Wednesday
Jan212009
New Zionist Interview
Wednesday, January 21, 2009 at 9:05PM
News and Discussion on the Future of Zionism, Israel, and the Jewish People
March 29th, 2005
by Yoav
We present the second interview that New Zionist is conducting with leaders, writers, speakers, and revolutionaries, who are, in some way, making Judaism and Zionism new. We seek to elicit opinions that will push conversation on the site. We also want to ask our subjects for their personal views on the future of Israel and the future of diaspora Judaism, so look for that as a consistent feature. Many thanks to Douglas Rushkoff who served as an excellent 2nd interviewee.
NZ: Let’s talk about your writings first. Your previous work is mostly about media and popular culture with books like Playing the Future, Media Virus, and the Marshall Mcluhan Award winning Coercion. What inspired you to write Nothing Sacred, a book about Judaism, history and religion?
Is there a relationship between the two subjects of your books: media/pop culture and American Jewry?
DR: Well, I don’t draw hard distinctions around these subject areas. To me, I’ve been writing about the same thing all along: whether or not we’re ready to become truly literate – and by that, I don’t mean just reading books, but understanding our media, our culture, and our very world as its potential creators.
To me, Judaism is a product of media literacy. Hieroglyphs were “priestly writing,” and limited to the priest and royal classes. The invention of the 22-letter Hebrew alphabet turned the greater population into readers and writers. So when God says to Abraham ‘you will be a nation of priests,’ he may as well be saying ‘you will be a nation who can read and write.’ Imagine that! A whole nation of people who have attained literacy. What would that mean?
It would mean a people who no longer simply react to the whims of their gods, but instead write their own laws, record their own history, and who take the very controversial stand that human action makes a difference. You have to realize, in pre-Israelite times, to say that human beings made a difference was blasphemy – heretical. For the Israelites to run off to the desert after desecrating Egypt’s highest gods (sacrificing a calf was illegal, particularly on April New Year’s Day when he was being revered) and then create a legal and spiritual system based on life – that was revolutionary. Lechaim is a naughty thing to say in a society based on death cults.
So Playing the Future is about how kids see themselves not just as passive recipients of media, but as its potential creators. Media Virus is about how the mediaspace is not impervious to our intervention. Coercion is about learning how to break free from mental slavery, and Nothing Sacred is about how literacy promotes the kind of iconoclasm that allows people to become what I’d consider to be “real” Jews – those who can see through idolatrous beliefs and engage with the core creativity of a path based in an ongoing, evolving relationship with Torah.
NZ: In Nothing Sacred you claim that “lapsed” Jews are arguably our most underappreciated and promising members because they challenge the religious status quo and refuse to submit blindly to rituals that are not applicable in the present day. This journal agrees with you on the whole, but what happens when those who question come to answers that are not Jewish, as in they renounce the religion or give up faith? How should Judaism, and American Jewry in particular, change in order to bring these “lapsed” Jews back into the fold and prevent them from giving up on all things Jewish?
DR: Well, institutional Judaism, for one, has to stop using verbs like “bring back” or “get people to” and replace them with “invite” “make accessible,” or even “challenge” people to engage with Judaism as a living conversation renewed by every generation. Judaism is not broken; it’s our institutions that have collapsed under their own weight and sense of obligation to nation and race. So they measure Judaism in terms of numbers on the temple rolls (itself a violation of Talmud’s injunction on counting people), or in terms of pollster data on American teen’s waning support of West Bank settlements or the “wall” – or “fence,” if you use Frank Luntz’s language.
We don’t make Torah or engagement accessible, and we don’t generally have a good time. We present Judaism as an obligation rather than an opportunity. A burden rather than the emergence from slavery of all kinds. People looking for what they see as a genuinely challenging spiritual path turn elsewhere – not because these other faiths are so much better. It’s that they’re not quite as patronizing or even accommodating to values we all know go against spiritual development.
Judaism was never a path of answers, it was a path of questions. But – from the outside, anyway – it seems to be holding of a set of answers and iron-clad beliefs. And that’s not attractive or enticing to those who are genuinely interested in finding something like Judaism.
So a person looking to get beyond his own needs – will he go to a religious institution that appears to be about creating Jewish marriages, or reinforcing his identification with a nation state? Or will he head to a meditation or yoga center? Of course, those places will ultimately be just as dedicated in their own way to Tibet or some Indian ashram or guru, but that’s their problem – and they are wise to keep it distinct from the practices they offer on the first level.
I think the easiest way not to “lose” people who find answers that are “not Jewish” is for us to expand what it means to follow Torah. If a person – a so-called lapsed Jew – were to recontextualize his work for the ACLU, or helping Tsunami victims or whoever as an extension of his Judaism, we’d be a lot more likely to be able to serve him in his efforts, and benefit from his association with our community. I had the pleasure of engaging with Ruth Messinger’s AJWS on this front, helping them see their mission as universal, yet inspired, fueled, and informed by the Jewish perspective.
The second thing would be to start simply doing Judaism the way we want to do it, rather than trying to make it look “cool” for the MTV generation. That’s the philanthropies’ biggest mistake right now. In an era when young people are desperately seeking meaning systems more substantial than the ones offered by MTV, here we have Jewish institutions aping that garbage. Kids see through marketing. We all do. Judaism should not market itself; that just makes Judaism look more desperate and less intrinsically valuable.
NZ: Your book claims that one of the biggest problems of the organized faith is that it has become obsessed with self-preservation and assimilation (and maybe add latent fear of anti-Semitism to the list). How would you propose changing these religious institutions so that they focus on the core questions of Judaism such as spirituality, faith, and revision in our modern times?
DR: It’s hard, since rabbis have lost the ball to philanthropies, for the most part. This seemed like a good thing thirty years ago, because it looked like it might democratize Judaism. Get it away from those stodgy rabbis. But what it actually did was elevate those who have money. In Judaism, money means power. And that’s not a great situation.
But it’s a certain generation of well-meaning philanthropist that seeks to prevent intermarriage, and to maintain a racial understanding of Judaism. I asked a great philanthropist if would like everyone on the planet to read Torah, observe Sabbath, and follow all the Jewish laws and ethical templates. The only caveat would be that no one would no it was called “Judaism.” He said “no!” Imagine that.
So it’s not Jewishness he means to support, but the word Judaism – the identity more than the essence or practice. And in many cases, this identity as it’s inadvertently defined by the philanthropies, is in direct opposition to what many people imagine to be a fully functioning and healthy, tolerant, enlightened human being.
I think institutions need to stop worrying so much about outreach or even inreach, and start practicing the most living, vibrant form of Judaism they can muster. For me, this would mean matching all that Grateful Dead inspired Friday Night Live and BJ [Bnei Jeshurun] singalongs with Torah study and social action. People are looking for opportunities to engage more meaningfully with the world around them, for its own sake. They’re also looking to become part of a project that spans longer than the quarterly report, and actually reaches back and forward generations. At its best, Judaism offers such an opportunity.
But it can’t do this by making its face about counting the number of people showing up to synagogue, voting for Joe Leiberman, or refusing to date non-Jews.
NZ: It’s fair to say that your book has received A LOT of negative backlash (you even predicted it in a number of interviews you made prior to the book’s release). Just a sample from Amazon.com: “This book, though disguised as a progressive attempt to revitalize Judaism is, in actuality nothing short of a complete smear job on the Jewish religion and Jewish tradition as understood by all three major branches of Rabbinical Judaism. Rushkoff basically dismisses and distorts 3,000 years of Jewish religious thought in the service of an obviously left wing effort to promote “secular humanism” at the expense of Jewish tradition”
What is your response to people who blatantly criticize the book?
