Opinion – Page 24

Multiple membership models

Years ago, I briefly served on a synagogue board and did some research into membership dues. Some congregations had flat rates. Others had scales according to income or age. Others had no set dues, members gave according to what they felt they could give, with the congregation merely offering suggested amounts. There are plenty of articles on this topic, and even a book by rabbis Kerry Olitzky and Ari Olitzky. Synagogues cost money to run: salaries, buildings and activities are expensive. If we want Jewish life to continue, we need to consider this because synagogues offer us education, community, lifecycle events and more. However, there is no one size fits all when it comes to membership models.

Just as there are many models for dues, there are different ideas about new members. Some congregations post their membership application forms online and indicate where to submit the finished paperwork. Others offer membership information via email or post when it’s requested. Still others insist that the potential congregant meet with the executive director to gain access to the paperwork or the requirements for membership.

My husband and I have moved a lot in nearly 25 years of marriage. That has included “shul hopping” within communities sometimes. We’ve formally belonged to seven congregations, and attended services at many other places. Our experience hasn’t been limited to one North American movement. Due to our families’ diverse affiliations, geographic limitations and shifting needs, we’ve been members at Reform, Conservative, Modern Orthodox and unaffiliated congregations. We joke, when asked, that “we get around.”

All this resurfaced while I read about Toronto Congregation Beth Tzedec’s recent experiment with membership. This congregation saw that members under age 40 paid only 5% of their total operating income. By waiving dues for members under 40, Beth Tzedec gained 900 members in eight months, according to a recent JTA article. This remarkable leap in membership shows just how much of an obstacle membership dues are for many younger Jewish people in Canada.

For years, when I joined a congregation in a new place, I was asked to join committees, lead services, teach, volunteer or provide other services. Only very rarely did any of these congregations ask first, “What can we do to meet your needs?” or “What are you hoping to gain from this experience?” While it sounds crass to see this as a solely “transactional” experience, it can be painful to spend a lot of money to support a place that sees no obligation to create a relationship or a meaningful experience with its new and/or younger members.

Few congregations have new members start by meeting with a rabbi or cantor or other engagement professional. The first interaction is almost always with an executive director who is essentially asking, “How much can you pay us?” While congregations almost always state that they don’t turn down anyone due to lack of funds for membership, in practice, many people are turned away. They’re turned away or turned off because they don’t even make the embarrassing first appointment where they must admit they cannot afford the full costs of membership.

We just signed on the dotted line at a big, established congregation because our twins are nearing b’nai mitzvah age. We’ve been regular synagogue attendees for years. We had asked about membership when I was pregnant and, at the meeting with the executive director, we felt as though we were being interviewed to join a country club. As older first-time parents, we saw the membership cost was delineated by age and we fell into a more expensive category. Our roof was leaking, we were expecting twins. Our decision was easy – we fixed the roof. Synagogue membership could wait.

Over the years, we briefly joined two other congregations to access their educational opportunities or community events. In the end, though, we faced the same process over a decade later, with a different executive director. He told us that no one was turned away. However, the paperwork indicated that, unless we paid the building fee plus membership dues plus b’nai mitzvah charge, we couldn’t have a lifecycle event at the congregation. That upfront cost was about 4% of our gross annual income, which is a large chunk of change. That’s before paying for a Kiddush luncheon or family celebration.

There’s no one answer to this challenge. Here are some ideas based on our anecdotal experience.

Make synagogue membership paperwork and financial information easily available on a website or via email. It shouldn’t be a secret, offered only in a face-to-face meeting with the executive director. This isn’t a good first impression. Potential members might also want to meet with a rabbi, cantor or other professional rather than the executive director.

Second, consider a membership model that provides multiple options based on income rather than age or a flat fee. There will always be older members who earn less income and younger people who can afford more.

Third, create an environment where members will not begrudge further donations. If the membership fee is a suggestion, and is affordable enough so that people can manage it, then a happy member may want to donate more money in the future. A supportive congregation and positive community experience is worth a lot! Members who sense that level of support are willing to pay for it.

Finally, recognize that many “middle-class” incomes don’t cover the cost of living the way they used to. Due to inflation, a professional who, for instance, works as a teacher or at a nonprofit may not have much expendable income. Find ways in which professionals might volunteer hours in lieu of part of their membership fees. Despite education and experience, these professionals have often been asked to volunteer for work in a Jewish context that one would have paid for elsewhere. They pay for membership that they perhaps couldn’t afford – for the privilege of also volunteering expertise.

We need each other for many reasons. Membership dues are not just for a minyan but also for the building where the minyan meets. Our tradition teaches us that every person is valuable, that embarrassment should be avoided at all cost, and that Jewish communities are essential. Synagogue membership models should reflect those teachings, too.

Joanne Seiff has written regularly for CBC Manitoba and various Jewish publications. She is the author of three books, including From the Outside In: Jewish Post Columns 2015-2016, a collection of essays available for digital download or as a paperback from Amazon. Check her out on Instagram @yrnspinner or at joanneseiff.blogspot.com.

