![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
osewalrus I had an unusual experience on Twitter. When I initially read this article in Tema Smith "Are Jews White, American History Says It's Complicated," I was annoyed. But after an exchange with the author, I understood her actual point. Not only did I actually agree with her, but now that I understood the article it got me something about the issues in new ways. She, in turn, thanked me for pushing her in a way that prompted her to clarify her language to make her point more clear.
I unpack below . . .
For those who do not click through to the article. Ms. Smith -- herself a biracial jewish woman -- discusses the debate that has emerged since Trump's election over whether Jews are "white." I.e., do Jews suffer from the institutional racism and prejudice that people of color (particular African Americans (AF)) experience from being viewed by the majority os the population as different from the default "normal." As many Jews have discovered that antisemitism is alive and well, they have described what the Jewish experience as "passing" for white. The article is about the problematic use of the term "passing."
As the author explains, the term "passing" has a long history in the AF community in particular. Ms. Smith traces it through the history of segregation and the "one drop rule." To pass, she points out, was not simply to go unsuspected as black in white communities going about one's daily business. To pass meant building a false identity as "white" and leaving behind (or at least disguising) one's black identity. This contrasts with the experience of Jews in the United States. Here, racial bias was never a function of law (with the exception of the immigration restrictions, which are irrelevant here). Jews might, and did, suffer from racial prejudice. But there were no miscegenation laws preventing Jews from marrying Christian women, there were no (explicitly) Jewish sections on buses or official "Jew" cars on trains. As a consequence, using the word "passing" to describe the Jewish experience is both technically incorrect as to the meaning of the word in its use in minority communities, and resented by some as an inappropriate usage/appropriation. (Ms Smith cites some other scholars and writers who have suggested terms such as "functionally white" or "provisionally white" to describe the Jewish experience, but explicitly encourages an internal discussion in the Jewish community t consider how to describe our cultural experience in the U.S.)
My first reaction was negative. I have seen too many articles in recent days by people trying to minimize the Jewish experience with discrimination and how our long history -- which extends beyond the United States both geographically and linearly -- impacts our experience today. Such articles and social media posts are frequently efforts to minimize anti-Semitism and shield its practitioners. But additionally, what upset me was the fact that as an Orthodox Jew who wears a kippah and tzizit, I have seen the institutional racism of setting not merely white, but also Christian as the default norm. My wife and I have lost too many job opportunities, for example, because of our inability to work on Sabbath. So my initial reaction to the article was to say: "hey, I can say from personal experience that life as a clearly visible Jew who keeps traditional Jewish religious practices is very different from life as a Jew who has no visible identification as Jewish and/or does not keep traditional practices that can carry significant life penalties. To me, those Jews are passing as much as any person of color who pretended to be white. They get by in society by blending in to the surrounding white society."
But after some exchange with Tema Smith on Twitter I got to the real heart of the distinction she is making. It's a fundamental question of defining one's personal identity. We Jews have the ability to decide for ourselves how much we want to assimilate into the surrounding white culture. We can do everything from isolate ourselves in entirely Jewish communities and wear extremely distinctive clothes that plainly mark us as Jewish from a mile away, to changing our names and disavowing any Jewishness, or anything in between. But whether one regards assimilation as a good thing or a bad thing, and whether or not it is motivated in whole or in part for the social and financial rewards of blending with the norm, it is our constructed identity. I have assimilated partially into American society. I wear modern clothes and have a job in public policy where I do things like testify before Congress and meet with top level government officials to discuss matters wholly unrelated to Judaism or the Jewish community. That makes me more assimilated than a co-religionist from Lakewood or Williamsburg. But i am also very visibly Jewish, which makes my life experience different from my co-religionists who are not visibly Jewish. But the key point is that whatever level at which one sets one's assimilation, that is who you actually are. The Jew who identifies as culturally Jewish or ethnically Jewish is not disguising their real identity to achieve social and economic advantage. It is their life choice about who they actually are.
By contrast, the idea of passing in the AF community is about abnegating one's true identity. The AF (or other POC) who "passes" does not decide as a matter of identity 'I may look white,' but I am ethnically black. The person who passes is actively trying to deceive society at large about their true identity, and to do so gives up association with their non-white community. Or, to reframe in the language of our Jewish culture tradition, "passing" is much more like being a Marrano. As Jews went through baptism and pretended to be Catholics to escape the inquisition while secretly trying to preserve their heritage (and living in fear of being discovered by the Inquisition), African Americans who "pass" are trying to hide their blackness from white society -- and live in fear of being discovered and suffering consequences that could be as lethal as the Inquisition.
