Over 600,000 Jews from around the world have embarked on the informal, all-expenses paid, Taglit Birthright educational trip to Israel. What this article will lead you to wonder is whether this is simply a free trip. This article will examine the Birthright graphics and analyze the impact this has on the American Jewish population. If you examine the data comparatively with employment retention, you find a logical and surprising assessment. In addition to an overview of the population participating in Birthright, this article will analyze participants' post-trip evaluations, stronger Jewish identities, stronger commitment to marrying a Jew and raising Jewish children, understanding of Israeli society, and l Birthright's impact on the cultural and physiological identities of young American Jews. While it is important to note the many ways in which the American Jewish population supports the occupation, this article will focus on only one of these key elements. Birthright is an essential element to analyze due to the impact it had on the American Jewish population and, therefore, in support of the occupation of Palestine. The American Jewish population is a well-organized and connected community that supports the occupation: by financially supporting the institutions and businesses that enrich the occupation, by pressuring American politicians to unconditionally support the occupation, by promoting a political culture that does not undermine question Palestinian livelihoods, voting for leaders who do not criticize Israel and hide the nature of the situation via Taglit Birthright. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay This document will define the occupation as the military rule of Gaza, the West Bank, and East Jerusalem. Similarly, IfNotNow, anti-occupation peace activists, describe the occupation as follows: “discrimination and displacement within Israel's 1948 borders are linked to its rule in those occupied territories. This system of violence deprives all Palestinians of civil, political and economic rights." This is how the document will use and define occupation. The purpose of analyzing these findings is not solely to further understand the American Jewish population, but to chart, based on American Jewish identity, the potential impact they may have on Israel's future. . By extension, American support for the occupation. It is also important to note the difference in political perspectives and generational gaps. Not unlike other conflicts, each generation connected to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has been exposed to different historical events throughout their lives. Generations who lived during the first and second Intifadas and the Oslo Accords commonly hold more right-wing and militaristic political views and largely do not support the two-state solution. Unlike the millennial population who in part saw the fall of the Oslo agreements, or in others only from the 2000s onwards. The difference in exposure to historical events related to this conflict may cause a difference in how people identify as Jewish. To further exemplify the growing divide among Jews, changes are occurring in the Jewish-American population, according to a major survey by the Pew Research Center. The recent poll “suggests that Jewish identity is changing in America, where one in five Jews (22%) now describe themselves as having no religion.” In extension, the Jewish population of the United States has decreased by half when it iswas asked if they were Jews by religion. To highlight the contrast between the Boomer generation (born 1946-1964) and the Millennials (born after 1980), Boomers identified 81% as Jews by religion while 19% identified as Jews without religion; millennials responded: 68% were Jews by religion and 32% were Jews without religion. The importance behind these numbers shows us how the Jewish population is moving away in how they identify as Jews. Different identities display different opinions and social orientations, particularly within Jewish communities. Understanding who funds Birthright is essential to understanding the purpose of the program and what it aims to achieve. Formed by a group of Jewish philanthropists, in collaboration with the Israeli government, Birthright is able to give away free trips. Each participant is valued at $3,000 per trip with total 2017 programming costs of $85,377,951. The foundation's president, David Fisher, explained: "We have individual donors who give us up to $2.5 million a year, many family foundations," Fisher said, "In recent years, the Shimon ben Joseph Foundation, the Marcus Foundation, the Schusterman Family Foundation, the Steinhardt Foundation, the Jacobson Family Trust, and the Klarman Family Foundation donated $1 million or more. Birthright Israel's largest donors were Sheldon and Miriam Adelson, who contributed to the effort. organization with over $200 million since 2009.” With independent donors, federation support and an average of $40 million from the Israeli government, it is logical to conclude that Taglit Birthright's success is largely due to the Jewish population. The next question to logically ask is: Why are countless people willing to open their checkbooks in unconditional support of Taglit Birthright? Arguably, Taglit Birthright makes young Jews understand who they are and where their people come from, incentivizing Jewish- Americans to donate to the foundation. A big part of Taglist's success is tracking the impact these trips have on young Jews. Additionally, the recent and ongoing boom in philanthropic giving has led to an increase in people giving generously. The foundation's president, David Fisher, said: "One of the greatest strengths we have is our ability to show and demonstrate impact, consistent and measurable statistical impact." Fisher continued, “We have been measuring the impact of the program since the beginning. We know now, 16 years later, the