From Division to Dialogue: Insights from the Jewish Leadership Collaborative of WNC

The silence that descends after community trauma can be deafening. In the aftermath of October 7th, Jewish leaders across Western North Carolina were met with exactly that: grief, fear, and deep uncertainty about how—or even whether—to speak to one another again.

In this episode, we sit down with Judy Leavitt, Frank Goldsmith, and Sam Kaplan of the Jewish Leadership Collaborative of WNC, a volunteer-led coalition of over a dozen organizations working across difference to strengthen community ties. With support from Resetting the Table, they launched a series of brave, small-group conversations designed to move their community from division to dialogue—and to answer the question: How can we simply learn to talk to each other again?

About Frank: Frank Goldsmith is a longtime Jewish community leader and retired civil rights attorney. A former president of the ACLU of North Carolina, he co-chaired the NC Commission of Inquiry on Torture and served on the board of Asheville’s Racial Justice Coalition. At Congregation Beth Israel, he has served as president, chaired the Social Action Committee, and regularly leads services. Frank currently serves on the Jewish Community Relations Council of Greater Asheville and the WNC Jewish Security Task Force, and held leadership roles with Carolina Jews for Justice.

About Judy: Judy Leavitt is a retired health policy advocate, educator, and justice activist. She authored Policy and Politics in Nursing and Health Care and has written extensively on social policy. A member of Congregation Beth HaTephila, Judy chaired the Social Justice Committee for 10 years. In 2013, she co-founded Carolina Jews for Justice-West and subsequently led its steering committee, serving on the statewide board for seven years.

About Sam: Dr. Sam Kaplan is a Professor of Mathematics and Director of the Center for Jewish Studies at UNC Asheville. Sam is celebrated for his engaging and inclusive instruction, including the development and teaching of courses on Women in Judaism and Jewish humor, reflecting his commitment to cultural insight and equity in education. Sam is a dedicated member of the Jewish Leadership Collaborative and  UNCA's Marvelous Math Club, advocating for dialogue, connection, and intergenerational learning across WNC.

Whether you’re part of a nonprofit, activist network, or faith-based community, this episode offers a living example of transformative dialogue in action.

Press play to plug into the collective liberation playbook!

We'll see you same time, same place next month. Until then, peace.

Transcript

Speaker 1 0:04

We're profoundly, profoundly interconnected. We don't always live that way, we don't always acknowledge it, but if we're going to heal, we have to live it, experience it and create institutions that celebrate it. Can we create a we where no one's on the outside of it?

Speaker 2 0:20

Welcome to the Uplift with Zedek Real talk for real change. Before we jump in, a quick reminder of why we're here and what we hope to achieve. We're here to build authentic community relationships and help fuel social transformation in Asheville, north Carolina. We believe collective liberation is not only possible but probable as we share, listen and learn together. We're here for the process. However, the views and opinions expressed in this program are those of the speakers and do not necessarily reflect the views or positions of any entities they represent.

Introductions

Speaker 3 0:49

Hello audience and welcome to the Uplift. I'm Tara Coffey and I'm joined here today by Judy Levitt, frank Goldsmith and Sam Kaplan of the Jewish Leadership Collaborative of WNC. Before we get started, I just want to hear a little bit about yourselves. Can you tell me just a little bit more about who you are?

Speaker 4 1:05

Sure, this is Frank Goldsmith and I am a member of the Jewish community here and through Carolina Jews for Justice, I serve as one of the representatives to the Jewish Leadership Collaborative, and we can explain more about what that is in a moment.

Speaker 1 1:20

Sure, my name is Sam Kaplan, I'm a faculty member at UNC, asheville and I serve as the director of Center for Jewish Studies at UNCA, and I'm also a member of the Jewish Leadership Collaborative, western North Carolina. And I did want to also take just a second on behalf of all of us to say thank you to SADC for supporting our efforts to strengthen our community. And then, judy, I'm Judy Levitt.

Speaker 5 1:46

I'm also a member of the Western North Carolina Jewish Leadership Collaborative and I also represent Carolina Jews for Justice.

Speaker 3 1:55

Well, it's great to have you all here and I think, with that, since we were, all you know, here to hear about what the Jewish Leadership Collaborative is doing, tell us a little bit about what is the Jewish?

