Search results

Your search found 18 items
You ran an advanced options search
Sort: Relevance | Topics | Title | Author | Publication Year
Home  /  Search Results
Date: 2017
Abstract: Одной из примет нашего времени стало по­явление так называемых «новых этнических диаспор», которые стали итогом массовых межгосударственных миграций – как прямых, так и возвратных – особенно интенсивных после Второй мировой войны. Члены этих диаспор, в отличие от мигрантов предыдущего поколения, не спешат растворять­ся в социокультурной среде принимающих сообществ, а достаточно долго, иногда на протяжении поколений, сохраняют многообразные социальные, культурные, идентификационные и даже политические связи со странами исхода. Еврейский мир также не остался в стороне от этих процессов. Важным со­бытием последних десятилетий стало появление двух новых транснациональ­ных еврейских диаспор: израильской и русско-еврейской. Обе эти группы, не­сомненно, стали заметным фактором современной еврейской жизни и важным элементом многокультурной мозаики внутри еврейских коллективов стран пребывания и их обществ в целом. При том, что еврейской эмиграции из Израиля и возникшей за его преде­лами «израильской диаспоре» (термин, который в научный оборот ввел Стивен Гольд) посвящена довольно обширная научная литература, а «всемирное рус­ско-еврейское сообщество» также стало объектом ряда фундаментальных работ3, общий компонент этих диаспор – эмигрантские сообщества русскоязычных израильтян – пока очень малоизучен. Речь идет как о тех уроженцах (бывшего) СССР, которые в составе изра­ильской миграции оказались в странах Запада, так и в особенности об участни­ках «возвратной миграции» на постсоветское пространство. В академической литературе существует некоторое количество информации о русскоязычных израильтянах в разных странах Запада, и крайне немного – об израильтя­нах в странах бывшего СССР. Что же касается украинского сегмента этой диаспоры, то его до недавнего времени исследователи почти вообще не изуча­ли. (Единственным известным нам исключением является исследование изра­ильтян в Одессе, которое провела украино-британский антрополог Марина Са­прицкая.) Исследование, которое легло в основу этой статьи, было призвано заполнить этот пробел. Его совместно провели Центр еврейского образования в диаспоре им. Лук­штейна (Университет Бар-Илан, Израиль) и Институт иудаики НаУКМА при поддержке Министерства алии и абсорбции Израиля и Евроазиатского еврей­ского конгресса. В ходе этого исследования в два «раунда» (в начале 2009 и в конце 2011 гг.) методом стандартизированного интервью было опрошено соо­тветственно 167 и 147 респондентов из числа израильтян, с разной степенью по­стоянства живущих в Украине6. При этом нам представлялось верным сравнить сообщества русскоязычных израильтян в Украине с сопоставимыми с ними по базовым параметрам контрольными группами, прежде всего – с израильтяна­ми, живущими и/или работающими в России. One of the distinctive features of our times is the appearance of the so-called “new ethnic diasporas” resulting from mass state migrations—both direct and reverse—which especially intensified after the Second World War. Unlike previous generations of migrants, the members of these diasporas are not in a hurry to assimilate into the socio-cultural environment of the receiving societies. Instead, they continue to maintain—sometimes for several generations—a multifarious social and cultural identity and even political ties with their countries of origin. The Jewish world did not remain on the sidelines of this process. An important development in recent decades is the appearance of two new transnational Jewish diasporas: Israeli and Russian-Jewish. Both these groups undoubtedly became a noticeable factor of contemporary Jewish life and an important element in the multicultural mosaic within Jewish communities of the host countries and within host societies at large. Although the Jewish emigration from Israel and the “Israeli diaspora” (a term introduced by Steven Gold) has received considerable attention in the scholarly literature and the “global Russian-Jewish community” has become the subject of a series of fundamental works, the common component of these diasporas—Russian-speaking Israelis—remains understudied. The reference points here are both natives of the former USSR who came to the West as part of the emigration from Israel and participants of the “reverse migration” to the post-Soviet states. The academic literature contains a certain amount of information about Israelis in the countries of the West and very little about Israelis in the countries of the former USSR. The Ukrainian segment of this diaspora was practically ignored by scholars until recently. The only exception we are aware of is the research project on Israelis in Odessa carried out by the Ukrainian-British anthropologist Marina Sapritsky. The research on which this article is based aimed to fill this important gap. The project was implemented by the Lukshtein Center of Jewish Education in the Diaspora (Bar-Ilan University, Israel) and the Judaica Institute of the National University of Kyiv-Mohyla Academy (Ukraine) with the support from the Ministry of Aliyah and Absorption and the Eurasian Jewish Congress. In the course of this study, researchers held two rounds of interviews in 2009 and 2011 with 167 and 147 respondents from among Israelis who reside in Ukraine more or less permanently. We wanted in this process to compare the communities of Russian-speaking Israelis in Ukraine with similar control groups, primarily with Israelis working and living in Russia.
Translated Title: Antisemitism Report 2016
Date: 2017
Abstract: Depending on the study, anti-Semitic attitudes are to be encountered in 10 to 25 percent of the
population. The Swiss Federation of Jewish Communities (SIG) and the Foundation against
Racism and Anti-Semitism (GRA) show in their Anti-Semitism report for 2016 what happens
when attitudes become actions.

