The poll is now closed. There were are 352 people who
responded. Based on my daily average of about 1000 unique visitors (not
factoring in Shabbos and Yom Tov) that is about 1/3 of my readership.
(Actually, it’s probably less because there are many people who visit this blog
regularly but not daily – so they may have missed this poll.) But for purposes
of analysis let us say that out of the one thousand people who visit my blog,
about a 1/3 participated.
One of the biggest criticisms from some who responded was
that my categories were inadequate for a variety of reasons. To an extent I
concede the point. It is absolutely true that these categories are too broad.
It was also pointed out that I did not list enough of them. Those I listed didn’t
fit their definition of themselves. …or they
straddle one or more of them. True again.
Some people said that these categories are no longer
applicable and that entirely new categories should have been designed. Very
possibly the case.
Others said they hate labels. I completely understand that. The
argument has been made that labels can have a divisive effect. Without them we would all be in the same boat
and get along much better. Nort sure I entirely agree with that one. But let’s
move on.
The biggest flaw in this poll is that I did not define each category
well enough – or not at all. One poster referenced an Avi Chai segmentation as
described by Professor Marvin Schick. It had an entirely different meaning for
the term Modern Orthodox than I give it. Prof Schick defines it the way I
define Left Wing Modern Orthodox.
Although he defined Centrist Orthodoxy in the same way I did- to me
Centrism is really a part of Modern Orthodoxy too - the right wing of it.
There are also clearly identifiable groups – like Moderate
Chasdim or Lubavitch – that did not have
a category. In my defense, I meant to include the former into the category of
Moderate Charedim and the latter into Charedi-Chasidic. But that may not fit them exactly either. In
any case I didn’t specify any of that so it’s my fault.
Yet another difficulty here is the very unscientific nature
of a poll like this. There are many things that can affect the results here so
that in the end the numbers do not reflect the reality -skewing the numbers unfairly
in favor of one demographic. Besides - even the most carefully designed polls
have a margin of error. 352 people
responding means that 648 people did not. Who knows what they really think?
So if one takes all of these criticisms in the aggregate,
one has to wonder if there is any validity to this poll all!
That said, my gut feeling (…and take that for whatever its
worth) is that there probably is a degree of validity to these numbers. I
believe that most people responded honestly and that it probably does reflect
the proportions of each demographic I listed. Before I report those numbers, I
am going to address some of the concerns expressed in the comments.
First - why the great big response (212 as of this writing)?
I think the content of those comments themselves speak to that. They are in
part an explanation for the success of this blog. People care passionately
about their beliefs – or lack of them. Belief is one of the topics I explore
here (although perhaps not often enough).
Given the opportunity to talk about them as this post did,
enables people to actually put their beliefs down on paper (virtual paper at
least) and organize their thoughts; to compare
and contrast their own beliefs with those of others. It clarifies and refines
those beliefs. This is the back and forth I noticed in some of the comment
trails.
While labels can have a divisive effect, they also have a defining
effect. By examining your beliefs against those of others it helps your
understanding of who and what you are. I believe it enables one’s belief
system to grow and mature. Even if one ends up finding that “none of the above”
fits best.
As for the poll itself, I agree that thinking people are hard
to peg. Thinking people tend to define who they are not by picking a pre-existing category, but
by studying various ideas; accepting some and rejecting others; and then arriving at
who they are. This usually means that they do not fit neatly into any one category.
As more than one commenter said, they see themselves in X to a certain degree
and in Y in another.
Some people said that they grew up one way and still feel comfortable in that environment but that Hashkafically find themselves in another category. In short the most thoughtful people did not find an exact match. Some chose not to respond at all because of that. Others responded by picking the one closest to their beliefs but not really reflective of their views.
Some people said that they grew up one way and still feel comfortable in that environment but that Hashkafically find themselves in another category. In short the most thoughtful people did not find an exact match. Some chose not to respond at all because of that. Others responded by picking the one closest to their beliefs but not really reflective of their views.
I am somewhat of an enigma myself in that respect. While I
define myself ideologically as a Centrist (RWMO) I find that I am more
comfortable socially in a moderate Charedi setting. In fact the community in
which I live and the people I Daven with on Shabbos are mostly moderate
Charedim. I should add (as one commenters said about himself) that in some
areas I tend to be a bit more to the left and in others I tend to be bit more to the right of my Centrist
colleagues.
Now to the numbers. 352 people responded. Here is the
breakdown:
Charedi Chasidic - 21 (6%)
Charedi Yeshivish – 15
(4%)
Charedi moderate – 59 (16%)
MO Centrist – 132 (37%)
MO Left Wing – 36 (10%)
Orthoprax – 58 (16%)
Non Orthodox – 24 (6%)
Not Jewish – 7 (2%)
It seems like those who tend to fit into the Centrist camp
comprise the largest percentage of my readership by more than double of any
other segment. That should not be a surprise. We are all kindred spirits seeing
the world in the same way and seeking the same goals – for the most part.
The next largest group is Moderate Charedim. Again no
surprise, they too agree with many of my views. That is good to know. As I
always say, these two groups are the wave of the future and have an almost
identical lifestyle. I believe that they
comprise the largest segment of Orthodox Jewry.
What surprised me is the number of Orthoprax that read this
blog. The same percentage as Moderate Charedim at 16%. Not sure what to make of
that. I hope it means that I am trusted to treat everyone fairly.
I am happy that Orthoprax Jews find value here. Their 16% translates
to 160 Orthoprax Jews reading my blog on average every day. I am grateful that
they respect the views expressed here enough to stick around and read the posts
and - for at least some - the comments too.
10% of my readership is LWMO. Even though the issues that
divide us are pretty “hotbutton” - our differences are far smaller than what we share
as observant Jews. I think that in most cases they respect my views because I
respect theirs.
I am also happy that non Orthodox Jews read this blog.
Especially since I am very critical of Heterodox movements. But they seem to
forgive me and understand where I am coming from. At least I hope that’s the case. I honor them
for that.
I also fully respect non Jews that come here. At 2% that
isn’t much. It means that about 20 non Jews read this blog on average daily. I
welcome them and hope that I do my religion justice in their eyes and express
our beliefs well.
Not too surprising at all is the number of Charedim and Chasidim
who do not consider themselves moderate. A combined percentage of 10% of my readership
is Charedi. That means about 100 Charedim on the average every day. Not too bad
if you consider that so many of my posts are critical of their community or
their leaders
I welcome them too… especially those among them who respond
in the comments. The only thing I don’t welcome is the disparagement and
ridicule of a few of them that occasionally accompanies a comment.
This pretty much sums up my analysis of the polling results-
given space and time considerations. Of
course there is a lot more to say, but I’ve already exceeded my usual post
length. So I now turn it over to readers to make their own analysis – and if so
inclined to post their views in the comment section.