Speaker 1 2:06

Leadership Collaborative of Western North Carolina. So it's a volunteer-based strategic body that drives really collaboration across more than a dozen Jewish organizations in Western North Carolina from Asheville to Boone, to Hendersonville and Brevard, and we members range from congregations and other Jewish organizations like Jewish Family Services and Hillel, of course, unca Center for Jewish Studies and Carolina Jews for Justice.

Speaker 5 2:34

And the Jewish Community Center and the temples and the synagogues throughout Western North Carolina.

Speaker 4 2:41

I would add that it predates any of our involvements in it. I think the Jewish Leadership Collaborative was probably formed more than 15 years ago maybe as many as 20, because Carolina Jews for Justice has existed here for about 15 years in this community. I think that's right. We joined the collaborative as it was a work in progress, a volunteer-led coalition umbrella group, if you will, of all the elements of the Jewish community in Western North Carolina.

Speaker 5 3:08

I will say it's pretty unique in terms of communities and people who come in from other communities are always astounded how we work together, because that's not typical of most communities where they really make an effort to work together.

Speaker 3 3:29

It brings together so many different groups. What was the focus of bringing together so many groups? You say it's a strategic kind of coalition. What is it you strategize around generally?

Speaker 5 3:34

I think we keep each other informed of what's happening. So I mean, just as a not a small part because it's large for each organization for instance, fundraising drives, not a small part because it's large for each organization for instance, fundraising drives that we don't try to do fundraising at the same time with a limited population and the Jewish population in Western North Carolina is quite small. We've sponsored, in fact, one of the things that we've tried to do most recently is have a survey of what does the Jewish population in Western North Carolina look like, because there was one done by Brandeis in 2010. And, needless to say, the whole community, not just the Jewish community, the larger community, has changed significantly since 2010. So it helps us focus on what the needs are and then who can provide the needs, so smart.

Speaker 4 4:23

I would also say it facilitates communication among Jewish groups. It serves as sort of a clearinghouse, Judy mentioned. We don't want to step on each other in fundraising but there have been efforts in the past to have a calendar established so that we don't overschedule our events. It's really more of a group to keep each other informed about what all the elements of the community are doing.

Speaker 1 4:43

One of the things that I really appreciate is the opportunity to share resources, so I might have somebody coming in for the center, but then there's, if I share that information, there's an opportunity to maybe have them go to other organizations. Or I'd like to bring somebody in, but it would take several of us to partner to make something happen, and so it becomes a clearinghouse for all these different elements.

On Addressing Community Schisms

Speaker 3 5:02

Love it. I mean, it's a really smart idea. I'm happy to say that Western North Carolina can boast that we have that. So, with that getting together, talking about the needs, I think that really tells us a little bit about why we're here today, which is to talk about some emerging needs that have happened across the Jewish community the Jewish community certainly, though also across our entire larger community, which is what what happens when you have really really difficult topics come up that create a schism in your community. How do you overcome that? And so, with that, I wanted to talk to you a bit about what is resetting the table and why did you approach them right for for support within your community.

Speaker 5 5:44

That's a great segue. What happened after October 7th? Not that this wasn't true before October 7th, but I think within the Jewish community there was a real almost fear of talking about what happened October 7th and the sense of people wanting to talk, needing to talk and not feeling safe to talk was just so palpable. And in one meeting I remember very clearly when one of the leaders said I need help, I'm feeling so overwhelmed, I don't know who to turn to, I don't feel safe. And we all sat there in silence because we were all feeling the same way. But as a leader, this individual just felt well, but I am a visible leader and I need help in knowing how to respond.

Speaker 5 6:38

And a few of us got together after that and said we've got to do something, not only for this particular individual but for the other leaders in the group who were feeling the same way. Their staffs couldn't talk together. There was a lot of schism within staffs, which of course affects an organization's ability to be effective, and it's terribly stressful in a work environment. I think we've all experienced that. So a few of us got together and said, okay, what do we do? And we actually evolved this process. We started with saying, okay, look what's happening on college campuses Sam certainly was experiencing that at UNCA Maybe we need to hear more about different perspectives. And we began to research who we could bring into this community to talk with us. And, as those of us who have been here for any length of time, we know what happened. As we were planning this, helene struck. We had contacted a Palestinian American, we had contacted, actually, a Canadian, israeli, and they were planning on coming.