Framed as a question of identity, the distinction is both obvious and profound. Not because one suffering is bigger than the other or to denigrate our Jewish cultural experience. But because the difference in being able to define oneself (even if doing so has negative consequences) is a very different experience from the decision to deny oneself, and therefore creates very different life experiences for the individuals and an entirely different relationship with the majority society.
An additional factor that makes this feel true for me is the enormous weight we in the Jewish community put on the word "assimilation" and the idea of being an "assimilated Jew." Objectively, we can use assimilation as a simple descriptor for our relationship with surrounding society. But internally we view assimilation as an existential threat. To say of someone that they are an 'assimilated Jew' carries a somewhat pejorative meaning of turning one's back on Judaism and the community. While this may sometimes be used in context of the level of traditional observance, it does not have that meaning. We have seen many taskforces and studies on Jewish assimilation and Jewish identity in the United States, and they have included representatives from all Jewish denominations. Similarly, the experience of Jews who considered themselves fully assimilated into American society, who now find they are confronting real antisemitism, is very different from those of us who are less assimilated into the culture. The more one's Jewish identity is distinct from other aspects of surrounding society at large, the more of a shock to discover that surrounding society at large does not think of you in the same way.
To conclude, I have now come to the view that there is a clear distinction between "passing" in the African American sense of the word and the life experience enjoyed by Jews who are not outwardly distinctively Jewish. I am also extremely indebted to Tema Smith for being willing to engage with me in a meaningful and thoughtful way. For all the very real problems with social media these days, we should remember that it is also a tool for good an can be life enhancing when not ruined by trolls.
I unpack below . . .
For those who do not click through to the article. Ms. Smith -- herself a biracial jewish woman -- discusses the debate that has emerged since Trump's election over whether Jews are "white." I.e., do Jews suffer from the institutional racism and prejudice that people of color (particular African Americans (AF)) experience from being viewed by the majority os the population as different from the default "normal." As many Jews have discovered that antisemitism is alive and well, they have described what the Jewish experience as "passing" for white. The article is about the problematic use of the term "passing."
As the author explains, the term "passing" has a long history in the AF community in particular. Ms. Smith traces it through the history of segregation and the "one drop rule." To pass, she points out, was not simply to go unsuspected as black in white communities going about one's daily business. To pass meant building a false identity as "white" and leaving behind (or at least disguising) one's black identity. This contrasts with the experience of Jews in the United States. Here, racial bias was never a function of law (with the exception of the immigration restrictions, which are irrelevant here). Jews might, and did, suffer from racial prejudice. But there were no miscegenation laws preventing Jews from marrying Christian women, there were no (explicitly) Jewish sections on buses or official "Jew" cars on trains. As a consequence, using the word "passing" to describe the Jewish experience is both technically incorrect as to the meaning of the word in its use in minority communities, and resented by some as an inappropriate usage/appropriation. (Ms Smith cites some other scholars and writers who have suggested terms such as "functionally white" or "provisionally white" to describe the Jewish experience, but explicitly encourages an internal discussion in the Jewish community t consider how to describe our cultural experience in the U.S.)
My first reaction was negative. I have seen too many articles in recent days by people trying to minimize the Jewish experience with discrimination and how our long history -- which extends beyond the United States both geographically and linearly -- impacts our experience today. Such articles and social media posts are frequently efforts to minimize anti-Semitism and shield its practitioners. But additionally, what upset me was the fact that as an Orthodox Jew who wears a kippah and tzizit, I have seen the institutional racism of setting not merely white, but also Christian as the default norm. My wife and I have lost too many job opportunities, for example, because of our inability to work on Sabbath. So my initial reaction to the article was to say: "hey, I can say from personal experience that life as a clearly visible Jew who keeps traditional Jewish religious practices is very different from life as a Jew who has no visible identification as Jewish and/or does not keep traditional practices that can carry significant life penalties. To me, those Jews are passing as much as any person of color who pretended to be white. They get by in society by blending in to the surrounding white society."