Blood, tears and survival

When we think about Israel’s prominence now, with its population approaching 10 million, and its contributions in so many fields being far out of proportion to its size, it is sobering to recall its early beginnings, and its fragility, when it issued its Declaration of Independence 75 years ago.

On the day that Israel’s independence was declared, May 15,1948, forces from five Arab countries invaded to join internal resistance to Israel’s existence, which had begun in November 1947 with the United Nations declaration of the Partition Plan. The war continued until January 1949, through multiple calls for a ceasefire by the United Nations, as the Arab side saw their hopes for a quick victory reversed.

The government of Israel changed its stance during this time. Initially concerned only with preserving the UN Partition Plan, which involved non-contiguous pieces of territory, as its forces gained the initiative, it sought to establish borders having a greater chance of being more defensible in a hostile neighbourhood.

During the early period, Israel managed to establish the beginnings of a standing army, navy and air force, as well as a commando unit, assembled by bits and pieces from around the world. With unleashed immigration, available soldiery increased every day during the war period. As the war proceeded, every man, and every unmarried woman, in Israel over the age of 25 was eventually subject to mobilization. It has been said that the Jews’ secret weapon in the face of the existential threat they confronted was that there was no other place for them to go.

Many of the indigenous Arabs fled the country during the hostilities, sometimes at the urging of the invading troops, but there were also populations expelled, where Israeli forces faced hostility. Jews in the country had faced increasing violence from their Arab neighbours and, during the war, in areas occupied by Arab forces, particularly in the Old City, but also in the West Bank, there were Jewish residents who were summarily murdered.

Many of the battles were fierce and bloody, with substantial losses of people and material on both sides. Attacks on isolated settlements by Arab units were often aimed at overcoming the resistance of poorly armed residents living in strategic locations. The strength of their commitment to defending their homes often carried the day.

By the end of the struggle, more than 6,000 Israelis had been killed – one-third of the fallen were individuals who were survivors of the Holocaust. Estimates of the number of Arabs/Palestinians killed in the war vary from 5,000 to 10,000.

In the end, Israel retained its allocated portion under the partition and won some of the territory that had been ascribed to the Arab side by the UN plan. Israel withdrew from territories it still occupied in the Egyptian Sinai and in southern Lebanon when hostilities were ended by a ceasefire.

Israel inherited a de-facto Egyptian presence in the Gaza Strip and a Jordanian annexation of the Old City of Jerusalem, and what was ancient Judea and Samaria became the West Bank and under Jordanian control. These were a portion of the areas that had been allocated to the Palestinians by the UN Partition Plan. It was at great cost that control of West Jerusalem was retained.

Israel was attacked again in 1967 and in 1973, successfully defending itself and extending Jewish occupation in further areas that were a part of the country’s historic past, including the Old City and the West Bank. In the 1967 war, Israel seized and, in 1981, annexed Syrian territory, the Golan, high ground from which it was constantly being bombarded.

Under the later Oslo agreements, the Palestinian Authority (PA) was established to allow Palestinian self-government in the heavily populated areas of the West Bank. Israel unilaterally withdrew from the Gaza Strip in 2005. In a 2006 Palestinian election, the Hamas terrorist group became the elected government, but the PA (led by Fatah) refused to relinquish power. Hamas seized control of the Gaza Strip by force, and remains a continuous source of violence. In Lebanon, the terrorist group Hezbollah remains a factor, while Israel has managed to contain Iranian efforts to establish themselves in Syria.

In recent years, there have been alliances made with neighbouring Arab countries. Some of these countries recognize their common cause with Israel to counter efforts by Iran for hegemony. Many of these countries are seeking benefits from the technological advances made in Israel in sectors like agriculture, medicine, cybersecurity and defence. Research and development has been a priority investment by the succession of Israeli governments since its adoption of the private enterprise model for its economy. Foreign investment has poured into Israel, helping fund economic growth, and placing Israel among the world’s highest in GDP per capita.

The standard of living of Israel’s Arab citizens has also risen with increasing integration and exceeds that of citizens in neighbouring Arab countries, or those under PA administration. Perhaps this is another reason for the move to normalize relations with Israel by several Arab countries under the Abraham Accords.

As Israel’s 75th anniversary approaches, several problems remain to be tackled. Concerns over security and increased Jewish settlement in disputed areas are among the factors that led to the election of a government coalition many consider extremist, with some policy proposals, such as the judicial reforms, raising alarm among centrist and left-leaning elements. These have led to mass protest demonstrations in Israel and abroad. Demands from the ultra-religious sector who have gained political power, if realized, could impair the lifestyles of many in the general population. As well, there has been a wave of terrorist attacks recently and there is concern that this may lead to revanchist policies targeting Palestinian citizens.

At 75 years old, the state of Israel continues to be a happening place.

Max Roytenberg is a Vancouver-based poet, writer and blogger. His book Hero in My Own Eyes: Tripping a Life Fantastic is available from Amazon and other online booksellers.

If we forget, thee, Jerusalem

The Western Wall, Jerusalem, Israel. (photo from Wikimedia Commons)

When I was a teenaged member of the Zionist youth group Young Judaea in Saskatchewan, we recited this pledge: “If I forget thee, O Jerusalem, may my right hand lose its cunning; may my tongue cleave to the roof of my mouth.”