In 2016, the year under report, serious incidents were recorded from the spectrum of the extreme
Right: In October 2016, in Toggenburg, a concert was held featuring some notorious neo-Nazi
bands. According to media reports, around 5000 people attended the event.

A number of the bands appearing included songs with anti-Semitic content in their repertoire;
photos of the event show concertgoers giving the Hitler salute. A serious event likewise came to
light in October 2016: In one of their songs, members of a neo-Nazi band made death threats
against the SIG President and members of the SIG management. They also warned of bomb
attacks on Jewish institutions in Zurich.

In July the SIG received an E-mail containing blackmail threats. Jews were held responsible for
all the world’s misfortunes. The unknown sender demanded a large amount of money from the
SIG. If the SIG failed to pay up, the blackmailer threatened that “Jewish people in Switzerland will
bear the consequences”. Two incidents of physical violence occurred in Zurich: At a football
ground two Jewish youngsters asked other footballers if they could join in. The answer was:
“You’re Jews. There’s nothing here for Jews. S**t Jews”. The two Jewish youngsters were then
spat on. As they left they were followed by jeers of “Heil Hitler”. Again in Zurich, in April a Jewish
boy was the victim of massive anti-Semitic invective in the street and was spat on as he rode his
bicycle past three young people.

As the focus of his contribution the historian Daniel Rickenbacher, under the title “When hatred of
Jews creates unity”, looks at the cross-front phenomenon in Switzerland. Cross-fronts is the term
coined to describe associations which are formed between groups who are at opposite ends of
the political spectrum. Rickenbacher shows that in Switzerland informal interaction exists
between groupings on the Left, the Right, and Islamists. According to Rickenbacher, the
embedding of anti-Semitism in a range of different political spectra provides the basis for groups
to find common ground who would otherwise be assumed to be in complete opposition.
Date: 2017
Abstract: This book offers an extensive introduction and 13 diverse essays on how World War II, the Holocaust, and their aftermath affected Jewish families and Jewish communities, with an especially close look at the roles played by women, youth, and children. Focusing on Eastern and Central Europe, themes explored include: how Jewish parents handled the Nazi threat; rescue and resistance within the Jewish family unit; the transformation of gender roles under duress; youth’s wartime and early postwar experiences; postwar reconstruction of the Jewish family; rehabilitation of Jewish children and youth; and the role of Zionism in shaping the present and future of young survivors.

Contents
• Foreword—Sylvia Barack Fishman
• Preface—Joanna Beata Michlic
• Jewish Families in Europe, 1939–Present: History, Representation, and Memory—An Introduction—Joanna Beata Michlic
• PART I: PARENTHOOD AND CHILDHOOD UNDER SIEGE, 1939–1945
• Parenthood in the Shadow of the Holocaust—Dalia Ofer
• Clandestine Activities and Concealed Presence: A Case Study of Children in the Kraków Ghetto—Joanna Sliwa
• Resistance in Everyday Life: Family Strategies, Role Reversals, and Role Sharing in the Holocaust—Lenore J. Weitzman
• The National Institute for the Israelite Deaf-Mute in Budapest, 1938–1948: A Case Study for the Rescue Strategy of Continuously Operating Jewish Communal Institutions—Kinga Frojimovics
• Moving Together, Moving Alone: The Story of Boys on a Transport from Auschwitz to Buchenwald—Kenneth Waltzer
• Life in Hiding and Beyond—Jennifer Marlow
• PART II: AFTER THE WAR: REBUILDING SHATTERED LIVES, RECOLLECTING WARTIME EXPERIENCES
• A Zionist Home: Jewish Youths and the Kibbutz Family after the Holocaust—Avinoam Patt
• What Does a Child Remember? Recollections of the War and the Early Postwar Period among Child Survivors from Poland—Joanna Beata Michlic
• Memory Imprints: Testimonies as Historical Sources—Rita Horváth
• “I Will Not Be Believed”: Benjamin Tenenbaum and the Representation of the Child Survivor—Boaz Cohen and Gabriel N. Finder
• Transcending Memory in Holocaust Survivors’ Families—Uta Larkey
• Holocaust Child Survivors, Sixty-Five Years after Liberation: From Mourning to Creativity—Eva Fogelman
• Afterword: In Defense of Eyewitness Testimonies: Reflections of a Writer and Child Survivor of the Holocaust—Henryk Grynberg
• List of Contributors
• Index
Translated Title: Jews, Muslims and the Republic
Date: 2017
Date: 2017
Date: 2017
Author(s): Wagner, Leslie
Date: 2017
Abstract: It is unusual to find the words “revival” and “British Jewry” in the same sentence. Several decades ago, the title of this paper would have come as a surprise to the many critics of British Jewry. For example, in 1989, Professor Daniel Elazar observed that “the powers that be in British Jewry are content with the status quo and do not seek change.” Author Steven Brook (1990) scathingly remarked that the leadership of British Jewry “revels in its mediocrity, shallowness and philistinism.” And, in 1996, in the conclusion of his study, entitled Vanishing Diaspora: The Jews of Europe Since 1945, Professor Bernard Wasserstein stated that the Jews of Britain are “slowly but surely … fading away. Soon nothing will be left but a disembodied memory.”

