November 2007

A couple of years ago, my roommate and I went hiking on Sukkot. Holidays are a great time to get out, and we saw many families enjoying the vacation and hiking, picnicing and swimming in our beautiful country. One family in particular caught my attention: along the decidedly unfriendly, bumpy, dirt path, they were taking turns pushing a wheelchair-bound family member up the mountain we were hiking.
Israel, unfortunately, is not a very wheelchair-friendly place. Many public buildings have no wheelchair accessibility, and certainly it would seem that hikes are, for the most part, off limits.

But all this seems to be slowly changing. Haaretz is reporting today that the Tourism Ministry is starting a new program to make dozens of tourist attractions in the country more accessible. This includes some beautiful nature reserves. Apparently a number of places are already renovated, like Gamla, a fortress renown for its INaccessibilty.

I know that in architecture, while Negishut  is a concern, it isn’t the same overriding concern as it is in America, where ADA regulations play such a large role. But there are a number of organizations and people who are trying to increase the importance of it here, including B’Maaglei Tzedek, who campaign to promote wheelchair accessibility in restaurants and wedding halls, and an old family friend of mine who frequently calls the Jerusalem city council to insert curb cuts into sidewalks so that wheelchairs can get onto the sidewalks.

When I was involved in Zionist education back in the Old Country, we used to talk about bringing our values here in certain areas to help improve the Jewish State. I think sensitivity to handicapped accessibility is definitely an area in which this can be applied.

Today the world press is full of pundits declaring the failure of Annapolis and the probability that nothing will come of the peace conference. Voices in the Arab press, the Israeli press, the American press all seem to share this view. At least we can all agree on this much even if we don’t agree on who to blame. All sarcasm aside, I do share this view in the near term, at least as far as any practical accomplishments are concerned. Having said that, Prime Minister Olmert and President Bush did accomplish something important at Annapolis.

For the first time since the founding of the modern state of Israel in 1948 all of the Arab countries sat around a table with Israel and talked about peace. They all acknowledged peace between the Palestinians and Israel as a goal to achieve. This is a far cry from the aftermath of the Six Day War and the statement of the Arab League summit in Khartoum in 1967 with it’s famous three no’s: “no peace with Israel, no recognition of Israel, no negotiations with it”. By attending the Annapolis conference the entire Arab world did give tacit, though not official, recognition of Israel and the fact that Israel is likely to exist for the foreseeable future. They also endorsed continued negotiation and a final outcome of peace.

Israel has been at war with at least some of it’s Arab neighbors for nearly 60 years now. The Jewish people in British controlled Palestine were attacked by and forced to fight the Palestinian Arabs for nearly 30 years before that. Change in the Middle East comes slowly among people with long memories and histories. It took 30 years for Egypt to decide to negotiate with Israel and reach a peace agreement. Another 15 years passed before Jordan made peace with Israel.

Every step, no matter how minute, is cumulative. The Arab nations cannot change the fact that they sat down at the table with Prime Minister Olmert. President Bush, no matter what the eventual outcome, can take credit for helping to make that happen. It may be a small step, a tiny accomplishment. I do not expect a peace agreement next year as called for at Annapolis. Still, the small step taken at the conference in the long run may be seen as very important indeed.

Bill Hess, the new President of the American Zionist Movement (welcome Bill!), points out in the comments that the Federations do a good job of raising money for important causes, but there are other paths for the innovative to become involved, and those paths are best represented by Zionism:

… Not every organization wants a check, a big check and only a check. Many of those other paths comprise the Zionist movement…Religious organizations by denomination, Secular organizations, Youth movements, Eco-friendly groups, Russians, women’s organizations and more all make up the American Zionist Movement…We need the federations and the system they have developed to generate support for our needs at home and those in Israel as well. We also need a Zionist movement to inspire us with a vision of Israel not yet complete and to invite us and our children to take our chelek, our portion, of that vision that is the “yerusha”, inheritance of every Jew.

You can read his full take here.

Zionism has always been a small part of American Judaism, though it has frequently been confused with Pro-Israelism. Nonetheless it has consistently provided a subversive counterweight to the American Jewish ideal of success: in the Land of Israel the self-sacrificing Halutz was the hero, in America the lawyer, doctor, or businessperson was the ideal.

The Zionist movement has always been about bold action, demonstrable facts on the ground, and making do with less. That’s a perfect recipe for fostering innovations that can prove themselves in the market before draining community dollars from the vital work being done by the national fundraising institutions. That is also one of the reasons we tagged our summer institute with the name “creative Zionism.” And the American Zionist Movement (along with the World Zionist Movement) got behind the summer institute for exactly the reason it got behind BoZ: Zionists must always be ready to look over the river in pursuit of the mission, whether or not the resources are in place. It’s that whole thing about sheer will converting dreams into reality.