Well, I haven’t forgotten, and I’ve learned that, as never before, Jerusalem needs our help. In my Israel today, governmental criminal corruption and disinformation is so bad that citizens can’t have a rational discussion about politics without getting angry. Fear and anger at the government has brought hundreds of thousands of demonstrators into the streets of Israel’s major cities.

The fear and despair has spread to us here in the Diaspora. Our lovely ideals about our lovely, peaceful, democratic Israel are being systematically extinguished by a band of radical religious politicians, some with criminal records. Some of us here are going so far as to wonder that, if Israel is now being led by a covey of self-serving rascals, why should we ever repeat the age-old hope, “Next year in Jerusalem”? Now that I am an older man, I remember my pledge and I issue a warning. We’re in danger of losing our Israeli democracy.

Israel’s government today can be compared to a dog being wagged by its tail. The tail in this case is a small alliance of ultra-Orthodox Jews who hold the balance of power in the Netanyahu government. Two small political parties – Jewish Power and Religious Zionists – call the shots and their chief target is the Supreme Court. They want to gain control over it. And for what reasons would they promote such a radical step in the name of “judicial reform,” and why would they so endanger Israel’s democracy?

There has been a history of battles between the Supreme Court and the ultra-Orthodox community about who has the power to regulate religious law in Israel.

Round One: Supreme Court versus the Government of Israel on the thorny question of which converts are legally Jewish citizens of Israel. For years, the Orthodox rabbinate ruled that you had to be converted in Israel by an Orthodox rabbi.

Bring on the Supreme Court. In 2021, after more than 15 years of debate, the Court ruled that non-Orthodox converts to Judaism in Israel are Jewish and thus entitled to become citizens. The decision includes those who convert to Judaism through the country’s Reform and Conservative movements. “Jews who during their stay in Israel were legally converted in a Reform or Conservative community must be recognized as Jews,” the Court wrote in its majority decision.

Despite that this ruling would only affect some 150 Israelis, Aryeh Deri, leader of the ultra-Orthodox Shas party, who, at that time, was interior minister, condemned the decision. He said it constitutes “a mortal blow to the Jewish character of the state. I promise to fix the law to ensure that only conversions under Orthodox religious law will be recognized in the state of Israel.” Deri was a minister in the current coalition, but was fired earlier this year because the Supreme Court ordered Netanyahu to do so, as Deri has a criminal record.

Round Two: As far back as 2007, women were being beaten on buses for refusing to sit at the back, as the ultra-Orthodox community ruled. In response to a petition submitted against the ultra-Orthodox Mehadrin sect, the Supreme Court ruled that you can’t tell a woman where to sit on a bus.

Round Three: The battle over chametz (foods with leavening, products not kosher for Passover). Recently, the ultra-Orthodox got even with the Supreme Court, which had struck down another religious law. This one forbade hospitals to allow chametz to be brought into hospitals on Pesach. Hospital visitors had to open their bags to be searched by security guards, and there was public outrage at being treated as criminals for concealing food.

The Supreme Court declared the law unnecessary and as offensive to non-Jews as well as Jews. Then, in March this year, the ultra-religious parties snuck in a new chametz law just before Passover. This time, the law allowed hospitals to decide whether or not to search bags or to reprimand people, and the bill passed the Knesset. Score one for the ultra-Orthodox alliance.

Round Four: Military exemption for ultra-Orthodox yeshivah students and the birth of the idea of “judicial reform.” As a condition for joining the Netanyahu government coalition, the ultra-Orthodox wanted to pass a law exempting yeshivah bochers from the military service that all Israelis are obligated to make. And they want to ensure that the Supreme Court can’t strike down the law. The Knesset, they maintained should be able to reverse the Supreme Court’s decisions if they rule against the law. Enter the idea of “judicial reform.”

When they talk about “judicial reform,” what the ultra-religious group really wants strikes at the very heart of Israeli democracy. They want the Knesset to be able to pick and choose which laws the Supreme Court can overturn. They want to give the government the power to make any laws they want without restrictions. They want the Supreme Court to be impotent.

This fearsome, anti-democratic power grab is what sends shivers down the spines of democracy-loving Jews everywhere, and brings thousands into the streets to protest “judicial reform” planned by the Netanyahu government.

In Canada, all the laws passed by Parliament must go through several hoops. First, the law must be approved by the House of Commons. After that, it goes up for debate at the Senate, which can send it back to the House of Commons for revision. Third, the law must be signed by the governor general, who can withhold signature if she feels that the law is repugnant to democracy. Finally, our Supreme Court can either demand that the law be changed or strike it down totally if it finds that it contravenes our Bill of Rights.

Israel has only the Supreme Court to protect its citizens from religious fanatics or rogue governments. Legal scholars are agreed:

allowing any government to reverse judgments of the Supreme Court would not only remove the protections of the Court; it would make Israel a dictatorship.

Rogue government? Look who Netanyahu hired to help him govern.

