Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-fbnjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-13T00:45:00.776Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Anti-Semitism in Moscow: A Re-examination

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 January 2017

Robert J. Brym
Robert J. Brym*
Affiliation:
Department of Sociology, University of Toronto
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

My dispute with Gibson and Hesli et al. rests on fundamental methodological differences. They do not fully appreciate the historical and political context from which Russian survey data derive. As a result, they engage in a series of statistical misapplications which undermine the soundness of their critique of my article with Degtyarev and of their views concerning the nature and consequences of anti-Semitism in Russia.

Type
Response
Information
Slavic Review , Volume 53 , Issue 3 , Fall 1994 , pp. 842 - 855
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Slavic, East European, and Eurasian Studies. 1994

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. James L. Gibson, “Misunderstandings of Anti-Semitism in Russia: An Analysis of the Politics of Anti Jewish Attitudes ” ; James L. Gibson, “Understandings of Anti-Semitism in Russia: An Analysis of the Politics of Anti-Jewish Attitudes ” ; Vicki L. Hesli et al., “Comment on Brym and Degtyarev's Discussion of Anti-Semitism in Moscow ” ; Vicki L. Hesli et al., “Social Distance from Jews in Russia and Ukraine ” ; all in this issue of Slavic Review.

2. Robert J. Brym and Andrei Degtyarev, “Anti-Semitism in Moscow: Results of an October 1992 Survey,” Slavic Review 52, no. 1 (1993): 1–12Google Scholar.

3. Edward G. Carmines and Richard A. Zeller, Reliability and Validity Assessment (Beverly Hills: Sage, 1979 Google Scholar.

4. See, for example, Avtandil Rukhadze, /ea« in the USSR: Figures, Facts, Comments (Moscow: Novosti, 1978 Google Scholar. The Kosygin quotation is from “Kosygin's speech in Riga (1965)” in Benjamin Pinkus, ed., The Soviet Government and the Jews 1948-1967 (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1984), 77.

5. See, for example, Jonathan Frankel, “The Soviet Regime and Anti-Zionism: An Analysis,” in Yaacov Ro'i and Avi Beker, eds., Jewish Culture and Identity in the Soviet Union (New York: New York University Press, 1991), 310-54; Theodore Friedgut, “Soviet Anti-Zionism and Antisemitism—Another Cycle,” Soviet Jewish Affairs 14, no. 1 (1984): 3-22; Victor Zaslavsky and Robert J. Brym Sovietjewish Emigration and Soviet Nationality Policy (New York: Macmillan, 1983 Google Scholar.

6. Leonard, Shapiro, “Antisemitism in the Communist World,” Sovietjewish Affairs 9, no. 1 (1979): 48 Google Scholar.

7. Friedgut, “Soviet Anti-Zionism,” 19.

8. Gibson also questions whether our data actually demonstrate a correlation between responses on the infringement of rights question and the Zionist plot question. The way the categories of the Zionist plot question were collapsed in table 5, panel 1, does mask the correlation. But Gibson apparently overlooked table 8, panel 5, where the correlation is clearly demonstrated.

9. Gibson ( “Misunderstandings ” ) writes that we compare Moscow and US findings “throughout” our paper. Actually, two paragraphs of our twelve-page article were devoted to this side issue.

10. Gibson says that we claimed that 8% of Americans are hard-core anti-Semites. We did not. We claimed that 8% of Americans “had negative feelings about Jews, i.e., they scored in the bottom half of the scale” (Brym and Degtyarev “Antisemitism,” 4, fn. 11).

11. Frank, Prial, “Survey in Moscow Sees a High Level of Anti-Jewish Feeling,” New York Times (30 March 1990)Google Scholar.

12. Gibson makes it seem as if our procedure is idiosyncratic but it is actually commonplace for researchers to attach labels to a range on a scale. See, for example, Highlights from an Anti-Defamation League Survey on Anti-Semitism and Prejudice in America (New York: Anti-Defamation League, 1992).

13. Brym and Degtyarev, “Anti-Semitism,” 4-5.

14. Gibson, “Understandings,” tables 2 and 3.

15. Theodore Friedgut, H, “Antisemitism and its Opponents: Reflections in the Russian Press from Perestroika until the Present,” Analysis of Currrent Trends in Anti-Semitism 3 (1994): 13 Google Scholar.

16. Jean M. Converse and Stanley Presser, Survey Questions: Handcrafting the Standardized Questionnaire (Beverly Hills: Sage, 1986), 35–36 Google Scholar; Nikolai P., Popov, “Political Views of the Russian Public,” International Journal of Public Opinion Research 4, no. 4 (1992): 322 Google Scholar.

17. James L. Gibson and Raymond M. Duch, “Anti-Semitic Attitudes of the Mass Public: Estimates and Explanations Based on a Survey of the Moscow Oblast,” Public Opinion Quarterly 56 (1992): 12.

18. Introductory social science methodology books often caution against such simplistic reasoning and recommend strategies for dealing with missing data identical to the strategy we employed. See, for example, Earl Babbie The Practice of Social Research, 4th ed. (Belmont: Wadsworth 1986 [1973]), 372Google Scholar. This is probably the most widely used book of its type in the USA.

19. James L. Gibson, “Re-Evaluating Anti-Semitism in Russia: An Analysis of the Politics of Anti-Jewish Attitudes,” (unpublished paper, 1993), 13. Personal communication with Gibson.

20. Ironically, our analysis of “don't know” responses to the Zionist plot question led us to conclude that for that particular item “don't know” is a true intermediate response category between “yes” and “no” and not a mask for extreme anti-Semitic views.