DR: Well, it was a great lesson in Jewish superiority for me. See, I thought Jews were somehow less likely to fall into fundamentalist traps than Christians. I was originally thinking of extending the message of the book to include Christianity and even Islam , as well – our sister (or daughter) religions. But then I though, no – because of its iconoclastic and intellectual tradition, Judaism is uniquely poised to combat the superstitious belief systems holding so many people back. These notions of racial superiority, or God loving us more than anyone else, or the thought that God actually defines nation states in the Jacobean way they’re defined in the Middle East. I thought Jews’ strong tradition of iconoclasm and the Torah’s clear admonition against literalism and idolatry would make Judaism a more likely candidate for a revitalization of its participatory quality than other religions.
But Jews turned out to be just as fundamentalist as their Christian counterparts! There are people who really do believe God did the Shoah to his Jews because he was mad at them. There are those who believe that not only did everything in Torah happen the way it says, but that we should still follow all the laws in there as written. (If they actually read Torah, they’d probably stop short of stoning people to death, but maybe not.) There are those who see no human intervention in the development of Jewish narrative or Jewish law (even though Torah shows Yithro helping devise our system of courts, etc.) but that God said it all.
And if you remove human beings from Judaism, you make it a religion about death instead of life. It becomes the thing it was born to replace: a death cult. And that’s when we start to see people intentionally closing down their minds – refusing to participate in the ongoing revision of Jewish practice and law to become more and more ethical, and instead locking it down where it was two thousand years ago.
The beauty of Judaism was that it was built to be revised. Talmud shows us how to maintain the center while revising the expression. But today, too many Jews are threatened by the notion that they’re supposed to participate in a way other than blindly following the laws or what their rebbe says. So they have no choice but to see my work the way the worst rabbis saw Maimonidees or Spinoza’s work (which is basically all I’m reiterating in my book). The funny thing is, sometimes the people critiquing me say that the stuff I’m saying is outrageous and wrong – and a complete repeat of Spinoza or Maimonides. So I suppose they’re saying I’m as wrong as those two; and that’s fine with me.
The other main critique has been from people who haven’t read the book. A recent convert had written a major review in a philanthropy magazine. She was very upset by the book, and really went to town. So a number of fundamentalist Jewish groups got it in their heads that I had written some kind of anti-Holocaust survivor book, and began organized boycotts of magazines that carried my work, and stuff like that. Strangely enough, a year after she wrote the review, the writer wrote to tell me she had abandoned Judaism, all Jews were racist and horrible, and that I was “right.” I tried to explain to her that both her reactions were inappropriate. Jews are neither the perfect loved children of the only Lord God (like she thought when she trashed my book) nor the horrible racists that would never accept a convert like her.
NZ: You have another project that we wanted to discuss as well…
Back in 2001 you conceived of a summit called Reboot, the aim of which was “to examine what it means and what it could mean to be Jewish in America today”. The first summit was in 2002, where you invited some 40-odd youngish Jews to Utah to participate in an “open space” conference, where the participants determine the agenda based on what interests them. Tell us a little more about this project. What was the original aim, and what inspired you to hold this summit?
DR: Well, the reason I took the assignment was that the philanthropies paying for the summit gave me a blank slate. They had some bad luck doing gatherings before, and thought I could bring some new life to their process.
Their original purpose was to find ways to develop new Jewish mechanisms capable of engaging the 20/30-something generation. Their language was a bit backwards (they talked about “getting people to be more Jewish”) but their hearts were in the right place.
So I figured this would be a great opportunity to test the premise of my book: would lapsed Jews and other smart, engaged people of this generation accept an invitation to engage with Judaism – if they could do it completely on their own terms? Would they travel a few thousand miles to discuss – no holds barred, and no strings attached – what they would do about Judaism if they were in charge? And, not surprisingly, they came.
The object of the game, for me, was to recontextualize Judaism as an entirely Open Source proposition. It was up for discussion. What did we think Judaism is? What can it offer the world?
So we held a series of discussions, and did it over a Shabbat weekend. I wanted some Jewish content at the event – less to teach people how to do Shabbat or to make them read Torah – than for people to engage with some of the core Jewish practices and narratives, and then share their experience of these things. Why did they do or not do Sabbath? That was the biggest challenge – getting my sponsors to let me the whole thing framed within Shabbat – at least for the first night and next day. They resisted for a while. That’s how afraid they were of the participants’ reaction to anything nominally Jewish. But I figured that was the challenge – and without something to bounce off, we’d end up doing the whole thing quite abstractly.
And we had great discussions. There was a variety of reactions and perspectives on Judaism, but most everyone felt that Judaism was a discussion that needed to be renewed by every generation; that the situation we were in, of rejecting what felt like our “parents” Judaism, wasn’t at all unique. That reinvention was part of the process – that continuity, itself, is not the blind continuance of things we don’t understand or agree with, but the ability to participate in this living, active way.
NZ: Three Reboot summits have been held so far. What has been the outcome?
DR: Well, the first one was quite an experience for me. It confirmed everything I was working on in my book, and in my Judaism. Quite thrilling to see these prospects devoured and extended by a group of smart people. There were a number of great ideas for new kinds of Jewish experiences that came out Reboot, and many of them ended up being funded by another branch of the same philanthropies. And a terrific buzz got started: some Jews had done some strange wonderful thing out on a retreat in Utah, and that this might be the next great wave of this religion. Almost as if we had created a new secret society and everyone else wanted in. I have to admit it was kind of fun to hear people talking about Reboot, wondering what it was, when they didn¹t even know I was involved. We had generated a new excitement about Judaism. And it said no more about the greatness of what we’d achieved than it did about how little is going on that excites people about Judaism in this way as an invitation to re-engineer it as a creative participant.
NZ: Rumor has it that you have backed out of your responsibilities at Reboot because you were not satisfied with the direction it was taking. What happened that turned you off?
DR: I love rumor, don¹t you? I suppose what happened is that, as a real hater of marketing, I got a little spooked by the sponsoring organizations’ use of language. I kept getting the feeling like Reboot was really intended as a way of marketing Judaism more effectively to twenty-somethings. To *get* them to do something. I was afraid my whole open source approach was going to be used more as a marketing come hither as a wrapper for the same old thing. It didn¹t help that the some of the same philanthropies who were providing funding for the effort were simultaneously doing things like the Frank Luntz “Israel in the Age of Eminem” study. Focus groups figuring out how to get teenagers to be more Zionist, and to see if they’d use the word “homicide bomber” instead of “suicide bomber.” That sort of thing. I didn’t want to be part of that.
To be fair, though, Reboot isn’t a cynical marketing effort at all. Reboot was and still is founded on the principles I started it with. They might be a little fixated on re-branding Judaism, but this is a society that elevates the brand. Branding is our cultural currency. And the invitation list feels a bit elitist to me, made up of many entertainment personalities, as if to make Judaism ‘cool’ by association, or through cultural diffusion. And last year, some job description that went up for an ‘Executive Director’ position used language that made my skin crawl stuff about Reboot being a “diffusion marketing” strategy to penetrate new groups of unaffiliated Jews. Now I know the people actually doing and running Reboot wouldn’t have used language like that…but someone in charge of *something* did. And that wasn’t something I wanted to be associated with.