• The most dangerous and outrageous appointment is a man with a long criminal record, Itamar Ben-Gvir. The army refused to draft him because of his extremist ideas. To secure Ben-Gvir’s support, Netanyahu appointed this ultra-Orthodox Jew with a criminal record to the job of minister of national security and, incredibly, he now oversees police forces in Israel. He also holds the balance of power in the Netanyahu government. Anything that Netanyahu wants to do has to go through Ben-Gvir, who, in the face of widespread demonstrations gave his permission to temporarily halt progress on judicial reform.

• Haim Katz, a former minister of labour who was given a six-month suspended sentence for graft has been given the job of tourism minister.

• As stated above, Aryeh Deri, leader of the ultra-Orthodox Shas party, was appointed minister of health despite going to prison for taking bribes as interior minister and, earlier this year, being given a suspended sentence and a fine for tax offences.

• Netanyahu himself faces charges of corruption.

Is it any wonder that hundreds of thousands of people have taken to the streets to oppose the government’s judicial reform plan? Is it any wonder that the majority of Canadian Jews are also against the reform proposals?

Like them, I know that Israel needs me and that is why I write about it. Neither should you “let your tongue cleave to the roof of your mouth.” Join the Jews around the world who are speaking out for Israel’s democracy. And, while you’re at it, say a prayer for the state of Israel; she needs all the help that she can get.

Stan Goldman is a retired English teacher who lives in Richmond.

Gallup poll concerning

A Gallup poll released last week shows that, for the first time, Democratic voters in the United States sympathize more with Palestinians than with Israelis.

Among Democratic voters contacted, 49% sympathize more with the Palestinians and 38% with Israelis. Among Republicans, sympathy for Israel remains overwhelming, at 78%.

The poll should raise concerns – but not only for the most obvious reasons.

Halie Soifer, head of the Jewish Democratic Council of America, hit the nail on the head when she told the Jewish Telegraphic Agency that the question paints a false dichotomy. (First, though, she noted that the Democratic Party’s leadership is overwhelmingly pro-Israel, whether that is reflected across the grassroots or not.)

“Democrats – from President Biden on down – strongly support Israel’s safety and security,” she said. But, crucially, she added: “There is no contradiction between being pro-Israel and supporting Palestinian rights, which is why Democrats continue to support a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, as well as security assistance for Israel and humanitarian assistance to the Palestinians. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is not a zero-sum game, and thus polling that presents it as a binary choice is inherently flawed.”

Calling people on the telephone at dinnertime to ask them how to solve an intransigent international conflict is not likely to advance the most constructive ideas for resolution. Simplistic formulations are inevitable, nuance flies out the door. Questions become self-reinforcing, a sort of unintentional “push poll.” (A push poll is an unethical strategy used sometimes in political campaigns intended not to gauge public opinion but to influence it: “If you knew that Candidate A had a history of drowning puppies and pulling wings off flies, would that make you more or less likely to vote for them?”)

This is not to blame Gallup, an established and respected polling firm. Their question unfortunately, reflects a common narrative, an either/or. That, as Soifer said, is a false dichotomy.

To be genuinely pro-Israel demands we be pro-Palestinian because finding a resolution to 75-plus years of conflict requires some sort of resolution to the statelessness of Palestinians. Equally, being pro-Palestinian demands we be pro-Israel, because compromise and coexistence is the only thing that will result in Palestinian self-determination.

Of course, acknowledging this is the easy part. How to behave in “pro-Israel” and “pro-Palestinian” ways is the muddy part. Those who call themselves “pro-Palestinian” often behave in ways that preclude the very thing they claim to advance. By denying Israel’s right to exist, for example, they ensure that compromise is taken off the table and, since that is the route to Palestinian self-determination, they betray the very definition of “pro-Palestinian.”

Those who are “pro-Israel” also need to temper their extremes. It is fair to say that, during the Oslo process, Israelis demonstrated a consensus toward coexistence that has understandably waned since the violence of the Second Intifada. But, for example, the common and senseless mantra we see from some commentators on social media that “there is no such thing as a Palestinian people” is a fruitless – and racist – squabble. Deny their history, reject the legitimacy of their land claims – there are still people there whose present and future demands a serious form of address and dignity.

To be clear: the sometimes-stated idea that the status quo cannot hold is simply not true. It has, by and large, held since 1967 and it could continue for another generation or more unless mutual compromise emerges to change that. The status quo arguably harms Palestinians more than it harms Israelis, which has led to an assumption that Israel must be in favour of the status quo. As a consequence, overseas activists have blamed Israel for the situation on the assumption that, as the perceived powerful party, it is the only one that can break the impasse. This is partly, if not mostly, untrue. Compromise must come from both sides and chants like “From the river to the sea …” and “Intifada! Revolution! There is only one solution!” the latter of which echoes Nazi slogans, will not “free Palestine.” They will, however, influence public opinion.

We should be concerned by the results of the Gallup poll – it indicates that decades of building multilateral support for Israel’s security among Americans (and, by extension almost certainly Canadians and Europeans) is failing. But, we should be concerned for another reason. It reinforces a false belief that we can only call ourselves pro-Israel or pro-Palestinian. Until we can legitimately call ourselves both, none of us deserves to call ourselves “pro-peace.”

