Activism for Progressive Judaism: Can We Do Better?

About | Submissions | Contact

topics

Torah

Defining Reform

Jewish History

Jewish Living

Community

Social Action

Israel/World

Holidays

Shabbat

Lifecycle

Youth & Family

College Life

Books

BOOKS & MUSIC

Inside Intermarriage:
A Christian Partner's Perspective on Raising a Jewish Family
by Jim Keen
(URJ Press)

The Torah: A Women's Commentary
(URJ Press)

Union for Reform Judaism

Activism for Progressive Judaism: Can We Do Better?
January 21, 2009
Community | Israel | Social Action (5 comments)

by Russell Cohen
(Originally published on Russell Cohen's blog Cafe Birkenreis)
During the latter half of 2008, the WUPJ lent its support to two online petitions (e-petitions) on behalf of member unions. In both cases, the response from progressive Jews worldwide was less than rousing

In the first case, the IMPJ (Israel) attempted to gather signatures in support of the effort to achieve official recognition and a state salary for Rabbi Miri Gold, of Kibbutz Gezer in Israel. This is a potentially ground-breaking case, as a positive outcome would set the precedent for official recognition of progressive rabbis across Israel, and eventually lead to improved status for progressive Judaism as a whole.

In the second, the SAUPJ (South Africa) is attempting to gain access to the King David Jewish day schools network for Netzer, the Reform youth movement. The King David schools should be a resource for the entire SA Jewish community, but have instead been hijacked by the Orthodox majority there.

Progressive Judaism claims to be numerically the largest stream within Judaism worldwide. Progressive Jews are presumably largely computer literate, and have in the past overwhelmingly supported similar initiatives on behalf of anything from Climate Change action to the genocide in Darfur. Despite these factors, however, only 3,500 signatures had been gathered by end-November 2008 for the IMPJ e-petition (against a target of at least 10,000). In the case of the SAUPJ initiative, only 538 signatures (against a target of 500) have been received to date. In order to be truly effective, the first needs to be supported by tens, if not hundreds of thousand of signatories, while the second would have carried far more weight if endorsed by thousands rather than hundreds.

These results are disappointing, to say the least; perhaps even shockingly so. What went wrong with these two initiatives, and how can we ensure that future efforts receive the support they deserve from progressive Jews worldwide? To my mind, there are two factors to be addressed:

Attitude

I think we're seeing an example of the barber's children going with hair uncut. Progressive Jews have simply adopted so many causes, that there's no drive or energy left for causes closer to home. Charity doesn't have to begin at home, but it should also not be neglected.

Not neglecting our own issues is doubly important in the case of those relating to Israel. I believe that progressive Judaism will always be taken less than seriously, will always find itself in a defensive posture, until it receives official recognition and equality in the Jewish State.

We need to take the approach that "an injury to one is an injury to all", and simply not accept second-class citizenship or a lesser status for progressive Judaism anywhere in the world, but particularly in Israel.

Approach

To ensure an effective response to issues such as the two above, the initiative still needs to begin with a union (e.g. IMPJ, SAUPJ or URJ), but should then be adopted and coordinated by the WUPJ.

The issue and call to action (e.g. an e-petition) should be communicated to all progressive Jews worldwide, either by the WUPJ, the union, the congregation, or a combination of all three. The issue (including links to the appropriate online petition, donation page, etc.) should also be communicated through the official websites, blogs and e-newsletters of all these bodies. Members should also be encouraged to forward the material to their own "e-brigades" (we all have them).

Issues relating to privacy policies, etc., should be addressed by all progressive unions worldwide before the next such initiative, to ensure that no union is unable to support an initiative due to privacy or related concerns.

Such a combined "bottom-up" and "top-down" approach should prove more effective in both reaching and motivating the widest possible audience when these initiatives are undertaken in future.

In conclusion, progressive Judaism is facing many challenges, opportunities and threats worldwide. Where armchair activist tools such as electronic or online petitions can help us to meet those challenges, the WUPJ and all its member unions and congregations should present a united front and a coordinated approach.

Russell Cohen is a progressive Jew from Johannesburg, South Africa who writes and blogs under the pen name "Maskil".

RJ.org editor's note: The Union has solicited support for the cause of Rabbi Miri Gold in its Weekly Briefing, and we encourage you to visit the IRAC website to sign the petition.

Tags: IMPJ, Israel, Progressive Judaism, SAUPJ, WUPJ

Comment

Comments

Jordan Helfman said:

Don't want to be a detracting voice here, but I personally didn't sign either petition for two reasons:

1) I am not a citizen of either country, and while I feel that I have a responsibility to be active and vocal in my reactions to Israeli (more so than South African) policy, I feel that such petitions should be restricted to citizens of the countries as a way of representing their views to their government. Unless it is presented as a 'world opinion' petition, then it should be kept for citizens to show their displeasure with the status quo in their own countries. When elected officials receive such a petition, they should know it comes from their voting constituency.

2) I don't think signing such petitions really changes situations, and are a wasted internal PR efforts. They are more educational tools that teach 'Progressive Jews are not being treated correctly around the globe' (which, I'd argue is most true in Israel and many European countries), than tools that actually have a hope of changing policy. I hope I'm wrong on this, but I'd rather donate money to the struggling IMPJ and to its legal arm, IRAC, which is fighting the case in court, than sign my support.

In the end, petition-signing is emotional support - Donating money is real support.

January 21, 2009 3:34 PM

Larry Kaufman said:

I write as someone who has signed the Miri Gold petition, and who was not eligible to sign the SAUPJ petition.