Speaker 5 7:45

Helene hit, obviously, life took a whole different turn for all of us and by the time we got back together, what we realized was we don't need to bring in a speaker. We need to figure out how to talk together, because a speaker is a one off and it doesn't help us confront the very issue that we were all feeling. And so we began looking at OK, who are the groups that we could bring in? And we we looked at. We looked at Israeli groups. We said, oh no, that that already you know that presents a certain perspective in people's minds.

Speaker 5 8:17

We looked at other groups, nationally and even locally, who have helped people kind of have conversations. We decided on resetting the table and the reason was that the focus of this organization, which is an incredible organization. The whole focus is on how to have difficult conversations, learning the skills, developing comfort with a discomfort, and they really push. This is not about learning how to paraphrase what somebody says or getting somebody's point of view across. It's about learning how to listen correctly without influencing, but to truly expand each of our understanding of issues, no matter where we are on the spectrum. So that was the. That's how we got to bringing in resetting the table.

Speaker 1 9:08

That's how we got to bringing and resetting the table they really emphasize in their literature and certainly in their practice of going towards the heat is a phrase that they like to use rather than avoiding a tough topic, approach something challenging with curiosity, and they provide a structure so that the conversation doesn't start with my opinion is blah and I need to convince you that I'm right. Instead, it's a process that humanizes everyone involved in the conversation and then you can see how opinions, once they're voiced, emerged from personal experience and reflect possibly common values at the table, but through different lenses.

Speaker 4 9:46

And I would add that this methodology, this structure that they promote, can be applied to any difficult conversations. We did start out with this because of October 7, 2023, but there are other fault lines that been a debate in the Jewish community about whether that's true and which is worse, and that sort of thing, and these techniques, as my colleagues have said, about reframing, making sure you are listening and you can accurately reframe what somebody has told you, actually in a way that they the goal is to have the speaker say I get it or you get it. You get what I'm talking about because you've accurately reflected back what the speaker is saying, and so that kind of methodology can be used for any kind of difficult issue, I think.

Speaker 3 10:40

Yeah, absolutely.

Speaker 3 10:40

I think I'm really struck by something you said earlier, judy, about within these organizations, how you first really came to the conclusion that we really needed somebody who can help us talk to each other.

Speaker 3 10:51

Was that initially, even the feeling and the organizations of these leaders, but also staff and throughout the community itself? Was this sort of settling into a silence right, where you're not talking about anything, right, You're doing that little tiptoe around things just to even be in each other's presence, and I think that is something across all of our communities, across all of ZX focal areas, is kind of the start. That's where a lot of major issues lie within community and that, honestly, is the death of a community right, because you no longer actually interact with each other, you no longer seek to support, you're sitting in silence, you're not, you're not doing anything to support one another. And so this idea that then, to confront these issues, you're going kind of headlong into it like full, just giving yourself to the opportunity even to experience discomfort and move past it to get to the real heart of things, is really really powerful, and I think it's exactly what's needed right now.

Speaker 5 11:53

If I can just interject the way we did this, the way we did it we were. We met in small groups. They said maximum 25 in a small group and we selected the planning committee. People that we knew had very different opinions. So it was a purposeful. I mean, we didn't know everybody, but we looked at ages, we looked at all the diversity, diversity of opinions, just as much diversity as we could. That's what made it so successful, because those were often the very people that that many people could not sit in a room with. They knew over years that they couldn't sit in a room with. So we were taking a big risk.

Speaker 3 12:40

Yeah, they knew over years, years. Oh, okay, you were bringing in that those old old feuds, right, right.

Speaker 5 12:48

Okay, okay and so, and so we knew we were taking a risk. And you know, I think we were I wouldn't say nervous, because we felt resetting the table would be able to help us handle it. And sure enough they did. Their facilitator was incredible and people said they were hesitant to come. They really didn't want to come because they were frightened of engaging in some of these very difficult conversations. So it wasn't superficial, this was deep, deep, deep feelings of fear.

Speaker 1 13:19

And when we sent out invitations to these various leaders and folks who are influential within the Jewish community and well-connected in different parts of the Jewish community, we made it clear that the goal we didn't really want them to come if their goal was to change other people's minds. The goal was to learn how to have a conversation over something challenging. So we highlighted that there was a process that we're learning, not that we're coming together to hammer out all of our political differences.