21. Gibson, “Re-evaluating,” 13.

22. That is one reason why friendship ties in the Soviet Union were in general stronger than in the USA. See Fran Markowitz, “Russkaia Druzhba: Russian Friendship in American and Israeli Contexts,” Slavic Review 50, no. 3 (1991): 637-45. On the sharp distinction between public and private opinion in the Soviet Union, see, for example, Vladimir, Shlapentokh, Public and Private Life of the Soviet People (New York: Oxford University Press, 1989 Google Scholar; Victor Zaslavsky and Robert J. Brym “The Structure of Power and the Functions of Soviet Local Elections” in Everett M. Jacobs, ed., Soviet Local Politics and Government (London: George Allen and Unwin, 1983), 69-77.

23. Vladimir, Voinovich, The Ivankiad: Or the Tale of the Writer Voinovich's Installation in His New Apartment, trans. David Lapeza (New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 1976), 125Google Scholar.

24. Popov, “Political Views,” 322.

25. M ichael, McFaul, “Explaining the Vote,” Journal of Democracy 5, no. 2 (1994): 4–9Google Scholar. Among the anti-reformers I include the Liberal Democratic Party (Zhirinovsky), the Communist Party of the Russian Federation (Zyuganov) and the Agrarian Party of Russia (Lapshin). Among reformers I include Russia's Choice (Gaidar), “YaBLoko” (Yavlinsky) and the Party of Russian Unity and Accord (Shakhrai).

26. I am grateful to VTsIOM for permission to reanalyze the data and, in particular, to Mrs. Vera Nikitina for her promptness and efficiency in sending the data set to me via electronic mail. Of course, I alone am responsible for inferences drawn here.

27. Iurii A. Levada, “Novii russkii natsionalizm: ambitsii, fobii, kompleksy,” Ekonomicheskie i sotsial'nye peremeny: monitoring obshchestvennogo mneniya: Informatsionnyi byulleten', Intertsentr VTsIOM, no. 1 (Moscow: Aspekt Press, 1994), 15-17. See also Iurii, Levada, “Obshchestvennoe mnenie v god krizisnogo pereloma: smena paradigmy,” Ekonomicheskie i sotsial'nye peremeny: monitoring obshchestvennogo mneniya: Informatsionnyi byulleten', Intertsentr VTsIOM, no. 3 (Moscow: Aspekt Press, 1994), 5–8 Google Scholar.

28. Robert J. Brym with the assistance of Rozalina, Ryvkina, The Jews of Moscow, Kiev and Minsk: Identity, Antisemitism, Emigration, Howard Spier, ed. (New York: New York University Press,Google Scholar, in association with the Institute ofjewish Affairs, London 1994).

29. Gibson is apparently unfamiliar with the historical literature. Thus in his critique of our article and in his research note he fails to cite a single historical source. In Gibson and Duch, “Anti-Semitic Attitudes,” the only historical work cited is Salo Baron's English-language, one-volume standard, The Russian Jew Under Tsars and Soviets, 3rd edn. (New York: Schocken, 1987 [1964]). However, the authors cite the title incorrectly, say they are citing the second edition when they are in fact citing the third, misspell Baron's first name and confuse his first and last names, which is why references to Baron's book appear in their text as (Salow, 1987). This inspires little confidence in Gibson's grasp of Russian and Russian-Jewish history.

30. See, for example, Frank M., Andrews, “Construct Validity and Error Components of Survey Measures: A Structural Modelling Approach,” Public Opinion Quarterly 48, no. 2 (1984): 409–42Google Scholar.

31. It is also plausible that many Russian refugees have developed resentments against non-Russian groups because ethnic antagonism is a principal reason for the forced migration of Russians from the “near abroad.” See I. Orlova et al. “Contemporary Migration Processes in Russia,” Refuge 14, no. 2 (1994): 1–17Google Scholar.

32. Brym, “The Spread,” 31-32.

33. Ironically, Hesli et al. use measures that are of questionable or known unreliability in their own work. Introductory statistics textbooks usually state that a Cronbach's alpha of 0.7 or higher indicates a reliable scale. See, for example, George W. Bohrnstedt and David Knoke, Statistics for Social Data Analysis, 2nd edn. (Itasca: F. E. Peacock, 1988 [1982]), 385Google Scholar. But in Arthur H. Miller, Vicki L. Hesli and William M. Reisinger, “Reassessing Mass Support for Political and Economic Change in the Former USSR,” American Political Science Review 88, no. 2 (1994): 399-411, the authors report eight alphas, none of which reaches 0.7 and three of which do not even reach 0.5.

34. (1) Contrary to what Hesli et al. say, their findings about Ukrainians in Ukraine have no bearing on our findings concerning Ukrainians and other non-Russians in Moscow: we are generalizing about different groups in different social settings. (2) Their criticism of our Russian/US comparison ignores the data we cited on attitudes towards intermarriage, which help undermine their case. (3) Hesli et al. find different social determinants of anti-Semitic belief than we did. That is partly because they included different independent variables in their multiple regression equations and partly because their sample was drawn from European Russia while ours was drawn from Moscow only. For instance, Hesli et al. find that rural residence is associated with anti-Semitism. Obviously this finding cannot hold for Moscow considered alone because it has no rural residents. Other factors therefore emerge as significant in a Moscow-only analysis.

35. In both cases I employed oblimin rotation, which permits extracted factors to be correlated, but in each case only one factor proved to be interpretable. The results reported here are based on mean substitution of missing values but listwise deletion of cases with missing values produced basically the same results.

36. George, Schopflin, “Postcommunism: The Problems of Democratic Construction,” Daedalus 123, no. 3 (1994): 128 Google Scholar.