Meanwhile, I was out there speaking at synagogues about my book, and causing quite a ruckus. It was hard for me to speak honestly about Judaism while being regarded, via Reboot, as some kind of Jewish professional. I wanted to be a regular old member of the congregation, which is what I really am. The book and my message means more when it comes from a member of secular society who happens to be Jewish and who cares about his Jewishness. I never wanted to become a professional Jew, and Reboot was getting too big too lead as hobby.
Most of all, though, you have to realize I’m old. I’m over 40, now. So the thing I was doing for Judaism was really not for the group that includes me. They want to help 20 and 30 somethings connect with Judaism, that’s fine. It’s just that the natural expressions of that age group, like Shalom Motherfucker T-shirts and the like, don’t resonate for me. I’m more into studying Torah, mythology, literature, and history. So I have different tastes. I felt it was great for me to light a fire for them, and to introduce them to an open source process. But I’ve done my part for them. To continue would be to twist their efforts towards my frame of reference.
NZ: When should we be expecting our e-vite for the next summit (hint hint)?
DR: Well, if I were in charge, I would have turned Reboot into something that can be done anywhere, not just in a central high-priced location. My plan was to do a Reboot that trained people how to do Reboot in their own area. And spend the money paying for those people to go around the country holding these tremendous encounter sessions with Judaism as a work-in-progress, rather than paying for forty or fifty already wealthy people to come to Utah once a year. But again, that’s a different point of view. Some might even call it communist!
NZ: Lastly, we wanted to talk to you about Jews in general. We have found that the majority of Jewish-related commentary, either in print, television, or online, tends to be extremely retroactive, primarily focused on events or circumstances that happened in the past. The aim of this journal is to be proactive: taking the past as a given, starting from the present, and looking forward. Your writing also looks forward, to change and development for the coming generations (for Jews and society in general). Of the people we have interviewed who are “progressive” (proactive) about Judaism, they all state that they get criticized and “bashed” all the time for destroying the fabric of our people (see our interview with Heeb Magazine’s Anya Kamenetz), or for being unrealistic. Why is Judaism, American Jewry specifically, so fixated on the past?
DR: There¹s no such thing as Jews in general. That¹s what I¹ve learned. There¹s smart ones and stupid ones. Engaged ones and fundamentalist ones. Being Jewish, in itself, doesn¹t mean an awful lot about a person. It really doesn’t.
Even though Judaism was built with all sorts of safeguards against it turning into a religion, it became a religion all the same. We ended up with our own idols and superstitions. That¹s really important to realize. We Jews have nothing over anyone else. Sorry, but it¹s true. We have a unique and important contribution to make to the universal table, but we aren¹t better. Our religion didn¹t prevent us from being assholes and idiots, so we have no right to claim superiority. It’s a great ethical and spiritual template, but your results will vary with your intent and courage.
That said, you’re right. Judaism is fixated on the past. And when it’s not, it’s fixated on a fictional messianic and somewhat catastrophic future. We do have a hard time staying in the present, which is where real life happens. We seem to need a myth of Tikkun Olam in order to motivate ourselves to make the world a better place; when it should be the sheer joy of helping people that motivates us to make the world a better place. The improvement of global circumstances happens as a result of our good actions.
The problem is our obsession with a misguided understanding of continuity. We ache to continue the surface actions and beliefs, and disregard the core continuity of Jewish learning, revision, and evolution. Judaism has changed over time; it adjust to its location, and to the era in which it is living. That’s why Torah still works; if we looked at its ethics from a modern standpoint, they seem positively barbaric! Stoning people? Giving your daughters to be raped by the crowd? But when we understand them in their own context, the can make allegorical sense – we can see the direction that the Israelites were attempting to go in. Continuity doesn’t mean doing what they actually did, but continuing in the direction they were trying to go. This involves movement, and that movement is experienced as disruptive and discontinuous by fundamentalists. And, by the way, you can find these fundamentalists in a Reform synagogue as easily as an orthodox. People think I’m criticizing the orthodox – not at all.
The other reason we’re fixated on the past is the holocaust. It’s a huge event in the life of our people, and we’ll be living in its shadow for generations to come. It’s hard not to look back at something like that…
That’s why I say in Nothing Sacred that we might not be able to begin our conversation about Judaism, in earnest, until the generation that experience the Shoah directly has passed on. Then again, when I’ve considered this out loud at talks, it’s always holocaust survivors who get up and share the most progressive views on Judaism, and who demand that the “nothing sacred” talk I’m calling for be initiated immediately, with them as participants. So it seems that many of the people speaking on behalf of those who were tortured and killed don’t actually understand their perspective. It is not holocaust survivors, but guilty witnesses who tend to elevate the Shoah to an event of Biblical proportion, thus conflating history with myth, and doing both a disservice in the process. It’s what leads to a literal understanding of Torah, and a mythical understanding of Nazism.
NZ: For that matter, why are we so fixated on Israel as well? One could easily make the argument that American Jews have no right to say anything about Israel simply because don’t live there, aren’t citizens, and don’t vote there.
DR: Indeed. My critique of Israel has never really been about Israel, itself, as much as Americans’ twisted relationship to Israel. This has been interpreted as a demand for the abolition of the State of Israel, when it is nothing of the kind. It’s unrelated.
What I’m concerned about is the way that Israel has been turned into an icon and idol for American Jews. Somehow, guilt over the Shoah, and guilt over Americanization turned many Americans into “checkbook Jews.” They were convinced that whatever brand of Judaism they were doing in the US was some kind of Judaism ‘lite’ – which maybe it was. And they made up for this sense of compromise by writing checks to Israel where, it was hoped, some “real” Jews were keeping the torch alive over at the Western Wall.
This Judaism by proxy didn’t really help Israel in the long-run, and disconnected American Jews from their own Judaism in the process. Judaism is not experienced as something we do actively in our own lives, but something happening over there, somewhere, that we support.
There’s also a huge linguistic error that many American Jews make, between understanding Israel the nation state created by the United Nations, and Israel the relationship with God initiated by the patriarchs. We don’t want to lose the latter in the name of the former.
NZ: There have been a number of recent articles written about the demise of non-orthodox Judaism. Meaning that non-orthodox streams of Judaism are passing fads that flare up and die out throughout history, and the cultural, traditional, progressive, ethnic, whatever Judaism practiced by you, and us, is waning quickly. Do you agree?
DR: Of course I can’t agree, since a true study of history would reveal this to be false. Orthodox Judaism is, itself, a reaction to Reform Judaism! Rabbinic Judaism, itself, was a “passing fad” that ended up replacing Temple Judaism! The written law was supported only by a splinter group of heretics. Reading Torah out loud was a revolutionary act. Hassidism was a radical, renaissance effort.
It’s these extremely progressive streams that keep the practice of Judaism alive for successive generations. Jewish continuity is this process of reinvention. Orthodoxy was one such reinvention.
NZ: Now for the final questions we ask all our interviewees: Predict the future of Israel in 15 years and in 50 years.
DR: I don’t like to predict. It’s too restrictive. Instead, I’ll wish (which is all predictions really are):
In 15 years, Israel will have made peace with its neighbors, and granted full citizenship status to all who live within its borders, regardless of their race or religion.