Speaker 3 13:47

You're not looking for a fight is what it boils down to, right? The intention is not for us to actually sit here and just fight each other, beat each other over the head with our values or our perspectives. It's really just how can we even, how can we even actually just be in space with each other and it be okay, yeah?

On Future Conversations

Speaker 4 14:04

I'd also add that, while it is true we wanted people with divergent opinions, people who did not agree with each other, who never dreamed they would be in the same room with each other, let alone sitting in a little group of three having a conversation, we established some parameters of not inviting people who we perceived the planning committee as just beyond the pale, people who would not be capable, in our judgment, of engaging in a productive conversation. We felt that there were some folks on either end of the spectrum who were just probably incapable of doing that. I will add, our decision about that does not reflect what Resetting the Table thought. I think the facilitator and the people at Resetting the Table believe that anybody can participate in these conversations and that, you know, maybe we could have been bolder, but we filled up amply the 25 spots each day that we offered this program, so we didn't have to worry about that. But I think in the future, if we decided to expand it, we may well want to consider bringing in people who are at the polar extremes.

Speaker 3 15:06

Would that be something where, with future conversations, you would bring in a group of people, all who haven't experienced it, or would it be some returning folks?

Speaker 4 15:14

That's a good question. I think the common sentiment after we finished for all these 50 people is we want more. We want to do more of this, love it, and so we've talked about having some follow-up with the participants, but also seeing how we could expand it within the greater Jewish community as well.

Speaker 1 15:31

When we were planning this, we weren't sure what the next step would be. It wasn't with that vision that, oh, once we do this, we're going to do X. The goal was to have the event then ask the participants what are their priorities and vision about what might be next, so that it is more of an organic process and reflects priorities of the participants rather than imposing. This is what has to happen next.

Speaker 5 15:58

And we've gotten that feedback and in fact, I got the feedback and haven't yet shared it, but we will be meeting as a planning committee later this week and we have a huge amount of feedback and I think Sam is right the overwhelming I don't know percentage wise, maybe 90% is we want to continue this process. You know, we've learned some techniques. Now we want to really do the hard conversations, but we need to do it in a safe way, and one of the things that we have to talk about is are we, do we have the facilitators to do this, Because it could blow up again, you know, unless we are very careful about how we do it. So we're talking to Resetting the Table, about how they could work with us, both directly and indirectly. So we'll see. It's a work in progress. We have to fund it. Yes, we have to fund it.

Speaker 3 16:52

That's how you get to Zedek's table.

Speaker 4 16:55

We're grateful for that.

Speaker 3 16:56

Hey, I mean, we're grateful for you taking this plunge. I think it's something that, as I said earlier, so many of our different communities really need this kind of approach. To be honest, they also kind of need this, I think, really brave energy of finally saying we don't want to sit in silence anymore, we want to actually be with each other. I think that's the kind of energy that's necessary to sustain a community. I think we hear a lot about people saying well, back in the day, the community was like this and things were different, and really that missing ingredient is that, you know, not everybody liked each other. They just sat there and were like I don't like you about this, I don't agree. And then they, and then they go on to planning the potluck or whatever. Right, like it was, we had those muscles, and those muscles were a lot stronger than now.

Speaker 5 17:47

Yeah, and I think you know I can speak for me, but I think I could speak for all of us. I mean, we're willing to help with that process. I think we are. We've seen how it can work and I think we can be ambassadors for that process, particularly as we take the next steps, the harder steps probably. I mean this hard step was seeing if it works and if people were responsive. We found out that in fact they are, but I think plunging into the next step is going to be harder. Not everybody is going to want to do it. But I also think that we have found that it works and I think we could be ambassadors for you and for other groups as well.

Speaker 1 18:33

Yeah, I love that. I don't know that that's ever been true in the Jewish community in the history of Judaism. However, the goal is to continue talking and to continue disagreeing, but in a civil way, and to continue growing together. You know, part of what we wanted to do with all of this was really to increase the capacity to have dialogue in the Jewish community.

On Lessons Learned

Speaker 3 18:51

So what would you say then? Were your biggest learnings just off the bat, that you can think even just from your perspective so it doesn't have to be on behalf of the collaborative, but what were some things that you're like okay, so next time we're going to really think this through and maybe approach it slightly different. And what were the things that you were? Like this is the winning ticket. Like this is the thing that we've got to do each time. This is, it's huge for us.

