Rosner’s Domain: To Share a Future, To Feel Close

It’s a fairly familiar experiment in social psychology, but always eye-opening. It was held in the UK, with a group of soccer fans. To be precise: a group of Manchester United fans. And accuracy is important. The fans moved from one building to another. On the way, they came across the surprise that the researchers had prepared for them: a man who cries out in pain, and grabs his ankle. Maybe a sprain, maybe a fracture. Who knows? The outcry is heard; what will the fans do? There is an answer to this question. An answer in numbers: If the shouting man is wearing a Manchester United jersey, nine out of ten will turn to him for help. If he wears a plain shirt, only a third will offer him help. 

That’s a big gap. But what if the one who cries for help wears the shirt of another team, a rival, like Liverpool? There is an answer to that too. A little surprising. At least in one version of the experiment. This is a version in which, before the practical test, fans were asked questions about their love for soccer. Not for their love for their team, but for soccer in general — why they love soccer, what’s special about soccer, things like that. Then they went out and met the wounded man. Seventy percent of them helped him. Seventy percent! And this despite him wearing a jersey from a competing team. Why did they help him? Adam Grant, in his book “Give and Take,” explains the gaps in behavior. The question is whether we identify with the person in need of help or not. It is clear that United fans identify first and foremost with United fans, and therefore tend to help them more. On the other hand, there is a way to remind the fans that they have something in common not only with United fans but also with soccer fans in general.

All of this is a bit of a cumbersome parable for everything Israelis did this week of Memorial Day and Independence Day. A week of dispute and identification. From the decision to cancel the fireworks, because of a desire to show sympathy for the victims of the battle who suffer from PTSD and alleviate their pain, to the provocation of a professor at Tel Aviv University, who defined the hanging of national flags as a disease, to the aerial show that passed over Hebron, in the West Bank, either to shorten the route (Air Force version), or to strengthen the occupation (opponents’ version).

Dispute and identification are the two characteristics of a healthy society, provided there is a proper balance between them.

Dispute and identification are the two characteristics of a healthy society, provided there is a proper balance between them. Dispute is required to move forward, to improve, to explore new ways, to shatter old conventions, to evolve when reality changes. Identification is required for survival. Without identification there is no society. Without a sense of togetherness there is no society. 

The Jewish People Policy Institute, where I am a fellow, used its annual survey to examine the state of belief in a “shared future” and the state of a sense of “closeness” of various groups. Israeli Jews were asked about their closeness to all Israelis, including Arabs, and about a shared future for all Israelis, including Arabs. They were also asked about their closeness and shared future to all Jews, those in Israel and those who are not Israelis. Maybe Jews in Los Angeles. A large majority of Israeli Jews feel close to all Jews (about 70%), and a majority, though smaller, identify a shared future for all Jews (64%). A small majority of them feel a special closeness to all Israelis (53%, this is a certain increase compared to last year), and a larger majority believe that there is a shared future for all Israelis (58%). 

There is an interesting inverted correlation here that should be explored and explained. A shared future is a concept that refers to actual life. If you and I live in the same neighborhood, or town, we have a shared future, whether we like it or not, unless one of us decides to move to another neighborhood. In contrast, a sense of closeness is not warranted. You can share a neighborhood or a town without feeling close. 

Now see the Jews of Israel: In the case of Israeli Arabs, they see more shared future than closeness. The Arabs are here, so our future is shared, no matter what we feel. Closeness? Maybe it will come later, when the political situation becomes less tense. 

And of course, the situation is the opposite with the Jews of the Diaspora. A shared future? Some of us see it, each for his or her own reasons. But some of us also understand that it is difficult to shape a shared future for Jews living in Tel Aviv and Sydney, or Rio, or LA. On the other hand, a sense of closeness is possible even when the physical distance is great. So, when we celebrate Israel’s Independence, we know you’re rooting for our success.

Something I wrote in Hebrew

The conversion reform that the government planned doesn’t seem to have much chance of happening. Is that a problem? Here’s what I wrote:

How much should we mourn the lost reform? The answer of course depends on the position of the respondent. The Chief Rabbi is not sorry. He opposed the reform. Minister Kahana thinks the reform is essential. Either way, it seems that those who are not particularly sorry are the Israeli “nones”— the interest in conversion of those whose Judaism is not recognized by the rabbinate is not great. About 80% of them say they have no interest in undergoing a conversion process. Bottom line: The Boy Scout really wants to help, but the elderly woman does not wish to cross the road.

A week’s numbers

From The Jewish People Policy Institute Pluralism Index of 2022 (presented to the public earlier this week). 

A reader’s response:

Mitch Gold wrote: “Maybe American Jews support an agreement with Iran because they think it’s good?” My answer: Maybe, but we still need to ask, good for whom?

Shmuel Rosner is senior political editor. For more analysis of Israeli and international politics, visit Rosner’s Domain at jewishjournal.com/rosnersdomain.