Furthermore, my credentials include a strong commitment to and involvement in WUPJ and in ARZA, and membership in a congregation that "twins" with an IMPJ congregation and an FSU congregation.

I see the core of the problem that Russel Cohen articulates so eloquently as a failure to live up to the ideal that kol Yisrael arevim zeh lazeh -- all Israel is responsible one for the other. Particularly in the North American Reform movement, we focus so diligently on building our own congregations -- attracting members, and attracting those members to our local programs -- that we neglect teaching our adults and our children that they are part of a Movement, that that Movement is worldwide, and that for a variety of reasons, we have to lend moral, religious, political, and fnancial support to congregations in those parts of the world that lack many of our advantages.

As it happens, I spent an hour today with the chair of the URJ World Jewry Committee -- and I articulated my belief that creating relationships between congregations in the comfortable sectors of the Movement and those in the nascent territories for Progressive Judaism (Israel, FSU, Central Europe, etc.) helps the congregation that is ostensibly giving the help as much as the one that is ostensibly receiving it.

Our Judaism in Evanston IL is enriched when we better understand our kinship with our mishpoche in Simferopol and in Tzur Hadassah. We may send them a Torah scroll -- but they send us a Torah lesson. When we help paint the walls of the synagogue in Simferopol, we teach our congregants that our own synagogue is not contained within its walls. Yes, God may be in His Holy Temple, but He is not only there. (Side note: when we used to sing God is in His Holy Temple, nobody was conscious of gender neutrality.)

The Mormons understand the missionary business. Chabad understands the missionary business. but does YOUR congregation understand the mssionary business? Until we have taught our members that Miri Gold is not THEIR rabbi, she is OUR rabbi, our process of getting signatures on petitions will be difficult.

But we know the rule about difficulties. It is not incumbent on us to complete the work, but neither are we free to desist from it.

January 21, 2009 5:57 PM

BZ said:

I don't speak for anyone but myself, but I'm a progressive American Jew who didn't sign the petition, not out of apathy but because I don't want "recognition" for the progressive movements; I want separation of church and state. See http://mahrabu.blogspot.com/2008/05/nothing-in-streets-looks-any-different.html for my reservations about this.

But suppose 10,000 people signed it. What makes you think this would be "truly effective"? When have those who hold power over issues of religion and state in Israel ever been responsive to public opinion, particularly from outside Israel?

January 22, 2009 7:35 PM

Larry Kaufman said:

It's good to have BZ back in the discussion, and I urge whoever hasn't already done so to follow his link to his well-reasoned post on Mah Rabu. My inner idealist agrees with him; my pragmatic yetzer (inclination) does not.

Ben fails to distinguish between the best possible result and the best result possible. The Yozma example he cites -- a Reform synagogue funded with government money -- has been followed by three others, and the establishment of a precedent. Now it's time to extend the funding from buildings to rabbis, according to minhag hamakom, the custom of the place.

Even in the absence of the separation of religion and state, the Progressive movement in Israel has made substnntial progress, and has also eased the way for numerous non-aligned liberal worship groups. For now, evolution is happening, and remains more likely than revolution.

Ben also queries the effectiveness of non-Israeli voices in influencing Israeli policy. The prime example of its counting is the history of Who is a Jew.

And finally, like the proverbial chicken soup, even if signing the Miri Gold petition doesn't help, it couldn't hurt.

January 23, 2009 1:35 PM

Maskil said:

I thought I’d post a quick response to the comments thus far.

@Jordan Helfman. Your dissenting opinion is most welcome! As far as I can recall, neither e-petition was specifically limited to the citizens or residents of the affected country. The IMPJ petition was I think addressed to Israel’s president, while the SAUPJ was addressed the management of the SA Board of Jewish Education/King David Schools. Perhaps that’s one more reason why such petitions should be coordinated centrally, i.e. to restrict participation to certain countries in need?

I wholeheartedly agree that forwarded e-mail petitions are a total waste of time and effort. In both of these cases, however, proper online petitions were initiated by those closest to the action, and were endorsed by the respective unions and the WUPJ. For that reason I added my name to both. I share your reservations regarding armchair activism or “slacktivism” in general (i.e. where no actual time and effort or a donation is involved), but I didn’t see these efforts as falling in that category.

Because of my personal situation and our disastrous foreign exchange rate, making a financial contribution wasn’t an option. The support I was able to lend was in the form of blogging about the issues, and forwarding the calls to action as widely as possible.

@Larry Kaufman. Thank you for your contribution to the debate. I am gratified to hear that there is this kind of awareness and emphasis on activism, outreach and good old fashioned “missionary” work at your level in the ARZA, URJ and WUPJ structures.

@BZ. I’m a subscriber to your awesome blog; thanks for commenting on the issue. Believe it or not, I agree with you. The first prize would be a total separation between church and state in Israel. As a second prize, however, I would settle for equality between the various streams of Judaism within Israel, as far as personal status issues go, e.g. conversions, marriages, etc. That’s pretty much what I’ve been advocating on Altneuland and Café Birkenreis.

As regards effectiveness, I’m not expecting that the petitions will have any direct impact. What I’m hoping is that they will create a greater awareness amongst progressive Jews themselves, that it will mobilise Reform Jews everywhere behind these efforts. Secondly, I’m hoping that it will prompt Reform Judaism itself to flex its muscles and become the 900-pound gorilla it should be in the Jewish world. Lastly, I’m hoping that the powers that be (particularly in Israel) will start to take note of the support and momentum behind these efforts. For that to happen, however, we need tens or hundreds of thousands to lend their names to the cause. 10,000 (or 3,500) simply won’t cut it.

January 24, 2009 6:25 AM