What survey box to check?

Passover is coming. Its themes of freedom from oppression, the Exodus and Jewish identity stories are ready for the telling.

More Jewish people participate in Passover than many other holidays. A 2013 Pew Research study indicated that 70% of Americans who identified as Jewish attended a seder in the year, far more than any other Jewish practice, such as fasting on Yom Kippur, lighting Shabbat candles or attending synagogue services.

This statistic rings true for me, even though it’s a decade after the survey. I’ve hosted or attended many seders over the years where Jewish relatives or acquaintances turn up even if they’ve long since abandoned any other Jewish ritual. Some of these people hesitated to call themselves Jewish, even though they were raised Jewish or weren’t actively something else. How we identify is a complicated topic. It’s one I explore when I write a bio at the end of an article or introduce myself to someone at an event. As you might expect, the description provided by a writer is a shape-shifting event. I don’t advertise my religious identity in some publications. In others, I might mention where I graduated from university or what I write about.

I’ve told stories for a long time. Identifying as a writer came not long after. When the opportunity arose for me to go to the Young Writers’ Workshop at the University of Virginia as a teenager, at 13 or 14 years old, I was thrilled. I grew up in Virginia and Charlottesville wasn’t far away. My parents dropped me off. I stayed at the dorms. Mostly, I had a great experience and enjoyed myself. However, it was also the stage for some antisemitic moments that I haven’t forgotten.

I’d volunteered to set up chairs for a poetry reading, since a charismatic blond, older teen was also on the committee. Soon after arriving, he proceeded to tell antisemitic jokes, one after another. I silently kept setting out chairs as others crowded around, snickering. They snuck looks at me as I worked, ignoring him. That was the last time I chose the same committee as he did.

When this kind of bullying hate happens, oftentimes, the advice includes “Ignore it! His hate says more about him than it does about you.” That was little consolation for me. Despite the friends I made and all the learning experiences I had at that camp, it was also the source of several hate-filled moments. Later, I visited a camp friend at her home. I sat with her in the back of the family car. Her dad (much older than her mother) made languid conversation as he applauded Henry Ford’s union-busting and antisemitism. Then, he stopped to speak to “the boy” (a middle-aged, distinguished Black man) who managed his farmland. It was another moment I couldn’t erase from my memory, as my family believes strongly in unions and civil rights.

On Passover, we celebrate our identity and our journey, as if we, too, had been slaves in the land of Egypt. We use a story that shapes Jewish identity to help us coalesce into a grateful, free people. We discuss standing up for what we believe when it matters, the way Moses did.

All this came to mind when I took a research survey online. I agreed long ago to participate in occasional research surveys so that Canadian academics or government offices can learn how “ordinary Canadians” feel about things. This particular survey seemed to be about workplace psychological health. At the beginning, the authors gave their names, contact information and other details. By the end, lulled into complacency by harmless questions, I got to this question, which was something like: “We know that race is a cultural construct and isn’t genetic, but some people suffer on account of their race nevertheless. Please let us know how you identify for the purposes of this survey.”

What followed was a long list of categories, including “White, European descent” or “Middle Eastern, Arab” and various other categories, which you can probably imagine from your own survey experiences. I was stymied. In the past, I’d likely have ticked off “White, European descent” because, although my family has lived in the United States for the last 110 to 200 years, the places they came from were European. Yet, as anyone who has studied Jewish history knows, Europeans didn’t consider Jews to be in the same category as they were. Many centuries before the Second World War, Jews were being expelled from parts of Europe, murdered, raped and charged large extra taxes just to remain in some areas. The same can be said about much of the Middle East, where Jewish people have lived for millennia. Jews were heavily taxed, forced to wear identifying garments and had to cope with all sorts of other restrictions if they wanted to live as dhimmis, “under the protection of” Islam. Even in Virginia in the 1970s, Jews weren’t always considered “white.” We weren’t eligible for memberships in some social settings.

With current rising antisemitism, many slurs against Jews are conflated with issues surrounding Israel, our historic homeland. The Jewish population in Israel is in fact mixed, with Jews of all colours or races. Some Israelis are from families who have always lived in Israel. Also, yes, immigrants from all over the world have sought refuge by returning to Israel. Yet the antisemitic, race-driven comments online suggest that only white settlers from Europe “colonized” Israel.

That leaves a person with few options when the survey is about to “time out” online. One could just pretend and say “White/European” or “Indigenous” or “Middle Eastern,” “Asian,” “African,” or whatever one’s skin tone is. There’s often a “prefer not to say” category, which is a safe spot some choose. It offers anonymity, but it muddies the waters a bit for some research studies. This time, there was an “Other” category. Since the survey was aimed at an academic audience and anonymous, I checked off “Other” and in the box, I wrote Jewish, with a brief note that said, “In a time of rising antisemitism, please don’t leave us out.”