In 50 years, although Israel’s Jewish population will have been far outnumbered by its other ethnic and religious groups, progressive Jewish leadership will have established such a strong tradition of religious tolerance that the multi-ethnic nation will remain the safest place on earth for Jews, and members of all faiths, to practice without fear of reprisal.
March 29th, 2005
by Yoav
We present the second interview that New Zionist is conducting with leaders, writers, speakers, and revolutionaries, who are, in some way, making Judaism and Zionism new. We seek to elicit opinions that will push conversation on the site. We also want to ask our subjects for their personal views on the future of Israel and the future of diaspora Judaism, so look for that as a consistent feature. Many thanks to Douglas Rushkoff who served as an excellent 2nd interviewee.
NZ: Let’s talk about your writings first. Your previous work is mostly about media and popular culture with books like Playing the Future, Media Virus, and the Marshall Mcluhan Award winning Coercion. What inspired you to write Nothing Sacred, a book about Judaism, history and religion?
Is there a relationship between the two subjects of your books: media/pop culture and American Jewry?
DR: Well, I don’t draw hard distinctions around these subject areas. To me, I’ve been writing about the same thing all along: whether or not we’re ready to become truly literate – and by that, I don’t mean just reading books, but understanding our media, our culture, and our very world as its potential creators.
To me, Judaism is a product of media literacy. Hieroglyphs were “priestly writing,” and limited to the priest and royal classes. The invention of the 22-letter Hebrew alphabet turned the greater population into readers and writers. So when God says to Abraham ‘you will be a nation of priests,’ he may as well be saying ‘you will be a nation who can read and write.’ Imagine that! A whole nation of people who have attained literacy. What would that mean?
It would mean a people who no longer simply react to the whims of their gods, but instead write their own laws, record their own history, and who take the very controversial stand that human action makes a difference. You have to realize, in pre-Israelite times, to say that human beings made a difference was blasphemy – heretical. For the Israelites to run off to the desert after desecrating Egypt’s highest gods (sacrificing a calf was illegal, particularly on April New Year’s Day when he was being revered) and then create a legal and spiritual system based on life – that was revolutionary. Lechaim is a naughty thing to say in a society based on death cults.
So Playing the Future is about how kids see themselves not just as passive recipients of media, but as its potential creators. Media Virus is about how the mediaspace is not impervious to our intervention. Coercion is about learning how to break free from mental slavery, and Nothing Sacred is about how literacy promotes the kind of iconoclasm that allows people to become what I’d consider to be “real” Jews – those who can see through idolatrous beliefs and engage with the core creativity of a path based in an ongoing, evolving relationship with Torah.
NZ: In Nothing Sacred you claim that “lapsed” Jews are arguably our most underappreciated and promising members because they challenge the religious status quo and refuse to submit blindly to rituals that are not applicable in the present day. This journal agrees with you on the whole, but what happens when those who question come to answers that are not Jewish, as in they renounce the religion or give up faith? How should Judaism, and American Jewry in particular, change in order to bring these “lapsed” Jews back into the fold and prevent them from giving up on all things Jewish?
DR: Well, institutional Judaism, for one, has to stop using verbs like “bring back” or “get people to” and replace them with “invite” “make accessible,” or even “challenge” people to engage with Judaism as a living conversation renewed by every generation. Judaism is not broken; it’s our institutions that have collapsed under their own weight and sense of obligation to nation and race. So they measure Judaism in terms of numbers on the temple rolls (itself a violation of Talmud’s injunction on counting people), or in terms of pollster data on American teen’s waning support of West Bank settlements or the “wall” – or “fence,” if you use Frank Luntz’s language.
We don’t make Torah or engagement accessible, and we don’t generally have a good time. We present Judaism as an obligation rather than an opportunity. A burden rather than the emergence from slavery of all kinds. People looking for what they see as a genuinely challenging spiritual path turn elsewhere – not because these other faiths are so much better. It’s that they’re not quite as patronizing or even accommodating to values we all know go against spiritual development.
Judaism was never a path of answers, it was a path of questions. But – from the outside, anyway – it seems to be holding of a set of answers and iron-clad beliefs. And that’s not attractive or enticing to those who are genuinely interested in finding something like Judaism.
So a person looking to get beyond his own needs – will he go to a religious institution that appears to be about creating Jewish marriages, or reinforcing his identification with a nation state? Or will he head to a meditation or yoga center? Of course, those places will ultimately be just as dedicated in their own way to Tibet or some Indian ashram or guru, but that’s their problem – and they are wise to keep it distinct from the practices they offer on the first level.
I think the easiest way not to “lose” people who find answers that are “not Jewish” is for us to expand what it means to follow Torah. If a person – a so-called lapsed Jew – were to recontextualize his work for the ACLU, or helping Tsunami victims or whoever as an extension of his Judaism, we’d be a lot more likely to be able to serve him in his efforts, and benefit from his association with our community. I had the pleasure of engaging with Ruth Messinger’s AJWS on this front, helping them see their mission as universal, yet inspired, fueled, and informed by the Jewish perspective.
The second thing would be to start simply doing Judaism the way we want to do it, rather than trying to make it look “cool” for the MTV generation. That’s the philanthropies’ biggest mistake right now. In an era when young people are desperately seeking meaning systems more substantial than the ones offered by MTV, here we have Jewish institutions aping that garbage. Kids see through marketing. We all do. Judaism should not market itself; that just makes Judaism look more desperate and less intrinsically valuable.
NZ: Your book claims that one of the biggest problems of the organized faith is that it has become obsessed with self-preservation and assimilation (and maybe add latent fear of anti-Semitism to the list). How would you propose changing these religious institutions so that they focus on the core questions of Judaism such as spirituality, faith, and revision in our modern times?
DR: It’s hard, since rabbis have lost the ball to philanthropies, for the most part. This seemed like a good thing thirty years ago, because it looked like it might democratize Judaism. Get it away from those stodgy rabbis. But what it actually did was elevate those who have money. In Judaism, money means power. And that’s not a great situation.
But it’s a certain generation of well-meaning philanthropist that seeks to prevent intermarriage, and to maintain a racial understanding of Judaism. I asked a great philanthropist if would like everyone on the planet to read Torah, observe Sabbath, and follow all the Jewish laws and ethical templates. The only caveat would be that no one would no it was called “Judaism.” He said “no!” Imagine that.
So it’s not Jewishness he means to support, but the word Judaism – the identity more than the essence or practice. And in many cases, this identity as it’s inadvertently defined by the philanthropies, is in direct opposition to what many people imagine to be a fully functioning and healthy, tolerant, enlightened human being.
I think institutions need to stop worrying so much about outreach or even inreach, and start practicing the most living, vibrant form of Judaism they can muster. For me, this would mean matching all that Grateful Dead inspired Friday Night Live and BJ [Bnei Jeshurun] singalongs with Torah study and social action. People are looking for opportunities to engage more meaningfully with the world around them, for its own sake. They’re also looking to become part of a project that spans longer than the quarterly report, and actually reaches back and forward generations. At its best, Judaism offers such an opportunity.
But it can’t do this by making its face about counting the number of people showing up to synagogue, voting for Joe Leiberman, or refusing to date non-Jews.
