Group Distinctiveness and Ethnic Identity Among 1.5 and Second- Generation Russian-Speaking Jewish Immigrants in Germany and the U.S
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
City University of New York (CUNY) CUNY Academic Works All Dissertations, Theses, and Capstone Projects Dissertations, Theses, and Capstone Projects 5-2019 Group Distinctiveness and Ethnic Identity Among 1.5 and Second- generation Russian-speaking Jewish Immigrants in Germany and the U.S. Jay (Koby) Oppenheim The Graduate Center, City University of New York How does access to this work benefit ou?y Let us know! More information about this work at: https://academicworks.cuny.edu/gc_etds/3256 Discover additional works at: https://academicworks.cuny.edu This work is made publicly available by the City University of New York (CUNY). Contact: [email protected] GROUP DISTINCTIVENESS AND ETHNIC IDENTITY AMONG 1.5 AND SECOND-GENERATION RUSSIAN-SPEAKING JEWISH IMMIGRANTS IN GERMANY AND THE U.S. by JAY JOSHUA OPPENHEIM A dissertation submitted to the Graduate Faculty in Sociology in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, The City University of New York 2019 1 © 2019 JAY JOSHUA OPPENHEIM All Rights Reserved ii Group Distinctiveness and Ethnic Identity among 1.5 and Second-generation Russian- speaking Jewish Immigrants in Germany and the U.S. by Jay Joshua Oppenheim This manuscript has been read and accepted for the Graduate Faculty in Sociology in satisfaction of the dissertation requirement for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Date Richard Alba Chair of Examining Committee Date Lynn Chancer Executive Officer Supervisory Committee: Richard Alba Nancy Foner Philip Kasinitz THE CITY UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK iii ABSTRACT Group Distinctiveness and Ethnic Identity among 1.5 and Second-generation Russian- speaking Jewish Immigrants in Germany and the U.S. by Jay Joshua Oppenheim Advisor: Richard Alba This study investigates the ethnic identity of the 1.5 and second-generation of Russian- speaking Jewish immigrants to Germany and the U.S. in the most recent wave of immigration. Between 1989 and the mid-2000s, approximately 320,000 Russian-speaking Jewish immigrants departed the (former) Soviet Union for the U.S. and an additional 220,000 moved to Germany. The 1.5 and second-generations have successfully integrated into mainstream institutions, like schools and the workforce, but not the co-ethnic Jewish community in each country. Moreover, Russian-speaking Jewish immigrants are subject to a number of critiques, most prominently, of having a ‘thin culture’ that relies on abstract forms of ethnic expression and lacks in frequent and concrete forms of identification (Gitelman 1998). The study asks several questions: how the 1.5 and second-generation see themselves as a distinctive social group? Where do they locate social boundaries between themselves and others? How do they maintain them? Close family ties lie at the center of the group’s ethnic identity. Russian-speaking cultures offer an alternative, and in the mind of the 1.5 and second-generation, superior approach to relating to family and friends, where, for example, being an unmarried adult iv does not contradict living at home or where youths and adults can socialize in the same setting. Their understandings and practices of family often run counter to the expectations of the mainstream in both Germany and the U.S. of what it means to be an independent adult. The organization and expectation of social relations among these immigrants reflect not only their different national origins, but their constitution as a distinctive moral community. Different foods and language use support these immigrants’ sense of group distinctiveness and reinforce the centrality of family as a shared ethnic practice. Immigration has endowed family practices with the capacity to impart a sense of distinctiveness to the 1.5 and second-generation by changing the context in which close family ties are practiced. Transported across national borders these practices now contrast with prevailing understandings of family and serve as a cultural resource. Moreover, Russian- speaking Jewish immigrants have benefited, both culturally and economically, from state policies that granted them refugee status and enabled them to cross national borders as families and avoid years of separation other immigrants often must endure. The distinctiveness of Russian-speaking Jewish immigrants’ family practices is relative to those of the receiving country’s mainstream, but not those of other immigrant groups. As a result, a sense of group difference and belonging anchored in these practices may be challenging to impart to the third generation, who are removed from the immigration experience. Nevertheless, the 1.5 and second-generation experience their family relationships, obligations and expectations as anything but ‘thin’. They inform consequential decisions, are encountered regularly, and offer meaning to their lives as individuals, children and members of an immigrant and ethnic group. v This study draws on in-depth interviews in New York City and multiple locations in Germany with 93 Russian-speaking Jewish immigrants who arrived at the age of 13 or younger or were born in the U.S. or Germany. Despite the different history and structure of Jewish communities in the U.S. and Germany, 1.5 and second-generation Russian-speaking Jewish immigrants’ experience in each country have much in common with one another, a finding that emerged as a result of the study’s comparative design. vi ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This dissertation is the product of many contributions of which I am appreciative. I benefited from support from the CUNY Graduate Center in the form of both a Chancellor's Fellowship and later a dissertation award, as well as the Zeit Stiftung’s “Settling into Motion” fellowship, a Fulbright award and a Berman Foundation Dissertation Fellowship from the Association for Jewish Studies. I was fortunate to be able to participate in workshops organized by the Universität Viadrina (Frankfurt (Oder)), the University of Sussex (Brighton, UK), the Leonid Nevzlin Research Center at Hebrew University and National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) Summer Institute at Columbia University as well as the Max-Planck-Institute for the Study of Religious and Ethnic Diversity. Each helped develop a facet of this work, introducing me to new avenues of inquiry, raising important questions and connecting me with students and scholars that enriched the dissertation experience. My affiliation with the Institute for European Ethnology of the Humboldt University, courtesy of its director Wolfgang Kaschuba, facilitated my fieldwork there greaterly. I am grateful to my dissertation chair, Richard Alba, for the helpful, insightful and patient feedback he has provided, and to the dissertation committee (Richard Alba, Nancy Foner and Phil Kasinitz) for its support and encouragement. This study would not have been possible without the generosity of interview participants, who shared their time, experiences, and reflections, and the assistance of those who helped me reach them. vii Contents Lists of Tables ................................................................................................................... xii Chapter 1: Introduction ....................................................................................................... 1 Soviet Jewish immigration ............................................................................................... 1 Soviet Jewish life ............................................................................................................. 2 Study’s research focus ..................................................................................................... 4 Immigrant, Jewish, and refugee ..................................................................................... 11 Theories of ethnic identity ............................................................................................. 13 Immigrants from (Post-)Socialist societies and the study of ethnic identity ................. 15 Seeking difference in the wrong places ......................................................................... 20 Advantages of a generation and a half (or two) ............................................................. 27 From co-religionists to co-ethnics ................................................................................. 29 Contributions.................................................................................................................. 33 Expectations and learnings ............................................................................................ 34 Comparative Design....................................................................................................... 37 Defining Terms .............................................................................................................. 40 Methodology .................................................................................................................. 43 Criteria for study qualification .......................................................................................... 43 Geographic selection and comparison .............................................................................. 47 Overview of interviewees ................................................................................................. 51 Interview and Analysis ..................................................................................................... 53 Interviewer as Instrument and Analyst ............................................................................