Diet­mar Rabich, Knöpfe — 2018 — 0502,” CC BY-SA 4.0, via Wiki­me­dia Commons

The moti­va­tion for writ­ing a book often falls some­where between arro­gance and gen­eros­i­ty. And it’s fun­ny how these two impuls­es inter­act. For exam­ple, the arro­gant part of me thinks that I’m so well-inten­tioned that I wrote a book only as a self­less exer­cise in generosity.

Com­pul­sion can also be a pow­er­ful source of moti­va­tion for writ­ers. Like a per­son who’s seen a Rorschach test and can’t unsee a par­tic­u­lar image, and then is dri­ven mad by the fail­ure of oth­ers to see the same one, writ­ers some­times feel they must bring oth­ers to see the world as they do.

My Rorschach image is the Jew­ish com­mu­ni­ty, and I’ve been look­ing at that pic­ture for many years. Amid the inkblots and ghost­ly fig­ures, I see that Jew­ish com­mu­ni­ties in the Dias­po­ra are con­fronting three simul­ta­ne­ous crises: a cri­sis of mean­ing, a cri­sis of belong­ing, and a cri­sis of orga­ni­za­tion­al struc­tures. This is not a ground­break­ing dis­cov­ery; many schol­ars have not­ed the same. What I am com­pelled to get the com­mu­ni­ty to see, hid­den deep in the crevices of the images we see every day, is that these crises are all linked to a pro­found trans­for­ma­tion of the human con­di­tion — one that was unleashed three hun­dred years ago by the forces of moder­ni­ty, and that has reached its apogee in our times.

Since the advent of moder­ni­ty, indi­vid­ual free­dom and choice have been expand­ing in con­cen­tric cir­cles, like the stone-induced rip­ples on the sur­face of a qui­et lake. The human being of today has more free­dom and pow­er than ever before in his­to­ry. Before the eigh­teenth cen­tu­ry, free­dom of choice was extreme­ly lim­it­ed, almost nonex­is­tent. In the late nine­teenth and ear­ly twen­ti­eth cen­tu­ry, the uni­verse of choice expand­ed rad­i­cal­ly. Peo­ple could choose things that in past cen­turies were man­dat­ed by social struc­tures, like reli­gion, occu­pa­tion, com­mu­ni­ty, place of res­i­dence, and spouse. In the twen­ty-first cen­tu­ry, that free­dom of choice has been tak­en to the extreme. If in the past we didn’t have free­dom of choice, we now don’t have free­dom from choice. In the nine­teenth and twen­ti­eth cen­turies, indi­vid­u­als chose iden­ti­ties, belong­ings, and alle­giances that came prepack­aged. In the Jew­ish con­text, you could be Ortho­dox, Reform, Zion­ist, Com­mu­nist, and so on. In the twen­ty-first cen­tu­ry, how­ev­er, we don’t only choose between iden­ti­ties, but we are forced to build our own, some­times from scratch. Even those who choose not to choose” are, para­dox­i­cal­ly, choosing.

If in the past we didn’t have free­dom of choice, we now don’t have free­dom from choice.

This is what gen­er­ates the mix­ture of unprece­dent­ed empow­er­ment and anx­i­ety with which we all live. Empow­er­ment because we have the free­dom and the tech­no­log­i­cal means to decide who we want to be; anx­i­ety because in a world of end­less choice, it’s impos­si­ble not to sec­ond-guess your deci­sions and obsess over the roads not tak­en. Because we need to build our own selves, we need to devote enor­mous ener­gy to self-dis­cov­ery.” And because we need our choic­es to be val­i­dat­ed, we trans­form self-expres­sion into a cen­tral social value.

Our com­mu­ni­ty has been feel­ing the symp­toms of these changes, the three crises out­lined above. But my point — the form in the Rorschach that I des­per­ate­ly want you to see — is that with­out under­stand­ing this New Human,” we won’t be able to redesign our com­mu­ni­ty sys­tem in a way that is rel­e­vant to our times.

In North Amer­i­ca, we have a com­mu­ni­ty that was, by and large, designed between 1890 and 1920. And it has served us well. But that com­mu­ni­ty — in all its dimen­sions, from the ide­o­log­i­cal to the struc­tur­al — was a response to the chal­lenges and his­tor­i­cal cir­cum­stances of the ear­ly twen­ti­eth cen­tu­ry, not to those that we face today.

