Has British Jewry been more influenced by Israel or by American Jewry? Whatever you think, what can’t be denied is that what goes on in the world’s largest diaspora community sends ripples across the Atlantic. So a new book on the state of US Jewry should naturally be of interest here.
Shattered Tablets is an eloquent personal exploration of American Jewish religion and politics by 30-year-old Joshua Leifer, a journalist and PhD student who is a contributing editor to the left-wing magazine Jewish Currents. A product of a religiously Conservative, Zionist day school and a pre-university mechinah programme in Israel, he is among a growing wave of young American Jews who, dismayed at Israel’s occupation of the West Bank and successive Gaza wars, have embraced a far more critical stance towards Israel than their elders.
Groups such as Jewish Voice for Peace and IfNotNow, if still relatively small, have been making their presence felt, reflecting a process of radicalisation sharpened by alarm at the 2016 election of Donald Trump.
Leifer points out that by the middle of the century Israel will comprise the dominant population of world Jewry and believes that Jews elsewhere have no other option morally than to reckon with it. He is unusual, though not alone, in combining his left-wing views with a halachically observant lifestyle.
He has a lot to say about different features of US Jewry. He admires the resilience of the Charedim whose success lies in resisting the lure of mainstream American liberalism, though he also has critical observations to make about their communities. Noting the institutional decline of the Conservative and Reform movements, he casts a sympathetic eye on some of the experimental ventures emerging on the religious left, though he worries that a tendency towards syncretism threatens to eclipse their Jewish character.
But one of the core arguments of his book is that the glue that held organised American Jewish life together during the latter part of the 20th century, Zionism, is crumbling. With the weakening grip of religion, Leifer observes: “American Jews imagined Israel as a moral beacon and Zionism as the secular fulfilment of the religious faith in which they could no longer really believe.”
The same could be fairly said of British Jewry. Zionism – or rather, pro-Israelism – was part of the civil religion uniting most of the community. But here too the cracks have grown. I remember the debate at the Board of Deputies ten years ago to admit Yachad, the group which campaigns for a two-state solution. It secured the necessary two-thirds majority to gain membership not because everyone agreed with its position but because many accepted that it would be counterproductive to exclude a group whose views had a following, particularly among the young.
Time has moved on and now we have begun to see groups to the left of Yachad, such as Na’amod or the Diaspora Alliance. Whether they have a seat at the Board matters less than recognising they now form part of the British Jewish scene.
Of course, important differences remain between UK and US Jewry – we have far higher Jewish day school attendance and a greater proportion of teens going on Israel tour, for example. But the trends that Leifer identifies in the USA are apparent to some degree here and the Jewish left seems destined to grow.
Grappling with the diversity of views over Israel is therefore increasingly likely to challenge Jewish leaders. Board of Deputies president Phil Rosenberg has taken a sensible line in focusing on areas of unity rather than division, such as campaigning for the release of hostages.
But the reality of division constrains his and other leaders’ room for manoeuvre. The Board and other organisations can hardly ignore the finding of the latest Institute for Jewish Policy Research poll that more than three-quarters of British Jews disapprove of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. (Contrast this with a JC poll in 2015: when asked who they would vote for in an Israeli election, two-thirds of UK Jews prepared to choose a candidate opted for Netanyahu.)
A divergence of opinions was evident a few weeks ago after the government suspended some arms exports to Israel. The decision was denounced by the Chief Rabbi, the Board and the Jewish Leadership Council.
But one big communal grouping did not join the chorus of criticism: Progressive Judaism. It mentioned that many members might be unhappy with the government’s policy but stopped short of endorsing a single view.
Instead, PJ’s leaders emphasised that acknowledging “multiple voices” was fundamental to Jewish tradition.
