Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

The Southern Israelite Page 3 THE VOICE OF AMERICAN JEWRY America has long been known as the Land of Organization; and the Jews have, proportionately, more organiza tions than any other racial group in the country. The Jews from Lemberg are quick to form a Lemberg Relief Society; the Jews of Lithuanian origin organize a Lithuanian-American so ciety; then there are innumerable oth er types of religious, social, fraternal, economic and cultural groups to which Jews belong. Some psychologists have reasoned that this Will-to-Organization is a symbol of the restlessness which the j ew feels; he wants to identify him self with as many closed societies as possible in order to shield himself from a world which he subconsciously feels is hostile. Forced gregariousness with fellow-Jews over many centuries may also be the power that has caused the formation of the endless Jewish societies that now exist. It is also pos sible that the Jew has a highly social instinct. Whatever benefits may have ac crued to the Jew from his affiliation with one society or another, his or ganizing tendency has done immense harm to the Jewish body politics, ac cording to the views of those who most concern themselves with the problem. Because American Jews have split themselves into so many parties, factions, elements and interests they have made impossible a united Jewish opinion in the highest sense of the word. Because too many have sought to be leaders within the smaller circle, the wide field of Jewish welfare has remained unmanned. It is true that there are perhaps three or four out standing leaders in American-Jewish life today, but any opinion that they express is actually a personal observa tion and does not carry the weight of organized public opinion. There are a few organizations which are the most important potentially tor the American-Jewish public. They are, without any reference to their comparative standing, the American Jewish Committee, the American Jew ish Congress, the B’nai Brith, the Zionist Organization, and the Union American Hebrew Congregations. And yet, an opinion from the leader of any one of these organizations does not denote the support of the Jewish public. Believing that this phase of Amer ^an-Jewish life is one of the most in Portant in contemporary Jewish lif. writer presented the problem t several men in each of the above-mer !° ne( Bodies. It is interesting to not ,, a ‘ person interviewed thougl at his particular organization coul< should, deal with every phase c Amencan-Jewisb life> When ifc wfl ti /! e out ^at obviously this pai sent organ * zat i°n does not reprt e rest of American Jewry, th £! n ;°n interviewed replied that his oi Thf. f tlon . deserves such recognitioi son C ^ n Jewish Committee list ca on f t u 6 ^ oremost names in Amer Concrro 3 ^ 0ard; American Jewis ocra^ SS presu mably the most den ratlc of the national Jewis 4/i Analysis of a Contemporary Jewish Problem By JOSEPH SALMARK Descnbing the various organizations now existing that presume to repre sent different elements in American-Jewish life, Mr. Salmark very thoroughly and directly presents the problem of one unified body that would actually ex press the voice of the community. Neither blaming nor praising any particular existing institution, Mr. Sal- mark approaches the problem from an analytical point of view, and presents a situation which, although not immediately alarming, is one that merits the at tention of every Jew interested in the perpetuation of the highest traditions of American Jewry. —The Editor. bodies; the B’nai Brith membership includes the most substantial elements in the Jewish community; the Zion ist Organization propagandizes an ideal to which the great majority of Jewry has given allegiance; the Union of American Hebrew Congregations represent the most powefTully or ganized Jewish religious group. These were some of the characterizations applied to their organizations by the individuals interviewed. The fact remains that each group is distant from the others; has little, if any, contact with the others. As a result, we have had some of the most absurd situations in American-Jewish life within recent years. Not long ago there was a tragic situation involving the fundamental interests of American Of JO/tPU /uvcrmAn Oi: Ito. M. Pranklin Oi: Abram /imon Or David Pwiuivon Dr. 14. G. twttow Dr. /ton. Vt JrBWARD N. CAlt/tH Dlt WlUlAM ftO/lNAU R.AB8I LOU>/ WoIfl Y Memories of other days will be recalled on Thursday morning, June 27th, by eight Past Presidents of the Central Conference of American Rabbis in a symposium at its 40th Annual Convention of June 26th-July 1st in Detroit, Mich. The eight former presidents and the present president are: Top row: Doctors Joseph Silverman, Honorary Rabbi, Temple Emanu-El, New York, N. Y.; Leo M. Franklin, Temple Bethel, Detroit, Mich.; Abram Simon, Washington Hebrew Congregation, Washington, D. C. Center row: David Philipson, Rockdale Avenue Temple, Cincinnati, Ohio; H. G. Enelow, of Temple Emanu-El, New York; Joseph Stolz, Temple'Isaiah Israel, Chicago, Ill. Lower row: Edward N. Calisch, Beth Ahabah, Richmond, Va.; William Rosenau, Eutaw Place Temple, Baltimore, Md.; Louis Wolsey, Rodeph Shalom Philadelphia, Pa. Jews. The incident promised the resurrection of the blood libel. There upon at least ten statements were is sued by as many different persons at tacking the creators of the incident and demanding apologies and restitu tions both recklessly and irresponsibly. Obviously this was a situation which demanded tact, statesmanship and calm, combined with vigorous dignity. The stories which the press carried made the incident look like a farce, with a host of Jews scrambling for the most favorable publicity. Another factor in the disunity of Jewish life is the multiplicity of money-raising campaigns with which the Amercan-Jewish community is be sieged. It is possible and probable that each drive has a meritorious purpose, but it is inevitable that each of the funds should suffer as a result of the great number of them. Occasional suggestions have been made for a na tional Jewish community chest. Those who favor this solution declare that fund-raising would become more scien tific, would involve less inconvenience to the contributors, and would actu ally raise sufficient to cover all needs. But such a prospect is far off in the horizon until some central organiza tion can actually represent American Jews. The voice of American Jewry can become a powerful instrument for good in the hands of the Jewish com munity, was the statement made by this writer to the leaders of Jewish organizations he interviewed. Have you any steps to suggest which will hasten the weeding out of all the “static” so that one clear, resonant “voice” may be heard? That was the question asked of them. Some were frankly discouraged. They declared that there was too much difference of opinion among Jews to make possible any unified body representing all of American Jewry. They pointed to the history of the American Jewish Congress to il lustrate their point. This organization started out as the ideal body to which the entire community had been look ing. Every possible faction was rep resented when it was inaugurated more than a decade ago. But since then, though performing admirable service, it has lost its multiparty char acter. Here was an instrument that might have made possible a united Jewry, but it failed. This, then, was the experiment which proved the im possibility of a united Jewish public opinion, this person argued. Another point of view was that it would be dangerous for Jewry to have a single, unified expression. Some de clared that this would result in a mis understanding of the American-Jewish position by non-Jews. It would be in terpreted as an institution similar to the Methodist Board of Morals, Tem perance and Prohibition, according to the opponents of the idea. Non-Jews would interpret such a unified body as a political manoeuvre by the Jews, which attitude would result in con siderable harm, was their view. The Zionists were the most hopeful. Declaring that the platform of Pales tine gave American Jewry a basis for unity, they said that through ipiited work for Palestine a unanimity of (Continued on Page 11)