Was this the right thing to do? I won’t ever know. The Canadian Jewish population is very small. We’re only a little more than 1% of the population, based on recent Census numbers. Even so, if we are to tell our own story – the Exodus from Egypt, or the story of Jewish identity, we should have the chance to do so. Many people don’t feel safe enough to self-identify as Jewish. I certainly know the relief of blending in as “other.” Sometimes in risky surroundings, I feel safer with my nondescript last name and features that could be Greek or French but aren’t identifiably Jewish. We all have to decide when to tell our stories. Some seek freedom through erasing their ethnoreligious identities. Others relish the freedom that comes from proclaiming their “otherness” as Jewish.

I don’t have the answers here. I’m still wondering which survey boxes to tick off myself. In any case, have a wonderful Passover, with a delicious, meaningful seder where you can explore your identities, stories and life journey to freedom.

The gift of sobriety

Pesach is approaching, and the connection to addiction is obvious – we were slaves in Egypt, we are slaves to substances and behaviours to our detriment. Sadly, we hear daily about the perils of addiction – certainly the news of the toxic drug supply and deaths as a result are constant reminders of the struggle many face.

In the same way that Pesach teaches us that the possibility of redemption exists, that the oppressed can survive and ultimately triumph over their oppressors, so too can we remain hopeful that there is a pathway out of addiction. The struggle is hard, but with perseverance and critical support along the way, recovery is certainly achievable.

Our work at JACS is multi-faceted – we meet new people weekly who are looking for recovery support and those who are not sure yet they are ready to address the struggle. We meet people wherever they are.

While the challenge is real, we wanted to share what some of our clients have told us – the gifts of sobriety.

Life is simpler – I used to have to steal to feed my addiction. It took time and I would wake up wondering when and where I would find my next “fix.” Now I celebrate each day knowing I am free of that struggle.
I feel better about who I am – I no longer have secrets that I have to keep from those I love.
I am present to my feelings – I recognize the urge to use drugs as just that – an urge. I am able to reach out for help as I need it.
I feel physically better – I appreciate my physical, mental and emotional health. Yes, it has been work and I am worth it.
I am part of a healthier community – the people I used to connect with were struggling with addiction as well. Now I surround myself with people who want to be healthy, living lives filled with meaning.
I live with purpose – by helping others who may be struggling with this challenge, or just being present to whatever I am doing or whomever I am with.
I feel the freedom to have fun – I enjoy a walk in the rain or the sun, I know that my joy and happiness is up to me.

We continue to be inspired by the clients we have the privilege of working with and supporting on their journey. May their courage and strength serve as inspiration to us all.

Wishing you a Pesach sameach!

About this year’s Passover cover art

For the this year, Steveston, B.C., artist Merle Linde, chose to create a Haggadah cover that would look old and hand drawn. To achieve this authentic feeling, Linde used Taiwan linen paper, traditional Chinese watercolour paints and brushes.

The calligraphy letters in solid black Hebrew-like text feature peacock blue flashes, often seen in antique manuscripts. Yom Tov candles sit on candleholders that borrow their design from ancient Egyptian columns. The traditional Four Cups of Wine are inspired by a set of old silverware featuring raised grapevine leaves and grapes. And a silver seder plate holder has space for the three traditional shmura matzot, the shank bone, the burnt egg, haroset, bitter herbs, green vegetable and salt water for dipping.

Chag Pesach sameach.

Standing by our family

If a member of your family were in crisis, would you abandon them? Even if the crisis were partly self-inflicted, of course you would stand by them.

In a metaphorical way, this is the issue facing Diaspora Jews in considering Israel right now. Whether you agree or disagree with the direction of the new government, it is undeniable that Israel is in a crisis. Each weekend, for several weeks, between 100,000 and 300,000 people have marched in the streets in opposition to a range of government policies, particularly proposed judicial “reforms” that many critics view as a threat to the fundamental democratic character of the country.

Watching from afar, these events are discouraging and worrying – and these emotions mingle with what might already be a degree of ambivalence, disappointment and many other sentiments. It is not always easy to be a supporter of Israel overseas. We have struggled in the face of decades of condemnation, some legitimate, some outlandish exaggerations. It would be easier, for some of us, to walk away.

Israelis do not have the luxury of walking away. And if one looks at Israel today and says, “That does not reflect my Judaism, my politics, my values,” remember: it does not reflect the Judaism, politics or values of most Israelis either.

The Israeli government we see today is the result of a tail wagging the dog, a reality facilitated by coalition politics and the desperation of Binyamin Netanyahu to regain power at almost any cost.

In many instances, people who voted based on concerns about national security find themselves appalled at policies around women’s equality, LGBTQ+ rights, the place of minorities in the country, the treatment of Palestinians in the West Bank and, of course, the overriding threats perceived in the attempts to meddle with the infrastructure of the Israeli judiciary – the wellspring from which much of Israel’s liberal character has come.

Most Israelis did not knowingly vote for leaders who would see the settler violence against Palestinians in the village of Huwara and endorse it, vindicate the perpetrators and incite further, even more destructive and possibly murderous violence. This latter example – of politicians (or anyone else, for that matter) openly celebrating and inciting racist violence – should disgust everyone, no matter their political stripe.

