Manfred Gerstenfeld American Jewry: Present and Future The condition and comfort level of Jews are influenced to a great extent by society at large. Hence, to assess the future of American Jewry attention must also be given to potentially major changes in the social, political, and economic environment in the United States. With this comes the question of the future of America’s status—including that of the continued relevance of its military might, Pax Americana, and the defense of democracy—in the world. Indeed, how the current administration and the following ones will modify the United States’ role as the single superpower is yet to emerge. One of the most immediate questions is whether the future withdrawals from Iraq and Afghanistan will be viewed as defeats. Even if such an analysis of the future can only be superficial, it can be helpful. Two major events of the last decade in the United States have greatly affected the world at large. At the turn of the century, few, if any, would have predicted that the United States would soon be hit by a terrorist attack of major magnitude. The events of September 11, 2001, led the United States—jointly with lesser allies—into two wars in Asia. Furthermore, a major economic crisis started in 2008 whose full consequences are not yet known. The Larger Picture When looking at the American scene from abroad, both mega-events appear as part of a larger picture, framed by the reemergence of major totalitarian forces in the Islamic world. Most such forces had faded away many centuries ago. In recent decades, however, they have mutated into new variants, of which the worldview promoted by Al Qaeda is one. The functioning of the Western economic system is another source of potential great unrest. “Vulnerability” and “uncertainty” may become important code words of the coming decades. The 2008 crisis began in the United States and metastasized from there. The reverse could happen in the future. It is doubtful whether the checks and balances of the extensive European monetary system are adequate to deal with major problems that may arise. At present some international bankers already say that neither the dollar nor the euro are safe investment vehicles. It is important to remember that there had been warning signs for both mega- 55 56 Manfred Gerstenfeld events in the United States. It was widely known that the “subprime mortgage” market in the country was unsound. Intelligence services had indications about the activities of Al Qaeda. If regulations had been followed, most of the middle- class Saudi terrorists who perpetrated 9/11 would not have been allowed into the country.1 Abraham D. Sofaer, a former legal adviser to the State Department testified: “The fact is that, well before September 11, 2001, the intelligence community and the ‘Terrorism Czar’ and everyone to whom they reported all knew that additional attacks by Al Qaeda were being planned and would certainly be attempted. Nonetheless, they failed to do before September 11 what was done immediately thereafter.”2 The problems of nations not wanting to deal with future threats are often structural. Malcolm Hoenlein, executive vice-chairman of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, said: “It was impossible to tell the American people that the Taliban represented a danger. When I mentioned this in my speeches as early as 1996, people looked at me as if I was discussing a conflict on Mars. I said to audiences: ‘You don’t know where Afghanistan is or who the Taliban are, but eventually your grandchildren will pay the price if we fail to act.’”3 All this emphasizes that, even when some major signs of the future can be read, action will not necessarily be taken to prevent disasters from happening. The possible realization of Iran’s nuclear plans may provide additional proof of this. The Nature of Postmodern Society The complex nature of postmodern society needs to be understood as well. It can only be defined in relation to what it has gradually replaced—modernity. Its major characteristics include the multitude and fragmentation of issues that come to attention in a disorderly fashion. In such a culture, defining common priorities becomes increasingly difficult. The same is true for the maintenance of common values by large parts of society. In a postmodern world, multiple identities, secularism, fundamentalism, and the breakdown of authority can all flourish simultaneously. How postmodernity’s characteristics will influence American society, whose values include multiculturalism and pluralism, is largely unpredictable. Individualism leads to the breakdown of responsibility. Being nonjudgmental can be shamelessly presented as a merit rather than a deficiency. It may mean that concern for the perpetrator and for the victim are equivalent narratives. Alan Mittleman suggests that a key issue in contemporary society is the loss of faith in institutions, especially those of government, but including other traditional institutional loci as well. He observes: “There is a hollowing-out of faith in long- American Jewry: Present and Future 57 established American myths, such as progress, upward mobility, and so on. There is a concomitant loss of social or public hope. None of these malign phenomena precisely map onto ‘individualism.’”4 Indeed it may well be that the next generation of Americans will not do better economically than that of its parents. The combination of some of these factors leads to increased polarization, which further intensifies the disintegration of society and is affecting the American Jewish community as well. David A. Harris, executive director of the American Jewish Committee said: “Younger American Jews do not reflect their parents’ attitudes so much as the overall apathy or cynicism toward society.”5 Yet at the same time new institutions, initiated by members of the younger generation, are flourishing. When trying to forecast where the United States may be ten years from now, one must assess, as much as possible, trends regarding a large number of issues. This should be done by asking multiple questions. Some are unanswerable; others can be answered with a high probability. Examples of the first are: when will the next economic crisis occur? Where and from what will it originate, and how major will it be? What will be its main consequences? Another possibly related question: will oil continue to flow to the West without interruption? An example of a question about the future that can be answered with little uncertainty is: will society be more or less complex ten years from now? With technology and communications developing in so many directions, it is highly probable that complexity will increase even further. One can ask, moreover, whether a greater or smaller percentage of people will be able to cope with the challenges of such an environment. The answer is that the more complex society becomes, the more likely it is that fewer people will be able to cope. In such a social order there will probably be even greater tendencies toward fragmentation, that is, disintegration. In such a society the borders of the politically correct will also be increasingly challenged and taboos increasingly broken. The Future of Jihadism In a world whose main elements are becoming opaque for an increasing number of people, is Muslim jihadism going to disappear, or at least greatly weaken? That seems unlikely both in view of the fanatically ideological commitment of its promoters and because people are inclined to look in an amorphous world for something they perceive as more certain. The Muslim world is permeated with a clear-cut recipe for an apocalyptic totalitarian future. This does not contradict the possibility that even more Muslims will reject extremism. Some surveys show declining public support for suicide bombings among many Muslim populations. A 2009 Pew study, however, also found that more than 20 percent of Muslims in Indonesia, Jordan, and Egypt have confidence in Osama bin Laden doing “the right thing in world affairs.” Among 58 Manfred Gerstenfeld Nigerian Muslims this percentage was over 50 percent.6 When President Barack Obama said in his Cairo speech of June 2009 that the extremists were a “small but potent minority,”7 he was clearly understating the problem. The Pew study and other data indicate that there are many more current adherents of extremist Islam than the number of Nazis at the time Hitler invaded Poland in 1939. They are far from a majority in the Muslim world. The same, however, is true of the committed moderate and secular Muslims on the other side of the ideological spectrum. These are also less well organized. A large, presently uncommitted center will usually side with the likely winner. Is the world thus moving toward a large-scale clash of cultures? There seems little place for this in a postmodern reality. Far more possible is that there will be many clashes of segments of cultures. The main ones are likely to be between parts of Muslim and parts of Western culture. Tensions with China and Russia may further complicate matters, fostering additional disorder. The United States will also be influenced by these developments. In such an environment preventing a gradual disintegration of society may become more important than working for a better world. What can those who are in positions of responsibility do to cope with these challenges? The answers seem to be varied, and include greater flexibility in thought and action. Requirements include the acquisition of multiple skills, continuous monitoring of change, and developing as many safeguards against risks as possible. A Classic Approach Hereafter, a more classic analysis will be made of a necessarily limited and selective number of issues concerning American Jewish society’s present, as well as its future prospects and challenges.