NZ: It’s fair to say that your book has received A LOT of negative backlash (you even predicted it in a number of interviews you made prior to the book’s release). Just a sample from Amazon.com: “This book, though disguised as a progressive attempt to revitalize Judaism is, in actuality nothing short of a complete smear job on the Jewish religion and Jewish tradition as understood by all three major branches of Rabbinical Judaism. Rushkoff basically dismisses and distorts 3,000 years of Jewish religious thought in the service of an obviously left wing effort to promote “secular humanism” at the expense of Jewish tradition”
What is your response to people who blatantly criticize the book?
DR: Well, it was a great lesson in Jewish superiority for me. See, I thought Jews were somehow less likely to fall into fundamentalist traps than Christians. I was originally thinking of extending the message of the book to include Christianity and even Islam , as well – our sister (or daughter) religions. But then I though, no – because of its iconoclastic and intellectual tradition, Judaism is uniquely poised to combat the superstitious belief systems holding so many people back. These notions of racial superiority, or God loving us more than anyone else, or the thought that God actually defines nation states in the Jacobean way they’re defined in the Middle East. I thought Jews’ strong tradition of iconoclasm and the Torah’s clear admonition against literalism and idolatry would make Judaism a more likely candidate for a revitalization of its participatory quality than other religions.
But Jews turned out to be just as fundamentalist as their Christian counterparts! There are people who really do believe God did the Shoah to his Jews because he was mad at them. There are those who believe that not only did everything in Torah happen the way it says, but that we should still follow all the laws in there as written. (If they actually read Torah, they’d probably stop short of stoning people to death, but maybe not.) There are those who see no human intervention in the development of Jewish narrative or Jewish law (even though Torah shows Yithro helping devise our system of courts, etc.) but that God said it all.
And if you remove human beings from Judaism, you make it a religion about death instead of life. It becomes the thing it was born to replace: a death cult. And that’s when we start to see people intentionally closing down their minds – refusing to participate in the ongoing revision of Jewish practice and law to become more and more ethical, and instead locking it down where it was two thousand years ago.
The beauty of Judaism was that it was built to be revised. Talmud shows us how to maintain the center while revising the expression. But today, too many Jews are threatened by the notion that they’re supposed to participate in a way other than blindly following the laws or what their rebbe says. So they have no choice but to see my work the way the worst rabbis saw Maimonidees or Spinoza’s work (which is basically all I’m reiterating in my book). The funny thing is, sometimes the people critiquing me say that the stuff I’m saying is outrageous and wrong – and a complete repeat of Spinoza or Maimonides. So I suppose they’re saying I’m as wrong as those two; and that’s fine with me.
The other main critique has been from people who haven’t read the book. A recent convert had written a major review in a philanthropy magazine. She was very upset by the book, and really went to town. So a number of fundamentalist Jewish groups got it in their heads that I had written some kind of anti-Holocaust survivor book, and began organized boycotts of magazines that carried my work, and stuff like that. Strangely enough, a year after she wrote the review, the writer wrote to tell me she had abandoned Judaism, all Jews were racist and horrible, and that I was “right.” I tried to explain to her that both her reactions were inappropriate. Jews are neither the perfect loved children of the only Lord God (like she thought when she trashed my book) nor the horrible racists that would never accept a convert like her.
NZ: You have another project that we wanted to discuss as well…
Back in 2001 you conceived of a summit called Reboot, the aim of which was “to examine what it means and what it could mean to be Jewish in America today”. The first summit was in 2002, where you invited some 40-odd youngish Jews to Utah to participate in an “open space” conference, where the participants determine the agenda based on what interests them. Tell us a little more about this project. What was the original aim, and what inspired you to hold this summit?
DR: Well, the reason I took the assignment was that the philanthropies paying for the summit gave me a blank slate. They had some bad luck doing gatherings before, and thought I could bring some new life to their process.
Their original purpose was to find ways to develop new Jewish mechanisms capable of engaging the 20/30-something generation. Their language was a bit backwards (they talked about “getting people to be more Jewish”) but their hearts were in the right place.
So I figured this would be a great opportunity to test the premise of my book: would lapsed Jews and other smart, engaged people of this generation accept an invitation to engage with Judaism – if they could do it completely on their own terms? Would they travel a few thousand miles to discuss – no holds barred, and no strings attached – what they would do about Judaism if they were in charge? And, not surprisingly, they came.
The object of the game, for me, was to recontextualize Judaism as an entirely Open Source proposition. It was up for discussion. What did we think Judaism is? What can it offer the world?
So we held a series of discussions, and did it over a Shabbat weekend. I wanted some Jewish content at the event – less to teach people how to do Shabbat or to make them read Torah – than for people to engage with some of the core Jewish practices and narratives, and then share their experience of these things. Why did they do or not do Sabbath? That was the biggest challenge – getting my sponsors to let me the whole thing framed within Shabbat – at least for the first night and next day. They resisted for a while. That’s how afraid they were of the participants’ reaction to anything nominally Jewish. But I figured that was the challenge – and without something to bounce off, we’d end up doing the whole thing quite abstractly.
And we had great discussions. There was a variety of reactions and perspectives on Judaism, but most everyone felt that Judaism was a discussion that needed to be renewed by every generation; that the situation we were in, of rejecting what felt like our “parents” Judaism, wasn’t at all unique. That reinvention was part of the process – that continuity, itself, is not the blind continuance of things we don’t understand or agree with, but the ability to participate in this living, active way.
NZ: Three Reboot summits have been held so far. What has been the outcome?
DR: Well, the first one was quite an experience for me. It confirmed everything I was working on in my book, and in my Judaism. Quite thrilling to see these prospects devoured and extended by a group of smart people. There were a number of great ideas for new kinds of Jewish experiences that came out Reboot, and many of them ended up being funded by another branch of the same philanthropies. And a terrific buzz got started: some Jews had done some strange wonderful thing out on a retreat in Utah, and that this might be the next great wave of this religion. Almost as if we had created a new secret society and everyone else wanted in. I have to admit it was kind of fun to hear people talking about Reboot, wondering what it was, when they didn¹t even know I was involved. We had generated a new excitement about Judaism. And it said no more about the greatness of what we’d achieved than it did about how little is going on that excites people about Judaism in this way as an invitation to re-engineer it as a creative participant.
NZ: Rumor has it that you have backed out of your responsibilities at Reboot because you were not satisfied with the direction it was taking. What happened that turned you off?
DR: I love rumor, don¹t you? I suppose what happened is that, as a real hater of marketing, I got a little spooked by the sponsoring organizations’ use of language. I kept getting the feeling like Reboot was really intended as a way of marketing Judaism more effectively to twenty-somethings. To *get* them to do something. I was afraid my whole open source approach was going to be used more as a marketing come hither as a wrapper for the same old thing. It didn¹t help that the some of the same philanthropies who were providing funding for the effort were simultaneously doing things like the Frank Luntz “Israel in the Age of Eminem” study. Focus groups figuring out how to get teenagers to be more Zionist, and to see if they’d use the word “homicide bomber” instead of “suicide bomber.” That sort of thing. I didn’t want to be part of that.
To be fair, though, Reboot isn’t a cynical marketing effort at all. Reboot was and still is founded on the principles I started it with. They might be a little fixated on re-branding Judaism, but this is a society that elevates the brand. Branding is our cultural currency. And the invitation list feels a bit elitist to me, made up of many entertainment personalities, as if to make Judaism ‘cool’ by association, or through cultural diffusion. And last year, some job description that went up for an ‘Executive Director’ position used language that made my skin crawl stuff about Reboot being a “diffusion marketing” strategy to penetrate new groups of unaffiliated Jews. Now I know the people actually doing and running Reboot wouldn’t have used language like that…but someone in charge of *something* did. And that wasn’t something I wanted to be associated with.