Overseas organizations that are connected with Israel – not least the Jewish Federations of North America – have spoken out officially in ways that are unprecedented in the history of Israel-Diaspora relations. Some of these statements have been comparatively mild in the minds of many observers, who view this as genuinely a time for full-throated disapproval. The fact that they are speaking out at all, however, is significant.

One of the side effects of all this is the debunking of the popular accusations that the tendency to keep negative comments within the family reflects “uncritical support for Israel.” This idea, that Zionism is a form of congenital disorder unrooted in reason, has never been true but it is now discredited. For what that’s worth.

Relatedly, individuals and groups who for years have been slandering Israel with hyperbole are now learning that they have exhausted the arsenal of vocabulary when actual events call for some strong language.

There is some reason for optimism. Isaac Herzog, Israel’s president, who has been cast by events into a role unlike the relatively ceremonial function that the office usually carries, said this week that a compromise may be in the offing on the contentious judicial reforms. Moreover, the resignation from cabinet last week of Avi Maoz, a far-right extremist, appears to be evidence that the government is wearying of fighting a multiple-front war. It is believed that Maoz realized the government wasn’t going to impose his racist, misogynistic and homophobic policies and so took his marbles home. There are reports of more turmoil in the ranks, which could drag the government and the country back toward a little sanity.

On the one hand, this should not invite a slackening of the pressure. There is a movement afoot among Diaspora Jews (and others) to discourage world leaders from meeting with extremist members of the Israeli government. Whether or not that will have much effect on anything, it is a valuable expression of revulsion for people who, like Bezalel Smotrich, incited (and then walked back) his call to “wipe out” the Palestinian village where Jewish settlers recently attacked innocent civilians.

On the other hand, anyone who is considering walking away from Israel, of abandoning the emotional energies of this fight, should consider who it is they would be abandoning in the process. A government is fleeting – although the lasting damage a single government can do is significant. But, Israel is the embodiment of the Jewish people’s national self-determination. To walk away from that is to walk away from more than bad government policy. It is to walk away from history. To walk away from everything that one’s ancestors hoped for, prayed for and built.

More importantly, it is to abandon to their own devices the very people in Israel with whom we probably most closely agree, who are struggling nobly to preserve the vision of Israel that many or most of us believe to be an ideal.

When a family member is in crisis, we do not abandon them. We engage. We help. We confront and intervene, if necessary. We do not walk away. In fact, this is precisely the moment when we dig deepest into our resources and do everything we can to make right what is wrong.

Join rally to support Israeli democracy

The Vancouver action group UnXeptable has been rallying on Sundays, at noon, at Robson Square, as part of an international grassroots movement to save Israeli democracy. (photo from Daphna Kedem)

We are a group of Israelis and Canadian Jews watching the grim news from Israel closely and feel that Israel’s democracy is on a very slippery slope, without brakes. The judicial crisis is leading to a dramatic loss of checks and balances in a state that has been democratic since its inception. It is shaking Israel and tearing apart its very fabric. We are terrified that the road to dictatorship will be quick and abrupt.

Israelis have been going to the streets in masses for the last many weeks. The biggest demonstrations drew more than 300,000 people to the street, yet we don’t see reference to these events in our local community. It seems that Jewish organizations and leaders are choosing to be on the sidelines, by toning down the crisis. Some are choosing to be silent altogether.

We are utterly frustrated by this silence. We know very well the horrific consequences that silence can bring about. But we realize that unprecedented events have been unfolding. Israel has been our source of pride throughout changing times and because events are happening fast, leaders might feel lost, without a compass in an uncharted territory.

We would highlight the facts as we see them: the Israel that we have known has changed.

Recent elections brought to power a group of people with personal interests counter to the public interest. One is a convicted criminal (bribery) who wants to clear his way to be a minister. The religious parties seek to release religious young people from army service, which is compulsory in Israel. A messianic, racist party wants to spread its agenda. And the prime minister is a defendant in three indictments and, in our opinion, to get away from his trial, he is promoting a change of regime in Israel, a radical move that will eliminate the separation of powers and the independence of the Supreme Court. The legal system will become part of the ruling party.

Until now, the selection of judges to the Supreme Court required agreement between the representatives of the judges and the representatives of the government. But the coalition has voted on a series of laws that approve a change in the judicial system. According to the new proposal, only the representatives of the coalition will be able to choose judges for the court. It seems clear that a preliminary committee will appoint judges that will dismiss the defendant, Binyamin Netanyahu, from all his charges.

The core issue is that the Netanyahu we knew from his 15 years in power previously is not the same Netanyahu. In his previous terms, he defended the Supreme Court as an anchor for freedom and justice. The new Netanyahu’s trial is going into its third year.

Israel has no constitution and no other checks and balances. The Supreme Court is the sole judicial body that secures the rights and freedoms of individuals and minorities. We would like to encourage our local leaders and the community at large to address these issues that will no doubt influence the close and delicate relationship we have with Israel. We would like to encourage people to stand up in defence of Israel’s democracy – our family members in Israel, our friends and colleagues, and the democratic forces in Israel need our help.