But after some exchange with Tema Smith on Twitter I got to the real heart of the distinction she is making. It's a fundamental question of defining one's personal identity. We Jews have the ability to decide for ourselves how much we want to assimilate into the surrounding white culture. We can do everything from isolate ourselves in entirely Jewish communities and wear extremely distinctive clothes that plainly mark us as Jewish from a mile away, to changing our names and disavowing any Jewishness, or anything in between. But whether one regards assimilation as a good thing or a bad thing, and whether or not it is motivated in whole or in part for the social and financial rewards of blending with the norm, it is our constructed identity. I have assimilated partially into American society. I wear modern clothes and have a job in public policy where I do things like testify before Congress and meet with top level government officials to discuss matters wholly unrelated to Judaism or the Jewish community. That makes me more assimilated than a co-religionist from Lakewood or Williamsburg. But i am also very visibly Jewish, which makes my life experience different from my co-religionists who are not visibly Jewish. But the key point is that whatever level at which one sets one's assimilation, that is who you actually are. The Jew who identifies as culturally Jewish or ethnically Jewish is not disguising their real identity to achieve social and economic advantage. It is their life choice about who they actually are.
By contrast, the idea of passing in the AF community is about abnegating one's true identity. The AF (or other POC) who "passes" does not decide as a matter of identity 'I may look white,' but I am ethnically black. The person who passes is actively trying to deceive society at large about their true identity, and to do so gives up association with their non-white community. Or, to reframe in the language of our Jewish culture tradition, "passing" is much more like being a Marrano. As Jews went through baptism and pretended to be Catholics to escape the inquisition while secretly trying to preserve their heritage (and living in fear of being discovered by the Inquisition), African Americans who "pass" are trying to hide their blackness from white society -- and live in fear of being discovered and suffering consequences that could be as lethal as the Inquisition.
Framed as a question of identity, the distinction is both obvious and profound. Not because one suffering is bigger than the other or to denigrate our Jewish cultural experience. But because the difference in being able to define oneself (even if doing so has negative consequences) is a very different experience from the decision to deny oneself, and therefore creates very different life experiences for the individuals and an entirely different relationship with the majority society.
An additional factor that makes this feel true for me is the enormous weight we in the Jewish community put on the word "assimilation" and the idea of being an "assimilated Jew." Objectively, we can use assimilation as a simple descriptor for our relationship with surrounding society. But internally we view assimilation as an existential threat. To say of someone that they are an 'assimilated Jew' carries a somewhat pejorative meaning of turning one's back on Judaism and the community. While this may sometimes be used in context of the level of traditional observance, it does not have that meaning. We have seen many taskforces and studies on Jewish assimilation and Jewish identity in the United States, and they have included representatives from all Jewish denominations. Similarly, the experience of Jews who considered themselves fully assimilated into American society, who now find they are confronting real antisemitism, is very different from those of us who are less assimilated into the culture. The more one's Jewish identity is distinct from other aspects of surrounding society at large, the more of a shock to discover that surrounding society at large does not think of you in the same way.
To conclude, I have now come to the view that there is a clear distinction between "passing" in the African American sense of the word and the life experience enjoyed by Jews who are not outwardly distinctively Jewish. I am also extremely indebted to Tema Smith for being willing to engage with me in a meaningful and thoughtful way. For all the very real problems with social media these days, we should remember that it is also a tool for good an can be life enhancing when not ruined by trolls.
no subject
Date: 2019-01-10 05:20 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2019-01-10 05:41 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2019-01-10 09:07 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2019-01-11 10:02 am (UTC)Jews have things they can (or might) "cover" that are different than what an African-American can (or might) cover.
When I think of it that way, first of all I appreciate your essay more, but second of all it highlights some of the discussion differently.
For me, I was raised in the Reform Jewish movement, and was taught that it's historic origin was in attempting meaningful assimilation into modern culture. One can debate whether that was a success or not, and whether it was good or ill. I think Modern Orthodoxy feels (to me) like a similar process, but with less of an interest in "looking just like everyone else" - preserving more of the parts of Jewish practice that make cultural and visual differences.
I think "assimilated Jew" can be quite a heavily laden noun-phrase. It can mean "successful in integration" or "losing something in integration" or "trying to pass and failing" - very contextual.
no subject
Date: 2019-01-11 10:41 am (UTC)And yes, Modern Orthodoxy is in some ways a reaction to how to adjust to modern society. It has its roots in the "Torah and (secular) Knowledge" movement of the early 20th Century. This was a movement by Orthodox Rabbis to incorporate modern thought and participation in the world while retaining traditional halachic practices. This was a combination of recognition that modernity had a lot to offer, that the rapid technological changes of the industrial revolution needed Rabbis who were immersed in the culture to understand it and properly guide their communities, and that in the wake of Emancipation a failure to find a way to address modernity other than screening it out was critical to the survival of the Jewish people.
It is too long to get into here, but the entire history of our people is one of both intense traditionalism and high adaptability. these forces ebb and flow and push against each other.
no subject
Date: 2019-01-14 02:04 am (UTC)