kind of impact the program has had, how participants have engaged in Jewish life three, five, ten years after their experience.' If Jews around the world not only participate but also donate to this foundation, it is logical to assume that it is contributing to a greater good for Jewish society. Nonetheless one wonders if the funding for Taglit's Birthright comes primarily from Jewish pockets, doesn't this create a one-sided organization? The question here is not the importance of philanthropic dollars, but rather, if the funding comes from a single source, is the funding blind? Or even more, biased? To further understand the context of Birthright's impact on Jews, it is important to note what Birthright is also exposing its participants. In a survey conducted by Brandeis University, participants were asked where their strongest travel memories were. Participants had the option to choose between Kotel, Masada, Jerusalem, Shabbat, Dead Sea and Yad Vashem, with Kotel representing the majority's strongest memory, 25%. When participants spend their 10-day journey in Serial,they are given a map that excludes Palestinian occupations and an itinerary that offers no exposure to the daily lives of non-Israelis. Although there are approximately 4.4 million Palestinians living under Israeli military control, Taglit offers no exposure to the conflict that is at the heart of the Israeli state. Sarah O'Connor wrote in early March 2019 about these controversies. The Jewish-American peace activist group IfNotNow says that “college students across the country are already demanding that Birthright commit to addressing the jobs crisis during travel this summer, and to do so by April 5. They also offered some simple changes Birthright could make: Mark the West Bank on every map. Educate participants about the daily nightmare of the Occupation. Shows a checkpoint from a Palestinian perspective. Although this position is presented by a group of anti-occupation activists, these statements ring true. If Birthright claims to promote an understanding of Israel, a connection to the state, and an awareness of the state's well-being, why does it isolate half the state's narrative? Created with the intention of promoting Jewish continuity and founded in the belief that an educational and culturally engaging experience was essential to fostering Jewish identity, Taglit is respectively unique and appealing to many young Jews around the world. Proven to increase ties between Jews and Israel, create new relationships among young Jews, and help young Jewish adults connect with their heritage. Since the program's inception in 1999, more than 600,000 Jews between the ages of 18 and 26 have participated in the free trip, leading to an unforgivable increase in stronger attempts at Jewish identity. Before Taglit, religious organizations targeted a pre-college teen demographic, however Taglit now targets the older, more mature population. Furthermore, Taglit focuses on intensive informal secular education. Unique to Taglit, participants come from diverse Jewish backgrounds, including 50 countries represented, some of whom received formal Jewish education and others who grew up in non-observant families. In-depth and widespread studies conducted on Birthright are the lasting impression that Taglit seems to leave on young adults: "Taglit's impact on one's sense of connection with Israel appears to be stable and long-lasting, even after the initial post-trip 'euphoria' The fact that non-participants also feel relatively connected to Israel (though significantly less than participants) is a function of American Jews' generally positive feelings toward Israel to infer its impact on the American-Jewish population. They were asked many questions, all related to identity, connection to Israel and their Jewishness, as well as their interpretations of Israel. This information can prove useful in a comparative way, however it is important to tell the exposure that Taglit Birthright is providing to its participants . When participants were asked the questions: “How important is being Jewish in your life?” three months after the trip, 74% of participants responded with “extremely important” compared to 66% of non-participants. Additionally, one year after the trip, 76% of participants responded with “extremely important”. when asked about the importance of marrying a Jew and the importance of raising children as Jews Leveling around 65% for nonparticipants and 75% for participants Participants and nonparticipants were asked to respond on countless wait of Jewish identity. Participants and non-participants identified themselvesconstantly with two themes: remembering the Holocaust and leading an ethical and moral life. Remembering the Holocaust, non-participants responded “very much” with 52% of participants, while participants responded with 67%. It is unclear whether this reflects a personal discovery of Jewish history or the impact of going to Yad Vashem and meeting Holocaust survivors during their Birthright trip. An interesting finding are also the participants' responses when asked about the connection before and after the trip with the Jewish people. 