Comments on: Is Birthright for Bibi?

By: Herbert Kaine

Herbert Kaine — Wed, 10 Dec 2008 04:32:58 +0000

Why shouldnt Birthright represent in part the views of its funders? There are already groups more in line with Josh Nathan-Kazis’ viewpoints, such as International Solidarity Movement, Birhtright palestine, and others. If one wants to do something really daring, they can sail a boat into Gaza and provide aid to hamas. That would be an unforgettable experience for a young Jew

By: ka

ka — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 05:27:12 +0000

michael steinhardt and charles bronfman are hardly right wingers.

By: Yam Erez

Yam Erez — Mon, 08 Dec 2008 11:33:11 +0000

One can speak to settlers without crossing the Green Line: They probably held a panel in Jerusalem or elsewhere; it’s a technicality. The problem is the imbalance of the information that participants are fed.

By: aliyah06

aliyah06 — Mon, 08 Dec 2008 05:28:36 +0000

You sure about this? My stepdaughter’s best friend is a Birthright trip leader and she’s to the Left of Gershon…..and she’s never taken a trip over the Green Line….

By: Michael

Michael — Sun, 07 Dec 2008 19:35:44 +0000

“They’ve met settlers in the West Bank” – Really? I thought Birthright was strictly limited to west of the green line.

The Union of Progressive Zionists are one group running a less ‘rose-tinted’ and more educational Birthright programme:

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1201070782892&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

By: Clif

Clif — Sun, 07 Dec 2008 18:30:02 +0000

Again, you’ve furthered my education.

When my nephew returned from a Birthright trip, I asked him if they had visited the occupied territories. He said no, it was too dangerous.

But the occupied territories and what is going on there are a (I hesitate to say integral) part of modern day Israel and definitely a product of the policy, stated or otherwise, of the Israeli government. The territories are THE issue and a place that a good number of Israelis call home.

It would be one thing if it were simply a vacation trip to Israel, but since it is, as I understand, a deliberate attempt to form a bond with the country how can one visit only a part of the area? To say it is too dangerous is a nice way to escape the whole issue with few objections – especially from concerned parents. To say instead that it isn’t legally part of Israel would be honest, but I wonder what politics would be involved in finding someone who, acting as a Birthright guide, would say it.

What I draw from your description of how the program works is that those who wish to send their children can tailor the visit to reflect the Israel they would like their children to know, so that Birthright is really the same birthright we all have; to be given a view of the world from the eyes of those who gave us birth. It is up to us as individuals to pull that filter from our eyes and find the world for ourselves.

I found out that one young man from a family we know was determined to go on a Birthright trip and get into the occupied territories to take a look. But I was told his effort was the act of an idiot and “self-hater”

By: Josh Nathan-Kazis

Josh Nathan-Kazis — Sun, 07 Dec 2008 17:30:40 +0000

You’re entirely misrepresenting my article. I simply don’t say that Birthright is “a propaganda machine aimed at promoting a particular right-wing nationalist vision of the Jewish state.” The idea that Birthright is propagandistic is entirely incidental to my piece. Rather, I’m arguing that in the implicit transaction between the participant and the donor, the donor receives a certain amount of status, and in the case of Adelson, who gave such a huge percentage of Birthright’s operating costs, the donor receives a lot of status. I argued that participants should consider that Adelson uses this status to pursue a right wing agenda, and as such those who take his money are implicated in his political work.

By: Conservative apikoris

Conservative apikoris — Sun, 07 Dec 2008 17:16:34 +0000

My problem with Birthright is that it’s spending communal money on people less likely to end up remaining connected to the Jewish community — and this at the expense of people who already have committed to remain connected.

My kids attend Jewish say school, which has a Birthright-type trip as part of its curriculum. But we have to pay more than $3,500 a kid for the privilege. That’s on top of $10K+ tuition. And having been on the school trip, our kids will be ineligible for a Birthright trip.

As you can imagine, I’m not too responsive when the UJA fundraisers come knocking at the door.

By the way, I spent a “gap year” in Israel on a Zionist youth group program in the early 70′s which had a total fee of $1,100. Adjusting for inflation, the fee in 2008 dollars would be about $5,800. The ruition being occurring charged for this same program today is $14,000.

The American Jewish community got a good investment on that subsidized $1,100 tuition, even if you would discount my “heretical” blogging since 2005. I’ve spent over 30 years as an engaged and committed member of various Jewish communities, helping make Jewish life happen on ca,pus, keeping ,y sysnagogue running, and raising a Jewish family.

Maybe Adelson and the other moneybags should be using more of their loot to subsidize the existing programs that serve young people likely to remain connected to Judaism. And, of course, there art other ways that people can connect to Judaism bedsides taking a trip to Israel.