We urge you to join the Vancouver action group UnXeptable – Vancouver, which is part of an international grassroots movement in more than 30 cities to save Israeli democracy. Rabbis and community leaders have come out to such rallies around the world to speak out and support the movement. We hope that you, too, will join us. Our next rallies will be held on March 12 and 19, at noon, at Robson Square in downtown Vancouver.

Rallying in Rishon Le-Tzion

Protesters in Rishon Le-Tzion Demonstrating against judicial reform February 25, 2023. (photo by Hayden)

It was a valuable experience to attend a protest rally in Rishon Le-Tzion. Several hundred people gathered in a city square to express concerns about the dramatic changes being initiated by the new Israeli government. The rally was more poignant, given that it was held in a square that commemorates people from this city who have died in combat.

As a Canadian, I had mixed feelings about attending. Who am I to be here protesting, as I don’t pay taxes and haven’t served in the army? On the other hand, the changes proposed by the government are going to affect Jews around the world and not just in Israel. Also, having three grandchildren in Israel increases my interest in what happens.

Rishon Le-Tzion, established in 1882, is well known as one of the first cities to be established in modern Israel. Its name, translating as “first in Zion,” says it all. The first Israeli Hebrew school was established here. Baron Edmond de Rothschild established what evolved to be a thriving wine industry here. The city predates the establishment of Tel Aviv by 27 years.

The square itself commemorates the large number of Israelis from Rishon Le-Tzion who have died in combat. Engraved in a monument is a listing, year by year, of names of the deceased. Israel today is one of the most successful countries in the world. When you visualize the large number of names engraved on these walls, it is clear that Israel’s achievements did not come without major losses of life.

The rally itself consisted of many people waving large Israeli flags. There were people of all ages, including many children present.

One of the speakers, Meir Sheetrit, served as minister of several different portfolios in previous Likud governments. Sheetrit was so respected that his name was brought forth as a candidate for the presidency of Israel in 2014. As a Likudnik, he decried the changes taking place and asserted that the current government is deviating radically from the direction of previous Likud governments.

Another speaker was Yair Golan, who was a member of the Knesset and has served on government committees. He was a former general in the Israel army and, at one point, was considered for the position of army chief of staff. He said he values a democracy that is based on law and not on tyranny, a press that is free and not based on peoples’ whims and a government that will protect the rights of minorities.

Merav Michaeli, the leader of the Labour party, was in attendance. She circulated through the audience, but, according to the protocols of the demonstration, being a sitting member of the Knesset, she was not permitted to speak.

The audience was mainly attentive, though occasional side conversations took place. People frequently erupted with Boosha! (Shame) in reference to various proposed government changes. The slogan De-mo-cra-tia frequently reverberated through the audience.

Periodic references were made to the diminishing status of women, LGBTQ+ people and minorities, especially Arab minorities, with the thought that these groups will bear the brunt of the changes.

Jews of non-Orthodox denominations feel that their rights will be diminished under the new government. The Women of the Wall fear they will always be relegated to second-class citizens when they pray at the Kotel. Several of the new government ministers want to cancel the annual Gay Pride parades. Many Israelis and leaders of other countries think the new government will end the possibility of ever having a two-state solution.

Most of all, people are concerned about the future of Israel’s fiercely independent judiciary. In a bill recently introduced into the Knesset, the government will have the ultimate say in who is appointed to the courts. Also, the Knesset will have the ability with a simple majority to overrule decisions of the Supreme Court. Many people, including a large number of Canadian judges and lawyers, have spoken out against these changes.

I came to Israel with major concerns about the new government’s policies and directions. It was instructive to see that a large percentage of the Israeli population shares similar feelings.

The demonstration I attended was only one of many that took place that night. According to reports in the press, there were 40,000 demonstrators in Tel Aviv, 20,000 in Haifa, 2,000 in Beersheva and smaller rallies all over the country. Clearly, a large percentage of the Israeli population strongly objects to the proposed changes. Large demonstrations occur every Saturday night, but also at other times during the week. If public engagement is a sign of a functioning democracy, then Israel is a healthy society.

Will these protests make a difference? So far, the new government has been firm in its conviction that major new directions are needed and is not backing down.

Rallies such as the one in Rishon Le-Tzion raise many questions. Are rallies an effective way to advocate for change in a society? Do democratic governments need to respond to what people participating in rallies are advocating? Are the proposed changes going to lead to a better or worse Israel? Is it important for Diaspora Jews to express their opinions about what is happening in another country far away?

As a Canadian, I came back with a firm opinion about the latter question. Diaspora Jews, who can be greatly affected by what is happening in Israel, need to express their opinions about the changes that may affect them. People who support democratic systems should weigh in anywhere in the world when they perceive that democracy is threatened.

But it is up to Israelis themselves to answer the basic questions as to what type of electoral and judicial systems they prefer. For the sake of the Jewish Diaspora and the rest of the free world, we hope that they will make the right decisions.

Larry Barzelai is a semi-retired physician living in Vancouver. He’s always had strong ties with Israel through the Canadian Zionist Federation, CJPAC and the annual Public Speaking Contest. His main connection now is his three grandchildren who call Israel their home.