Is Tikkun Olam a substitute for Israel?

Is Tikkun Olam a substitute for Israel? 1/11/2007 , Haaretz.com
We know that young American Jews are less supportive of Israel than their parents. Does the trend of Tikkun Olam is yet another proof that they are looking for new ways, unrelated to Israel, to express their Judaism?
1. A couple of readers wrote to me with some sense of concern, following my recent article on the Chicago based "The Jewish Council on Urban Affairs" (the fourth part of my series on the Changing face of American Judaism). All these letters were along similar lines (let's be honest here: there were 4 of them, not hundreds): the writers expressed suspicion of the Council's attitudes toward Israel, or lack thereof. Maybe the readers thought that as an Israeli this will be my main point of interest in regard to this topic, but it isn't. Maybe it was seen by these readers as the most problematic aspect of the group's activities (there are many other aspects that can be criticized, or admired). This group, they wrote, is very liberal, too liberal, and does not convey a sense of support for Israel (I heard the same argument from people in the Chicago Federation). On the broader sense, these letters were dealing with a question that does not concern the Council alone, but rather the whole notion of Tikkun Olam - repairing the world. Does this still-growing trend of caring for the world mean "the world rather than Israel."
2. Some circumstantial evidence might show that it is. As the Tikkun Olam trend is on the rise, support for Israel, especially among the younger generation is declining. An AJC study concluded that "For most American Jews born before 1965, the major Jewish shaping experiences were the Holocaust and the birth of the State of Israel. While many scholars have argued that with increased time-distance from these two events, their impact on younger Jews should be attenuating, it appears that there is a divergent response the Holocaust continues to be profoundly important to a broad spectrum of young Jews, yet Israel appears to much less important in positively affecting Jewish identity." 3. But it is not just the holocaust that's important to young American Jews expressing their identity. Contribution to the community is important to them (55%), but not necessarily to the Jewish community. Only 39 percent cited their ethnic group as being of special significance - a low percentage as compared to other minority groups, such as the blacks (60 percent) or Hispanics (48 percent), but slightly higher than that of Americans of Asian descent (34 percent). Writing about generation Y a while ago, I cited these numbers from Anna Greenberg's study: "When she asked young people what it means to them to be Jewish, she got the following responses, in this order: remembering the Shoah (a great deal - 73 percent, a fair amount - 89 percent); making the world a better place (64 percent, 82 percent); living a moral lifestyle (63 percent, 80 percent); understanding Jewish history (58 percent, 84 percent); learning about Jewish culture (57 percent, 83 percent); and so on." Greenberg's research places Israel in a reasonable position in the middle of the order of Jewish priorities of young Americans: 54 percent think that Israel is very important, 80 percent feel it is very important or quite important (the study is here). 4. Here's one anecdotal example as to give you a sense of young, trendy, liberal American Jewish thinking about this matter. A couple of months ago, in a dialogue with Jewcy editor Tahl Raz, I asked him both about Jewish Peoplehood and Tikkun Olam, and he offered these two contradictive responses: Jewish Peoplehood: "No significance, and too muddled a term to say that it has any concrete meaning. When the Jews of pre-WWI Poland didn't speak the language of their own country, occupied a distinctive economic and social niche, and had virtually no social interaction with non-Jews, it made sense to talk of them as a people. But American life has annihilated Jewish Peoplehood." Tikkun Olam: "Essential. If Judaism can't inform Jews as to how to navigate the universal ethical dilemmas of modern life, then the religion isn't worth keeping. We're better off all converting to Quakerism. Tikkun olam will have to be a vastly more significant and better elaborated component of Judaism than it has historically been." 5. But back to the initial question: does this mean that Tikkun Olam is a way to avoid Israel, to find alternative venues as to express ones Judaism? Here's one example showing that no, it doesn?t have to be Tikkun OR Israel: "Agahozo Shalom, slated to open its doors in September 2008, will bring together Jewish donors from the United States, African Israeli staffers (Jewish Ethiopian graduates of Yemin Orde) and a rescue operation in Rwanda - all under the Israeli flag." As I wrote half a year ago: Anne Heyman's project offers a perfect integration of the new Jewish philanthropy model: helping Israel and tikkun olam. 6. So, pick your analysis. I heard these two lines of explanations ? presented here in a somewhat simplistic way ? in the last couple of months. Not surprisingly, the first one was coming mostly from people more concerned with Israel, the other one mostly from people more involved with Tikkun Olam. Tikkun Olam is a neatly tailored way for the disillusioned, tired, and sometimes embarrassed-with-Israel American Jews to express there Judaism in a fashion more in co ordinance with their liberal views. Tikkun Olam is another expression of ones Judaism, that's now taking center stage simply because now the Jews can afford it: anti-Semitism is down, Israel is more secure, Jewish Americans are wealthy and prosperous and it is time for them to give something back to the community.