill a void in Israeli ideology that has existed for some time. When millions of persecuted Diaspora Jews were arriving in Israel and the State itself was under constant existential threat, the classical Zionist claim that only a nation-state could protect the Jews was an influential ideology. Today, however, with most Diaspora Jews living in freedom and the State of Israel existing in relative security, the classical Zionist approach does not hold as much weight.

Globalization has also played a role in undermining classical Zionist thought. The allure of the nation-state in general, and the State of Israel in particular, lost much of its luster for the growing number of people who travel across the globe, often for long periods of time, with the possibility of instant communication. The nation-state’s demand for one loyalty to a particular country and piece of land simply does not fit the world in which many people operate today.

As a result of greater security among Jews worldwide and the forces of globalization, some scholars suggest that a new ideology called ‘Jewish peoplehood’ is gradually replacing the Zionist approach.

Researchers Dr. Ezra Kopelowitz and Ari Engelberg suggest that Jewish peoplehood rests on three principles: first, that any understanding of Jews today must be multidimensional. The Jewish religious, national, and cultural components all play a role in creating the collective we call the Jewish people. Second, and very much related, is the “rejection of a strong ideology”—no one element of Jewish identity can claim superiority over another. And third, Jewish leaders should focus on increasing the connection between Jews through group frameworks instead of promoting individual Jewish identity.

In a new volume entitled Jewish Peoplehood: Change and Challenge, Chancellor Arnold Eisen, head of the Jewish Theological Seminary, explains why this approach is right for our times.

“[P]eoplehood is probably the only concept that suits the present situation and meets present needs. ‘Nation’ and ‘religion’ are each in their own way too all-encompassing. They demand more than many Jews are willing to identify with in terms of belief or behavior…on the other hand, ethnicity and heritage are too narrow. They miss out on much of what makes Jewish identity attractive and even compelling for Jews.” In integrating different elements of Jewish identity and acknowledging the globalized world in which we live, Eisen says, peoplehood strikes the right balance.

Beyond the inclusion of the chapter in the new textbook, an Israeli awareness of peoplehood is spreading to informal education as well. In bringing young American Jews to Israel for 10 days, Taglit- Birthright Israel has had a major impact on Israeli youth. Since the program’s inception, almost 30,000 Israeli soldiers and students have spent time, usually around half the trip, with their American peers.

In bringing the two groups together to discuss their identities and get to know one another on a more personal level, Birthright is exposing the face of American Jews to Israeli young adults and emphasizing the Jewish ties that bind them together. A 2008 study conducted by the Cohen Center for Modern Jewish Studies about Israeli and American attitudes toward their interactions on Birthright found that 80% of Israelis said they somewhat or strongly agreed that the trip made them feel “part of the Jewish people worldwide.”

As peoplehood is an ideology inherently about bringing different groups together under the Jewish tent, recent peoplehood initiatives all emphasize inclusion and cooperation. Compared to the status quo where Jewish groups often try to separate themselves from other Jews, the focus on peoplehood is a heartening trend.

At the same time, peoplehood is not a “Kumbaya” ideology where all differences are swept under the rug in the name of unity. It encourages Jews from different places to question and debate. The textbook chapter, for example, asks Israelis to ponder many questions, including whether they benefit from interacting with Diaspora Birthright Israel participants and the extent to which American Jews should be involved in Israeli politics.

If peoplehood initiatives can maintain the right balance between inclusion and serious debate over the long term, perhaps peoplehood will become increasingly important to Jewish identity in Israel and beyond.