Israel means a lot of things to a lot of people. For Jews it means a cultural and religious center, a haven, a historic and a national homeland. It means a lot to Palestinians too. And Muslims. And Christians of all denominations. But it also has historic meaning to dozens of other countries. Take, for example, the Turks.
The Jerusalem Post ran an article this month about how the there are plans in the work for a new Ottoman memorial here in Jerusalem. There are foreign memorials all over this country, so this in itself isn’t particularly surprising. But as in the real estate business, the most important aspect of a memorial is location, location, location, and the Turkish government has picked for itself a doozie. The memorial, which has already received approval from the Wakf, is to be abutting the eastern wall of the Old City, just opposite the Temple Mount.

“The intended memorial, which would be located several meters away from the Temple Mount on a 120-square meter plot, would be about three meters high and would be adorned by a Turkish flag.”
The plan has yet to be approved by Israel, though efforts are underway.
I understand that Turkey wants to commemorate the soldiers who died defending the Holy Land. I understand why they want to pick as nice a location as they can. I even understand that it’s a sensitive issue for Israel, because of our friendship with Turkey. But I’m not quite sure why a sovereign nation would authorize a memorial to a foreign army, let alone in such a prime location.

Over the past month, Aharon and I have traveled to over a dozen communities (in a dozen States!) in following with the old Zionist tradition of road-trip-stumping (it was in those days that a bunch of idealistic young activists would board a train, speed to a random community, get off, speak on the corner and spread ideas, argue, and then board another train to repeat until the idea had either spread or been altered).

Our tour, which we named “Invest in Value ‘07″ after the Haaretz op-ed we co-authored, was structured around this presentation.

It has sound, is less than 10 minutes long, and we look forward to your feedback.

On November 15, Ariel presented a way of thinking about the mission of the creative Jew at the Skirball center in New York about the idea of Creative Zionism — and specifically relating it to the weekly portion Veyetzei. In commenting on the passage where it is written that Jacob’s descendants will be as numerous as the dust of the earth, Ariel says:

How is it that the Eternal both promises Jacob – our namesake, the father of our dozen tribes – both the Land while in the same breath saying that the Jacob’s descendants will be spread upon the nations? The two seem at first glance to be in opposition to one another: a People once spread is far from the Land assigned, and a People spread rarely retain the cohesion to become, collectively, as a blessing to the Nations. Untold tribes have melted into the nations that currently populate our planet; hundreds of languages disappear every day. How is it, then, that Jacob’s descendents should be different? How can we remain eternally creative, eternally engaged in the task mandated by our covenant, as constant and as populace as the dust of the earth?

The story of Jacob’s dream suggests an answer: by being proud of our song, even when we are no higher than dust. As such, Jacob sees Angels climbing up before coming down—not descending from heaven, not singing in the sky-high choir. Jacob sees Angels rising up from the dust and providing the world with their blessing. That is the elemental work of the Angel – Angel, Malakh, meaning messenger or he-who-acts-on-behalf of. And how else can one act on behalf of the Eternal Creator than to be a creator, a world transformer, oneself?

Have a listen at the excellent Skirball Center for Jewish Learning’s “AfterWords” series website. You download the lecture online here to learn all about Creative Zionism in the PresenTense. Make sure to check out the previous AfterWords talks as well.

Daniel Septimus from MyJewishLearning.com commented on my recent post “Invest in Value” with the following important question:

I totally agree with the need to bring a more market-minded approach to the Jewish world. (I’ve always felt that there’s a big downside to trying to make things free for our generation, because we do, to a large extent, express what we value in monetary terms.)

That being said, won’t there always be worthwhile endeavors that the market alone will not be able to support?

Is self-sustainability the mark of success for all types of social initiatives or only a certain kind? Curious to hear your thoughts.

The question is fundametnal, and in thinking about what should be supported by the community regardless of sustainability I’d say that anything having to do with basic physical and spiritual needs should be supported under all circumstances. One could look at Maslow’s hierarchy of needs for some guidance here. But I’d actually spin it out to Jabotinsky’s “Five Mems” which, in my mind, cover the basics: mazon (food), maon (housing), marpeh (medical care), malbush (clothing), moreh (education).

Initiatives that are operating in the upper sections of Maslow’s pyramid should strive for sustainability as much as possible. I’m not disregarding the fact that certain cultural institutions may need philanthropic support or endowments over the long term–that’s fine, as long as they also show that the market really considers the product of that institution valuable. One of the best ways to prove that is to see if people will pay for the product.

I recently had the pleasure [sarcastic] of participating in a new phenomena occurring on university campuses throughout the United States, called Jewish Dialogues. It was sponsored by our campus Hillel and posed as a night of dialogue amongst fellow Jewish college students who would “for the first time” have the ability to discuss taboo issues affecting Jewish life in America without feeling like they are in a debate or in a yelling match. No, seriously, that’s how it was presented. You would think by the description, that it would be a night full of kosher pizza and healthy dialogue, and that we would be discussing the culture clash between Sephardic and Ashkenazi Jews and why Sephardim eat rice on Passover.