Meanwhile, I was out there speaking at synagogues about my book, and causing quite a ruckus. It was hard for me to speak honestly about Judaism while being regarded, via Reboot, as some kind of Jewish professional. I wanted to be a regular old member of the congregation, which is what I really am. The book and my message means more when it comes from a member of secular society who happens to be Jewish and who cares about his Jewishness. I never wanted to become a professional Jew, and Reboot was getting too big too lead as hobby.
Most of all, though, you have to realize I’m old. I’m over 40, now. So the thing I was doing for Judaism was really not for the group that includes me. They want to help 20 and 30 somethings connect with Judaism, that’s fine. It’s just that the natural expressions of that age group, like Shalom Motherfucker T-shirts and the like, don’t resonate for me. I’m more into studying Torah, mythology, literature, and history. So I have different tastes. I felt it was great for me to light a fire for them, and to introduce them to an open source process. But I’ve done my part for them. To continue would be to twist their efforts towards my frame of reference.
NZ: When should we be expecting our e-vite for the next summit (hint hint)?
DR: Well, if I were in charge, I would have turned Reboot into something that can be done anywhere, not just in a central high-priced location. My plan was to do a Reboot that trained people how to do Reboot in their own area. And spend the money paying for those people to go around the country holding these tremendous encounter sessions with Judaism as a work-in-progress, rather than paying for forty or fifty already wealthy people to come to Utah once a year. But again, that’s a different point of view. Some might even call it communist!
NZ: Lastly, we wanted to talk to you about Jews in general. We have found that the majority of Jewish-related commentary, either in print, television, or online, tends to be extremely retroactive, primarily focused on events or circumstances that happened in the past. The aim of this journal is to be proactive: taking the past as a given, starting from the present, and looking forward. Your writing also looks forward, to change and development for the coming generations (for Jews and society in general). Of the people we have interviewed who are “progressive” (proactive) about Judaism, they all state that they get criticized and “bashed” all the time for destroying the fabric of our people (see our interview with Heeb Magazine’s Anya Kamenetz), or for being unrealistic. Why is Judaism, American Jewry specifically, so fixated on the past?
DR: There¹s no such thing as Jews in general. That¹s what I¹ve learned. There¹s smart ones and stupid ones. Engaged ones and fundamentalist ones. Being Jewish, in itself, doesn¹t mean an awful lot about a person. It really doesn’t.
Even though Judaism was built with all sorts of safeguards against it turning into a religion, it became a religion all the same. We ended up with our own idols and superstitions. That¹s really important to realize. We Jews have nothing over anyone else. Sorry, but it¹s true. We have a unique and important contribution to make to the universal table, but we aren¹t better. Our religion didn¹t prevent us from being assholes and idiots, so we have no right to claim superiority. It’s a great ethical and spiritual template, but your results will vary with your intent and courage.
That said, you’re right. Judaism is fixated on the past. And when it’s not, it’s fixated on a fictional messianic and somewhat catastrophic future. We do have a hard time staying in the present, which is where real life happens. We seem to need a myth of Tikkun Olam in order to motivate ourselves to make the world a better place; when it should be the sheer joy of helping people that motivates us to make the world a better place. The improvement of global circumstances happens as a result of our good actions.
The problem is our obsession with a misguided understanding of continuity. We ache to continue the surface actions and beliefs, and disregard the core continuity of Jewish learning, revision, and evolution. Judaism has changed over time; it adjust to its location, and to the era in which it is living. That’s why Torah still works; if we looked at its ethics from a modern standpoint, they seem positively barbaric! Stoning people? Giving your daughters to be raped by the crowd? But when we understand them in their own context, the can make allegorical sense – we can see the direction that the Israelites were attempting to go in. Continuity doesn’t mean doing what they actually did, but continuing in the direction they were trying to go. This involves movement, and that movement is experienced as disruptive and discontinuous by fundamentalists. And, by the way, you can find these fundamentalists in a Reform synagogue as easily as an orthodox. People think I’m criticizing the orthodox – not at all.
The other reason we’re fixated on the past is the holocaust. It’s a huge event in the life of our people, and we’ll be living in its shadow for generations to come. It’s hard not to look back at something like that…
That’s why I say in Nothing Sacred that we might not be able to begin our conversation about Judaism, in earnest, until the generation that experience the Shoah directly has passed on. Then again, when I’ve considered this out loud at talks, it’s always holocaust survivors who get up and share the most progressive views on Judaism, and who demand that the “nothing sacred” talk I’m calling for be initiated immediately, with them as participants. So it seems that many of the people speaking on behalf of those who were tortured and killed don’t actually understand their perspective. It is not holocaust survivors, but guilty witnesses who tend to elevate the Shoah to an event of Biblical proportion, thus conflating history with myth, and doing both a disservice in the process. It’s what leads to a literal understanding of Torah, and a mythical understanding of Nazism.
NZ: For that matter, why are we so fixated on Israel as well? One could easily make the argument that American Jews have no right to say anything about Israel simply because don’t live there, aren’t citizens, and don’t vote there.
DR: Indeed. My critique of Israel has never really been about Israel, itself, as much as Americans’ twisted relationship to Israel. This has been interpreted as a demand for the abolition of the State of Israel, when it is nothing of the kind. It’s unrelated.
What I’m concerned about is the way that Israel has been turned into an icon and idol for American Jews. Somehow, guilt over the Shoah, and guilt over Americanization turned many Americans into “checkbook Jews.” They were convinced that whatever brand of Judaism they were doing in the US was some kind of Judaism ‘lite’ – which maybe it was. And they made up for this sense of compromise by writing checks to Israel where, it was hoped, some “real” Jews were keeping the torch alive over at the Western Wall.
This Judaism by proxy didn’t really help Israel in the long-run, and disconnected American Jews from their own Judaism in the process. Judaism is not experienced as something we do actively in our own lives, but something happening over there, somewhere, that we support.
There’s also a huge linguistic error that many American Jews make, between understanding Israel the nation state created by the United Nations, and Israel the relationship with God initiated by the patriarchs. We don’t want to lose the latter in the name of the former.
NZ: There have been a number of recent articles written about the demise of non-orthodox Judaism. Meaning that non-orthodox streams of Judaism are passing fads that flare up and die out throughout history, and the cultural, traditional, progressive, ethnic, whatever Judaism practiced by you, and us, is waning quickly. Do you agree?
DR: Of course I can’t agree, since a true study of history would reveal this to be false. Orthodox Judaism is, itself, a reaction to Reform Judaism! Rabbinic Judaism, itself, was a “passing fad” that ended up replacing Temple Judaism! The written law was supported only by a splinter group of heretics. Reading Torah out loud was a revolutionary act. Hassidism was a radical, renaissance effort.
It’s these extremely progressive streams that keep the practice of Judaism alive for successive generations. Jewish continuity is this process of reinvention. Orthodoxy was one such reinvention.
NZ: Now for the final questions we ask all our interviewees: Predict the future of Israel in 15 years and in 50 years.
DR: I don’t like to predict. It’s too restrictive. Instead, I’ll wish (which is all predictions really are):
In 15 years, Israel will have made peace with its neighbors, and granted full citizenship status to all who live within its borders, regardless of their race or religion.
