Prof. Sam Lehman-Wilzig: Anti-Semitism is NOT the Main Threat to Jews
Look straight at yourself in the mirror when you answer this tough question: As a Jew, if the country you live in were to completely outlaw ritual circumcision for baby boys, would you emigrate to another country that permits this?
If that question is too tough to handle, try this one: In the modern age, which of these two phenomena has caused more Jews to cease having any real relationship with their Jewish tradition: assimilation or anti-Semitism?
Each Jew has to look within themself to answer the first question (a Belgian legislator has suggested such a law: https://www.timesofisrael.com/us-ambassador-to-belgium-urges-nation-to-drop-charges-over-illegal-circumcisions/), but for the second one the answer is quite clear: assimilation.
To be sure, there are Jews who try to escape their anti-Semitic environment by camouflaging their background or immersing themselves in their gentile surroundings. This is especially the case where and when anti-Semitism is particularly virulent, constituting a threat to Jewish life and limb. However, other than the mid-20th century Holocaust period where millions of Jews perished at the hands of anti-Semitic governments (Nazi Germany and Stalin’s Soviet Union), in the past two centuries most Jews have been able to escape such killing grounds by emigrating elsewhere.
The largest such emigration occurred between 1880-1920, to the United States: approximately 2.5-3 million Jews, mostly from Eastern Europe (including Russia) to the United States (about 80%). America at the time was certainly no Jew-loving country; anti-Semitism was rampant. Jews suffered very little outright murder (indeed, some became professional assassins!), but most did experience heavy discrimination in many fields e.g., the reason some picked up from the East Coast and established “Hollywood” on the other side of the continent where few “whites” lived at the time.
These early immigrant Jews were overwhelmingly “Orthodox” when they arrived (again, most came from highly traditionalist Eastern Europe). Within two to three generations, however, the majority had moved “leftward” religiously: Conservative, Reform, and agnostically non-denominational. The next two generations continued the trend, but by then many – perhaps most – left Judaism behind as anything but some cultural or culinary vestige of their ethnic (not religious) past.
The central statistic buttressing this: intermarriage. Over the past 15 years in the U.S., roughly 72% of non-Orthodox Jews married a non-Jewish spouse (counting the Orthodox, the number is 61%, still a decided majority). Arguing that a number of these Jews continue to keep some traditions is beside the point. First, by Jewish historical and theological standards, marrying a non-Jew is considered a complete no-no (except when the spouse converts, a la biblical Ruth). Using a contemporary, secular criterion for “remaining Jewish” is not Jewish; it’s secular. Second, the next generation or two of the intermarried couples’ progeny will have little experience in Jewish practice or knowledge to guide them in remaining Jewish.
No matter how one wants to count “who’s a Jew” in assimilationist America (and Europe for that matter), the number of those ceasing any personal Jewish commitment are far higher than the number of Jews in western countries (post-World War 2) who have died as a result of an anti-Semitic attack. Thus, again, from a purely physical (life or death) standpoint, the second question that I raised above has a most definite answer: assimilation is a far greater threat to Jewish continuity outside Israel than anti-Semitism.
But perhaps anti-Semitism drives assimilation i.e., the threat pushes Jews to leave the fold? Certainly, there are some Jews who do exactly that. But the overall numbers display the exact opposite situation: as American anti-Semitism decreased through the 20th century, assimilation increased by leaps and bounds. If anything, outbreaks of anti-Semitism tend to push many assimilated Jews back to some form of Jewish traditionalism. Some examples:
- A 2020 Pew Research Center survey on American Jews found that those with less traditional observance reported anti-Semitism as being a significant factor shaping their sense of Jewish identity; indeed, 75% said that remembering the Holocaust and combating anti-Semitism are essential to their Jewish identity.
- In a 2018 survey of European Jews, the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights found that while they thought anti-Semitism had increased in their country, many asserted this reality had made them more aware of their Jewishness, with a concomitant renewed interest in Jewish history, customs, and community engagement as a response to their feeling threatened.
- The UK’s Institute for Jewish Policy Research found in 2020 that concerns about anti-Semitism led to increased attendance at Jewish communal events and greater involvement with synagogues and cultural organizations, particularly during times of heightened tension.
There’s a scholarly term for this phenomenon: “reactive ethnicity.” It states that when a group feels itself threatened by external forces, its members are more likely to emphasize the traits that feature their difference. It’s a form of resistance plus a way to cope with fear and uncertainty through a sense of shared struggle that enhances community bonds.
Of course, this is not to suggest that anti-Semitism is “good for the Jews.” It is not. But it does lead to a corollary question: if Jewish continuity is the ultimate goal, what is the best path to take? Put simply (maybe somewhat simplistically): should Jewish resources be funneled to fighting anti-Semitism or to reducing assimilation? The above analysis leads to only one possible answer: the latter.
What this means is that Jewish resources should primarily be poured into Jewish education and practice: subsidizing tuition from kindergarten through high school, strengthening college courses and Jewish-related departments (history, religion, Israel studies), finding ways to make synagogue attendance more attractive without eviscerating core Jewish practice, expanding communal activities with bona fide Jewish content, and the like.
The bottom line: anti-Semitism will not disappear; it is surely incumbent to utilize some Jewish resources to fight its most egregious expressions. However, paradoxically, it can also awaken a stronger sense of Jewishness among many who otherwise will continue to drift from their roots. Thus, the brunt of Jewish resources should go to reinforcing Jews’ positive connection to Judaism, as there is much to celebrate within the Jewish religion and culture. This will enable assimilating Jews to explore their heritage out of positive pride, and not merely as a reaction to hate. In short, we have to re-source where we spend our Jewish resources.