Much to my dismay, it turned out to be none other than an Israel bashing event. How silly I had been, to be so naive of what sounded like such a pleasant gathering, without checking any websites for background information. The room was filled with students and moderators, all of the type of new, generation-Y Jewish Americans that feel absolutely no connection to Israel, as there parents once did, and appeared to be the far-left liberal type who feel they hold the high moral ground, always. One of the many rants and raves I had to bear for nearly over two hours was the nonsense that the new generation of Jewish Americans, are far more concerned with, the rich Jewish tradition they hold so dear, “Tikun Olam” than caring for Israel, which they see as an evil, Nazi-like, occupying force which countlessly and systematically ignores human rights and geneva conventions.

Now there is absolutely nothing wrong with being critical of Israeli government and policies, and although far too may are quick to point and shout “Self-hating Jews”, on further examination it is usually Jews and Israelis specifically that are the biggest critics of Israeli government and it’s policies. On the contrary, free speech and open dialogue is great, but not at the expense of hate speech, telling lies they read in “The Israel Lobby”, or pretending that they somehow fall under the cloud of true Jewish values particularly “Tikun Olam”. When I asked the one gentleman how he felt about the Jewish value of Ahavat Israel, he simply shrugged his shoulders and said he never heard of that. Never heard of that?!? “Ahavat Israel”, loving your fellow Jews? What synagogue has this kid been going to? It all finally made sense to me when he threw in that he believed anyone who drives a car is a sick and twisted monster, and that he really did not believe in “nations”. So I guess he doesn’t really care that he lives in America, a country that for all its misgivings, has been able to provide a place for freedom of religion and speech, so that loons like him can go around to “Jewish Dialogues” and bash Israel in the name of a so called Jewish Tradition he read on B’Tselem’s website. Wise up kids. The fear is that he is not an individual case, but a growing epidemic and those of us who live in America need to do a better job at exposing the truth and advocating for the only country Jews have, Israel.

Ariel and I have been traveling the midwest and east Coast talking with federations and large Jewish organizations about “post-digital” Judaism. We’ve been pleased to find that most federations have excellent teams of young professionals working hard to attract a younger generation. We’re concerned though that the need to turn this younger generation into donors may be in fact hurting that very cause. Much of our point was that the federations should be focused on creating value for these up and coming community members, without attention to giving and gifts. Our arguments was that if they pursue such a course the giving will ultimately make sense to that younger generation, and have a much broader reach. The question that the federations should be asking every time they think about exciting potential young donors is “What value can the organized Jewish Community (and Judaism itself!) bring to this specific person’s life?” The answer to that will be the key to the checks, but more importantly the key to a Jewish Community that’s meaningful.
Apropos, have a read of this article we just published in Haaretz.

Tomorrow, Sunday, November 18, 2007, there will be a different sort of U.N. Conference. No, it’s not another conference by the U.N., but rather one about the goings on at the United Nations and it’s constant discrimination and bias against Israel. I received an e-mail from Anne Bayefsky of Eye on the UN (excellent website, highly recommended) about tomorrow’s conference taking place between 9 AM and 6 PM tomorrow at Millennium UN Plaza Hotel (44th and 1st Ave., New York City). A couple of relevant quotes:

A first-ever conference on UN discrimination against Israel has been organized across the street from UN Headquarters to coincide with the General Assembly’s annual adoption of more than 20 resolutions condemning Israel and not one critical of Sudan and its ongoing campaign of genocide in Darfur.

“The discrimination against Israel at the UN has long been an outrage and must no longer go directly unchallenged,” said conference organizer Anne Bayefsky, Senior Fellow at the Hudson Institute and Director of the Touro Human Rights Institute. “Under the banner of a UN Charter that requires the equality of men and women, as well as member states large and small, the Jewish state and Jewish non-governmental organizations are constantly subject to different treatment than all others.”

Highlights will include addresses from John Bolton, former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations; Congressman Thaddeus McCotter (R-MI) (Chairman, House Republican Policy Committee); Ambassador Max Kampelman (Presidential Medal of Freedom recipient); and Senator Norm Coleman (R-MN).

Yep, for the U.N. genocide in Sudan is barely worth a mention. Israel is forever condemned for occupation of the Palestinian territories while China never is condemned for human rights violations or it’s ongoing occupation and colonization of Tibet. Israel is under daily rocket fire from Gaza but that’s just fine with the U.N. I guess human rights don’t apply to people in Sderot, do they?

It’s about time a conference like this happens, but I fully expect most of the media, especially the left leaning media, to thoroughly ignore this conference. It was just two weeks ago that CNN, for example, decided to rerun of G-d’s Jewish Warriors”, their two hour attack on Israel and American Jews. They didn’t even bother with the other religions (Islam and Christianity) this time. Don’t we all know that there is a far greater threat to the world from Jewish extremists than Islamic terrorists? CNN seems to think so. Their bias and the perpetual bias at the U.N. go hand in hand.

So… it’s up to us, the bloggers, to spread the word.

— Next Page »