In 50 years, although Israel’s Jewish population will have been far outnumbered by its other ethnic and religious groups, progressive Jewish leadership will have established such a strong tradition of religious tolerance that the multi-ethnic nation will remain the safest place on earth for Jews, and members of all faiths, to practice without fear of reprisal.
Winner of the first Neil Postman award for Career Achievement in Public Intellectual Activity, Douglas Rushkoff is an author, teacher, and documentarian who focuses on the ways people, cultures, and institutions create, share, and influence each other’s values. He sees “media” as the landscape where this interaction takes place, and “literacy” as the ability to participate consciously in it. His ten best-selling books on new media and popular culture have been translated to over thirty languages. They include Cyberia, Media Virus, Playing the Future, Nothing Sacred: The Truth about Judaism, and Coercion, winner of the Marshall Mcluhan Award for best media book. Rushkoff also wrote the acclaimed novels Ecstasy Club and Exit Strategy and graphic novel, Club Zero-G. He is currently at work on a book for HarperBusiness, applying renaissance principles to today’s complex economic landscape, Get Back in the Box: Innovation from the Inside Out. He has written and hosted two award-winning Frontline documentaries - The Merchants of Cool looked at the influence of corporations on youth culture, and The Persuaders, about the cluttered landscape of marketing, and new efforts to overcome consumer resistance. Rushkoff’s commentaries air on CBS Sunday Morning and NPR’s All Things Considered, and have appeared in publications from The New York Times to Time magazine. His column on cyberculture is distributed globally through the New York Times Syndicate. Rushkoff founded the Narrative Lab at NYU’s Interactive Telecommunications Program, and lectures about media, art, society, and change at conferences and universities around the world. He is Advisor to the United Nations Commission on World Culture, on the Board of Directors of the Media Ecology Association, The Center for Cognitive Liberty and Ethics, and as a founding member of Technorealism. He has been awarded Senior Fellowships by the Markle Foundation and the Center for Global Communications Fellow of the International University of Japan. He regularly appears on TV shows from NBC Nightly News to Larry King and Bill Maher. He is writing a new monthly comic book for Vertigo, and developed the Electronic Oracle software series for HarperCollins Interactive. Rushkoff is on the board of several new media non-profits and companies, and regularly consults on new media arts and ethics to museums, governments, synagogues, churches, and universities, as well as Sony, TCI, advertising agencies, and other Fortune 500 companies. Rushkoff graduated magna cum laude from Princeton University, received an MFA in Directing from California Institute of the Arts, a post-graduate fellowship (MFA) from The American Film Institute, and a Director’s Grant from the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences. He is a certified stage fight choreographer, and frequent keyboardist for the industrial band PsychicTV. He lives in Park Slope Brooklyn with his wife, Barbara, and daughter Mamie)
Reader Comments (1)
Click Discount Moncler Onlinethe best quality with the competitive price!
Click Moncler Down Coats Womenthe best quality with the competitive price!
Click Women Down Coats the best quality with the competitive price!
Click Moncler Down Coats Men the best quality with the competitive price!
Click Cheap Down Coats Men the best quality with the competitive price!
Click Moncler Down Jackets Women the best quality with the competitive price!
Click Cheap Down Jackets Womenthe best quality with the competitive price!
Click Women Down Jackets the best quality with the competitive price!
Click Women Down Jackets Online the best quality with the competitive price!
Click Men Down Vests the best quality with the competitive price!
Click Men Down Vests Sale the best quality with the competitive price!
Click Discount Down Vests Womenthe best quality with the competitive price!
Click Women Down Vests Wholesale the best quality with the competitive price!
Click Moncler Hoody Women the best quality with the competitive price!
Click Women Moncler Hoody the best quality with the competitive price!
Click Moncler Kids Jackets the best quality with the competitive price!
Click Moncler Jackets For Kids the best quality with the competitive price!
Click Moncler Men Shoes the best quality with the competitive price!
Click Moncler Shoes For Menthe best quality with the competitive price!
Click Moncler Polo Shirts the best quality with the competitive price!
Click Moncler Polo Shirts Menthe best quality with the competitive price!
Click Moncler Sweaters Men the best quality with the competitive price!
Click Moncler Men Sweaters the best quality with the competitive price!
Click Moncler Women Handbags the best quality with the competitive price!
Click Moncler Handbags Salethe best quality with the competitive price!
Click Moncler Men Down Jackets Online the best quality with the competitive price!
Click Discount Moncler Men Jacketsthe best quality with the competitive price!
Click Moncler Jackets On Salethe best quality with the competitive price!
Click Cheap Men Down Jackets the best quality with the competitive price!
Click Discount Women Moncler Sweaters the best quality with the competitive price!
Click Women Moncler Sweaters Salethe best quality with the competitive price!
Click Discount Women Moncler Boots the best quality with the competitive price!
Click Women Moncler Boots Sale the best quality with the competitive price!
Click Discount Women Moncler Scarves & Hats the best quality with the competitive price!
Click Moncler Scarves & Hats Sale the best quality with the competitive price!
Klicka på Rabatt Moncler Nätetbästa kvalitet med konkurrenskraftiga priser!
Klicka på Moncler Kvinnor Ner Västarbästa kvalitet med konkurrenskraftiga priser!
Klicka på Moncler Kvinnor Ner Västar Försäljningbästa kvalitet med konkurrenskraftiga priser!
Klicka på Moncler Kvinnor Dunjackorbästa kvalitet med konkurrenskraftiga priser!
Klicka på Rabatt Moncler Kvinnor Dunjackorbästa kvalitet med konkurrenskraftiga priser!
Klicka på Moncler Kvinnor Ner Rockar bästa kvalitet med konkurrenskraftiga priser!
Klicka på Moncler Kvinnor Ner Rockar Försäljning
bästa kvalitet med konkurrenskraftiga priser!
Klicka på Moncler Män Ner Västarbästa kvalitet med konkurrenskraftiga priser!
Klicka påMoncler Män Ner Västar Försäljning bästa kvalitet med konkurrenskraftiga priser!
Klicka på Moncler Män Dunjackor bästa kvalitet med konkurrenskraftiga priser!
Klicka på Moncler Män Dunjackor Försäljning
bästa kvalitet med konkurrenskraftiga priser!
Klicka på Moncler Män Ner Rockar bästa kvalitet med konkurrenskraftiga priser!
Klicka på Moncler Män Ner Rockar Försäljning
bästa kvalitet med konkurrenskraftiga priser!
Klicka på Moncler Barn bästa kvalitet med konkurrenskraftiga priser!
Klicka på Moncler Barn Försäljningbästa kvalitet med konkurrenskraftiga priser!
Klicka på Moncler Pikétröjorbästa kvalitet med konkurrenskraftiga priser!
Klicka på Moncler Pikétröjor Försäljning bästa kvalitet med konkurrenskraftiga priser!
Klicka på Moncler Tröjor Kvinnorbästa kvalitet med konkurrenskraftiga priser!
Klicka på Moncler Tröjor Kvinnor Försäljningbästa kvalitet med konkurrenskraftiga priser!
Klicka på Moncler Män Tröjorbästa kvalitet med konkurrenskraftiga priser!
Klicka på Moncler Män Tröjor Försäljningbästa kvalitet med konkurrenskraftiga priser!