38% of participants pre-trip responded “very,” however one year later, 65% responded “very.” While 47% of non-participants responded “very much,” highlighting the connection Birthright establishes between participants and Israel. Perhaps most importantly, political attitudes toward Israel have changed since Birthright. Participants felt a greater sense of connection, although no change was seen in political perspectives before and after participants. Additionally, a lack of difference between participants and non-participants. In the year-long follow-up survey, both groups were asked to respond to whether they had been affected by violence since the fall of 2000. The group was given positions on negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority, “4% of participants stated that negotiations could not continue in the foreseeable future; 25% said they should continue only if Palestinian violence ends and the division of Jerusalem and the return of Palestinians to Israel are not on the agenda; a similar percentage (27%) were content to abandon the latter conditions and argue only that negotiations should be suspended until the Palestinian violence ends; and 44% said negotiations should continue anyway. The opinions of non-participants were almost identical.” This is an interesting and somewhat unexpected finding, but one that nevertheless leads one to wonder whether the lack of change in political outlook is Birthright Israel's fault. In this case, looking at the data the inevitable changes, the perspective relating to Israel, and furthermore, to Palestine, would actually change if the exposure to these issues also increased. Travel and new experiences commonly change young adults' political perspectives; if the trip does not educate participants beyond their current knowledge, no new changes will be seen. An inference can be made regarding the lack of change in political attitudes, i.e. that participants were not exposed to relevant information on these issues. This inference is strengthened by comparing the vast changes in the perspective of culture, identity and religion of participants and non-participants: change is expected. The lack of change in political outlook, or at least intensification of outlook before the trip, concludes that Taglit Birthright has power in sustaining the occupation by limiting young adult Jewish exposure to the realities of Palestinian life. America's relationship with Israel supports the occupation in countless ways that this article will not explore, however Birthright is one such way due to the impact on the American Jewish population. It makes sense to have a physiological transformation once exposed to knowing information or experiencing something you've never experienced before. Any young adult who had the opportunity to learn objectively within Israel-Palestine would logically have an experience that would change their political perspectives. In contrast, Birthright's travels were not easily digested by everyone. A movement that began with a few adults abandoning their travelsBirthright, eventually numbering in the dozens each summer, and that has had a ripple effect in the Birthright conversation. Participants who decided to leave or asked to leave asked questions about the occupation or the Israeli army. Katie Fenster planned a walk with three other women, while on their tour bus she started a live stream on Facebook. Then he stated, “I just want to let you know that there is a group of us on this journey who have been asking questions and trying to engage, and we haven't been able to do that. And as a result, the five of us will leave. When we get off the bus, we” – that is, the quintet, not the rest of the group – “will go on a journey with Breaking the Silence to learn about the occupation from the perspective of the Palestinians and the IDF soldiers.” Fenster and the others they are not alone. Birthright is shaping the debate over the occupation of Palestine in Millennial circles. Most of these groups oppose the occupation of the West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza, but compared to other American peace groups, they stop at Zionism. They promote the two-state solution and the overall sustenance of Palestine. For most young, left-leaning American Jews, this is appealing. The peace activist group If Not Now, founded almost 6 years ago, is growing rapidly and is represented on many American college campuses. Most of these groups' requests are quiet simple and offer the birthright a clear goal. Sarah O'Connor wrote on behalf of IfNotNow: "If Birthright truly wants to offer its participants an authentic experience, it has a responsibility to educate them about the realities on the ground, including the daily nightmare of the Occupation." goes on to highlight If Not Now's recent request: “They also offered some simple changes Birthright could make: marking the West Bank on every map, educating participants about the daily nightmare of the occupation, showing a checkpoint from a Palestinian perspective.” It is inexcusable that these additions would impact anyone, let alone Jews, who learn of Israel's formation. These components are rudimentary to understanding the realities of life in Israel and probably quite basic compared to the other realities that come with life in Israel. These peace activist groups show that there is opposition to what Birthright is exposing its participants to and that not every young adult is complicit. Many arguments can be made against anti-Birthright groups, just like any other, however the purpose of this section is not to evaluate their validity but rather to acknowledge the argument against Taglit. People are angry and recognize the many ways in which the Palestinian occupation is supported by the American population at all levels. Conclusion The issues within the Israeli-Palestinian conflict are no exception, in fact they are unmistakably parallel to many others, nationalism, genocide, racism, militarization, corruption and more. It is important to deexceptionalize this conflict; we continually teach the cycles of violence, both in Israel and in America. Birthright is exposing young, imprintable generations to a false reality, preventing them from forming a clique or original thought. Exposing a young adult to false truths is harming our future. Teaching the next generation is one of the most crucial foundations for change. If change is desired in the history of America's relationship with Israel, it must begin with training younger generations with independent thought processes and innovative solutions. These ideas are not formed from an artificial environment but rather from exposure to the truth.,.