The current claim that a revival of British Jewry has taken place is supported mainly by the excellent work of the Institute for Jewish Policy Research (JPR) in London. The JPR has carried out an important analysis of the UK national census data of 2011 and supplemented it with its own more recent community studies, in particular, its 2013 National Jewish Community Survey (NJCS) and its 2016 Jewish Schools report. To be sure, as with all sociological studies, particularly concerning Jews, there are less encouraging data that emphasize the challenges, failures and threats that confront the British Jewish community.

This essay, however, argues that the vibrancy of a community should not be judged by the threats that it faces. While threats and danger form an existential part of Jewish life, they do not necessarily determine the strength or weakness of a particular community. It is important that a community understands the nature of such threats and can organize to overcome them successfully. In doing so, the Jewish community in the U.K. provides evidence that it is vibrant and undergoing a revival. This study focuses on four aspects that show the revival of British Jewish life: demography; religious identity; educational and cultural activity; and confronting antisemitism.
Date: 2017
Abstract: This report summarises the findings of a survey of Jewish students conducted by NUS between November 2016 and February
2017. It aimed to take stock of the experience of Jewish students in higher education at a time when the number of recorded anti-Semitic incidents has increased, both on and off campus, and because it is critical that NUS, students’ unions, universities and the wider higher
education sector understand the needs of Jewish students.

Some 485 self-defining Jewish students responded to the survey. The vast majority of the respondents were in full time
education (96 per cent), aged 17-24 (91per cent), studying at undergraduate level (86 per cent) and were UK citizens (87 per
cent).

The key findings of the report can be summarised as follows:

Provision:
• A plurality of students reported there was no kosher food on or near campus (42 per cent)
• The majority of students surveyed disagreed or strongly disagreed that their university avoids scheduling
classes and exams during Sabbath and Jewish religious festivals (59 per cent).

Academic coverage of Judaism:
A plurality of students surveyed either agreed or strongly agreed that:
• They feel comfortable with the way in which issues relating to Jewish people/Judaism are covered in class (36 per cent).
The majority of students surveyed either agreed or strongly agreed that:
• They have not experienced negative issues in classes related to Judaism (57 per cent).

Engagement with Students’ Unions:
• Respondents showed a high level of engagement with their students’ unions including being members of a society
or a sports club (69 per cent) and voting in student elections (75 per cent)
• Almost half of students felt they were always or usually able to participate in student politics (47 per cent).
A plurality or the majority of students surveyed either disagreed or strongly disagreed that:
• As a Jewish student they felt their SU understands their needs (43 per cent)
• As a Jewish student they feel represented by their SU (51 per cent).
• Their SU policy reflects the views of Jewish students (45 per cent).

Engagement with NUS:
• Almost half of students surveyed either disagreed or strongly disagreed that they would feel comfortable attending
NUS events (49 per cent)
• Two fifths either disagreed or strongly disagreed that they would feel comfortable engaging in NUS policymaking
processes (42 per cent)
• The majority of students either disagreed or strongly disagreed that NUS would respond appropriately to
allegations of antisemitism if they arose (65 per cent).

Israel/Palestine:
• In an academic context, over half of students surveyed agreed or strongly agreed that they felt comfortable
engaging in debate on Israel/Palestine (55 per cent).
Either a plurality or the majority of students surveyed disagreed or strongly disagreed that:
• As a Jew they felt confident to voice their opinions on Israel/Palestine in class (45 per cent)
• They felt comfortable engaging in debate on Israel/Palestine in their SUs or in a society context (54 per cent)
• They felt comfortable engaging in debate on Israel/Palestine on campus (50 per cent)
• The vast majority of students whose Students’ Union had a BDS policy or campaign did not feel comfortable or
comfortable at all with it (68 per cent).

Hate Crime:
The majority of students surveyed:
• Were not very or not at all worried about being subject to verbal abuse, physical attack, vandalism, property
damage or theft because of their Jewish belief (73 per cent)
• Had not experienced any crime whilst they have been students at their current place of study (65 per cent)
• Over a quarter have experienced personal abuse through social media or other communication (28 per cent)
• Of those who had experienced crime the majority believed these incidents were motivated by the perpetrator’s prejudice
towards them based on their Jewish belief (66 per cent).

Search results

Your search found 18 items
You ran an advanced options search
Sort: Relevance | Topics | Title | Author | Publication Year