Klicka på Moncler Kvinnor Luvtröjabästa kvalitet med konkurrenskraftiga priser!
Klicka på Moncler Kvinnor Luvtröja Försäljningbästa kvalitet med konkurrenskraftiga priser!
Klicka på Moncler Handväskorbästa kvalitet med konkurrenskraftiga priser!
Klicka på Rabatt Moncler Handväskorbästa kvalitet med konkurrenskraftiga priser!
Klicka på Moncler Kvinnor Stövlarbästa kvalitet med konkurrenskraftiga priser!
Klicka på Moncler Män Skorbästa kvalitet med konkurrenskraftiga priser!
Klicka på Moncler Scarfar & Mössorbästa kvalitet med konkurrenskraftiga priser!
Klicken Moncler Großhandel Onlinedie beste Qualität mit den günstigen Preis!
Klicken Moncler Frauen Daunenwestendie beste Qualität mit den günstigen Preis!
Klicken Moncler Frauen Daunenjackendie beste Qualität mit den günstigen Preis!
Klicken Moncler Frauen Daunenmanteldie beste Qualität mit den günstigen Preis!
Klicken Moncler Herren Daunenwestendie beste Qualität mit den günstigen Preis!
Klicken Moncler Herren Daunenjackendie beste Qualität mit den günstigen Preis!
Klicken Moncler Herren Daunenmanteldie beste Qualität mit den günstigen Preis!
Klicken Moncler Kinderdie beste Qualität mit den günstigen Preis!
Klicken Moncler Frauen Pulloverdie beste Qualität mit den günstigen Preis!
Klicken Moncler Herren Pulloverdie beste Qualität mit den günstigen Preis!
Klicken Moncler Frauen Hoodydie beste Qualität mit den günstigen Preis!
Klicken Moncler Herren Polo Hemdendie beste Qualität mit den günstigen Preis!
Klicken Moncler Frauen Stiefeldie beste Qualität mit den günstigen Preis!
Klicken Moncler Herren Schuhedie beste Qualität mit den günstigen Preis!
Klicken Moncler Handtaschendie beste Qualität mit den günstigen Preis!
Klicken Moncler Schals Mützendie beste Qualität mit den günstigen Preis!
Klik på Moncler Salgden bedste kvalitet med en rimelig pris!
Klik påMoncler Kvinder Vesteden bedste kvalitet med en rimelig pris!
Klik på Moncler Kvinder Jakkerden bedste kvalitet med en rimelig pris!
Klik på Moncler Kvinder Frakkerden bedste kvalitet med en rimelig pris!
Klik på Moncler Mænd Vesteden bedste kvalitet med en rimelig pris!
Klik på Moncler Mænd Jakkerden bedste kvalitet med en rimelig pris!
Klik på Moncler Mænd Frakkerden bedste kvalitet med en rimelig pris!
Klik påMoncler Schals Mützenden bedste kvalitet med en rimelig pris!
Klik på Moncler Kidsden bedste kvalitet med en rimelig pris!
Klik på Moncler Kvinder Trøjerden bedste kvalitet med en rimelig pris!
Klik på Moncler Mænd Trøjerden bedste kvalitet med en rimelig pris!
Klik på Moncler Kvinder Hoodyden bedste kvalitet med en rimelig pris!
Klik på Moncler Mænd Poloshirtsden bedste kvalitet med en rimelig pris!
Klik på Moncler Kvinder Støvlerden bedste kvalitet med en rimelig pris!
Klik på Moncler Mænd Skoden bedste kvalitet med en rimelig pris!
Klik påMoncler Kvinder Håndtaskerden bedste kvalitet med en rimelig pris!
Klik på Moncler Hatte Tørklæderden bedste kvalitet med en rimelig pris!
НажмитеMoncler Интернет-магазинахвысокое качество и конкурентоспособные цены!
НажмитеMoncler Женщины вниз Жилетывысокое качество и конкурентоспособные цены!
Нажмите Moncler Женщины пуховикивысокое качество и конкурентоспособные цены!
НажмитеMoncler Женщины вниз Пальтовысокое качество и конкурентоспособные цены!
Нажмите Moncler Мужчины Вниз Жилетывысокое качество и конкурентоспособные цены!
Нажмите Moncler Мужчины пуховикивысокое качество и конкурентоспособные цены!
Нажмите Moncler Мужчины вниз Пальтовысокое качество и конкурентоспособные цены!
Нажмите Moncler Детивысокое качество и конкурентоспособные цены!
Нажмите Moncler Женщины Свитеравысокое качество и конкурентоспособные цены!
Нажмите Moncler Мужчины Свитеравысокое качество и конкурентоспособные цены!
Нажмите Moncler Женщины толстовкавысокое качество и конкурентоспособные цены!
Нажмите Moncler Мужчины-половысокое качество и конкурентоспособные цены!
НажмитеMoncler Женщины Сапогивысокое качество и конкурентоспособные цены!
Нажмите Moncler Мужская обувьвысокое качество и конкурентоспособные цены!
НажмитеMoncler Женщины сумкивысокое качество и конкурентоспособные цены!
Нажмите Moncler Головные уборы и шарфывысокое качество и конкурентоспособные цены!
Klicka på canada goose försäljning på nätetbästa kvalitet med konkurrenskraftiga priser!
Klicka på canada goose parkabästa kvalitet med konkurrenskraftiga priser!
Klicka på canada goose parka män snö mantra parkabästa kvalitet med konkurrenskraftiga priser!
Klicka på canada goose parka män yorkville jackorbästa kvalitet med konkurrenskraftiga priser!
Klicka på canada goose parka män citadel parkabästa kvalitet med konkurrenskraftiga priser!
Klicka på canada goose parka män chilliwack bomberbästa kvalitet med konkurrenskraftiga priser!
Klicka på canada goose parka män expedition jackorbästa kvalitet med konkurrenskraftiga priser!
Klicka på canada goose parka män resolute parkabästa kvalitet med konkurrenskraftiga priser!
Klicka på canada goose rockarbästa kvalitet med konkurrenskraftiga priser!
Klicka på canada goose rockar kvinnor chilliwack jackorbästa kvalitet med konkurrenskraftiga priser!
Klicka på canada goose rockar kvinnor solaris rockarbästa kvalitet med konkurrenskraftiga priser!
Klicka på canada goose rockar kvinnor trillium rockarbästa kvalitet med konkurrenskraftiga priser!
Klicka på canada goose rockar kvinnor expedition parkaвысокое качество и конкурентоспособные цены!
Klicka på canada goose rockar kvinnor montebello rockarbästa kvalitet med konkurrenskraftiga priser!
Klicka på canada goose rockar cg55 kensington parkabästa kvalitet med konkurrenskraftiga priser!
Klicka på canada goose rockar kvinnor constable rockarbästa kvalitet med konkurrenskraftiga priser!
Klicka på canada goose västbästa kvalitet med konkurrenskraftiga priser!
Klicka på canada goose väst canada goose män västbästa kvalitet med konkurrenskraftiga priser!
Klicka på canada goose väst canada goose kvinnor västbästa kvalitet med konkurrenskraftiga priser!
Klicka på canada goose handskarbästa kvalitet med konkurrenskraftiga priser!
Klicka på canada goose handskar män ner handskarbästa kvalitet med konkurrenskraftiga priser!
Klicka på canada goose handskar kvinnor ner handskarbästa kvalitet med konkurrenskraftiga priser!