So it falls on us to do what Jews have done so many times in our his­to­ry: to dance the mag­ic dance of change and preser­va­tion, con­ti­nu­ity and rup­ture, tra­di­tion and transition.

In my book, pub­lished in June 2024, I offer a few guide­lines on how to address those three crises. More than a list of action­able ideas, though, the book is an invi­ta­tion to think anew. I’m con­vinced that we have the intel­lec­tu­al (and finan­cial) where­with­al to cre­ate and sus­tain new ide­olo­gies, new com­mu­nal struc­tures, and new, mean­ing­ful forms of belonging.

I decid­ed to write Tra­di­tion and Tran­si­tion out of gen­eros­i­ty, arro­gance, and com­pul­sion, but in actu­al­ly writ­ing it, I expe­ri­enced a process of dis­cov­ery. I got to know fas­ci­nat­ing authors who pre­dict­ed our times with great accu­ra­cy. For exam­ple, one of the sem­i­nal works I used in my research is Peter Berger’s The Hereti­cal Imper­a­tive. Writ­ten decades ago, the book is a play on the ety­mol­o­gy of the word heretic,” from the Greek her­ateikon, the one who choos­es.” Berg­er fore­saw that in the late twen­ti­eth cen­tu­ry and beyond, we would all be heretics in the sense that we’d be forced to choose our own paths rather than fol­low dog­ma. Anoth­er work that opened my eyes to the dark­er sides of free choice is La fatigue d’être soi (The Weari­ness of Self) by French psy­chi­a­trist Alain Ehren­berg. Ehren­berg showed that through­out human his­to­ry, peo­ple have expe­ri­enced sad­ness and melan­choly, but the com­bi­na­tion of anx­i­ety and depres­sion that we see in the twen­ty-first cen­tu­ry is unique­ly mod­ern; it’s the result of the exhaust­ing (and doubt-gen­er­at­ing) process of build­ing one’s own self.

In my research, I also redis­cov­ered the authors of the Roman­tic Peri­od and saw them in a com­plete­ly new light. Andrea Wulf’s 2023 book, Mag­nif­i­cent Rebels: The First Roman­tics and the Inven­tion of the Self, demon­strates how much our under­stand­ing of the human con­di­tion was born in the salons of Iena amid the tur­moil of the Napoleon­ic Wars. And last but not least, I real­ized that the writ­ings of Cana­di­an philoso­pher Charles Tay­lor (espe­cial­ly The Ethics of Authen­tic­i­ty) should be oblig­a­tory read­ing for those in posi­tions of com­mu­nal leadership.

Giv­en that I am a com­mu­nal leader myself, the chal­lenges I out­line in the book fill me with dread, but also with an intox­i­cat­ing sense of oppor­tu­ni­ty. I feel excit­ed about the need to build new ways of being Jew­ish, but also over­whelmed by the nature of the task. Empow­er­ment and despon­den­cy — how 2024 of me!

Andrés Spokoiny is a long­time Jew­ish com­mu­nal leader with a his­to­ry of lead­ing suc­cess­ful orga­ni­za­tion­al trans­for­ma­tions. He is the pres­i­dent and CEO of the Jew­ish Fun­ders Net­work (JFN), the pre­mier phil­an­thropic orga­ni­za­tion of the Jew­ish world. Before that, Andrés served as the CEO of Fed­er­a­tion CJA in Mon­tre­al and, pri­or to that, he worked for the Amer­i­can Jew­ish Joint Dis­tri­b­u­tion Com­mu­ni­ty (JDC) in Paris, France. Before his Jew­ish com­mu­nal work, Andres worked for IBM Corp. and was respon­si­ble for train­ing, devel­op­ment, hir­ing, and recruit­ment for IBM’s Latin Amer­i­ca South­ern Region. Andres has a mul­ti­dis­ci­pli­nary aca­d­e­m­ic back­ground, includ­ing busi­ness, edu­ca­tion, and rab­bini­cal stud­ies in dif­fer­ent insti­tu­tions around the world. He was born in Argenti­na and lives in Brook­lyn, NY.