Speaker 5 19:16

I'll jump in as a participant because one of the restrictions was that heads of organizations could not participate, which is an important point and we kind of wondered about that. In the beginning. Resetting the table was very insistent. That in the beginning, resetting the table was very insistent and the reason is no matter what that individual says, I'm here representing myself. The reality is they will be perceived as representing their group. So what we did was that none of the executives could participate, but what they did was they observed and participated amongst themselves. So they were in another room doing the exercises together so that the participants weren't distracted and they could really have the experience.

Speaker 5 20:00

I was a participant because I don't head anything. I think one of the wonderful takeaways was not only seeing people talking together who have not really spoken together and admitted it, when we got together and had an evaluation, my experience and I think so many others was the intergenerational aspect of it and that within communities like ours and I know other communities that you represent that the younger people are not talking to the older people and vice versa. And what we got and I've seen it even on the evaluations is that was so special Younger people saying I don't get a chance to talk with older people about these issues, and I want to hear and older people saying my gosh, I thought this is the way younger people felt, but I didn't really know that. So I think that was a huge takeaway and one we didn't really think about. I mean, we did, as I said, looked for diversity in terms of participants, but I don't think we appreciated it to quite the extent that people felt.

Speaker 4 21:00

Yeah, I think it was helpful that our planning committee and the planning committee is not a huge committee and it's just a subset of the Jewish Leadership Collaborative but it included two of the community rabbis and the head of the Jewish Community Center and while they did not participate, as Judy said, as participants, they did observe. They will get the feedback. We've all discussed how well it went and I think it was really valuable to have those professionals be a part of the organizing of this and seeing the benefits of it being there are leaders in the community, so that will help us a lot as we go forward and plan other events. You know, for good reasons they did not want to be participants, because you can imagine if somebody is a rabbi, they're a rabbi to all the congregants and if they are too candid in expressing their own personal views, that might alienate some of the congregants. So that was the practical reason.

Speaker 3 21:48

So that piece you were sharing earlier about resetting the table was insistent because the representation piece you know you're really putting the spotlight on that, frank of they also, just as humans, want to be able to participate, but also you do have a duty as a community leader, and so it gives them a space to balance that.

Speaker 3 22:07

Because that's you're totally right. If you're too too honest, right that that does alienate people. You're looking for a leader who can support you through, you know, some of your darkest times. Then you find out that they hold some kind of viewpoint that you're like well, this makes me question everything and that's that's really hard, because then you lose that support that you have in the community. So I think that's a really big takeaway to really think through and can help also, especially some of our other community groups, think through it can be really hard to be in a leadership position and also be a part of a community and feel like, well, I don't get to fully participate with my people, but I think that's such a powerful thing to really consider. Is that this is also for your people right, like there's a necessary kind of separation, that in being able to be considered a leader, you do have these drawbacks.

Speaker 4 22:56

Exactly.

Speaker 5 22:57

I also just want to say that resetting the table does this kind of program just for leaders. So there's a quality in that situation because, as you pointed out many of the issues, so I mean that's also one of the things that we're looking at for future work.

Speaker 1 23:13

Right, and I would say there's also one of the things that we're looking at for future work. Right, and I would say there's also the flip side is important.

Speaker 3 23:18

If you have somebody who's the head of an organization in the same room as several staff members, the staff members may not be as candid because then they're worried about their own job and position frustrations and so on that may not be able to be voiced or they don't feel like they can voice with their boss sitting, you know 10 feet away, yeah, and also even just as a congregant, let's say, you know you're just speaking your mind right, and then your rabbi sitting there like that's crazy and that can be really hard as well. So it has really real repercussions within the community because that's a big thing. That silences people is how you'll be perceived and what that will mean for you. So those things never make it to the light of day and then we never have a conversation that maybe could have changed your mind but also could have just said okay, well, we can, we can still love you, even if we just don't agree. I think that's really really powerful.

Speaker 3 24:06

And I want to go back to something else, judy, that you shared is like a really big bright spot for y'all is that intergenerational piece. That's something that certainly in a lot of our research in fact in our community-led grantmaking work our committee has also found is there's a huge appetite across communities to have more intergenerational experiences and communication. And it struck me as well that I think when we think of intergenerational pieces, a lot of the time that's something that people experience through their family units, but with a lot of these really hard conversations that has been so divisive, it's either harmed their family or in their family, they're certainly experiencing a lot of silence, and so I see this as something that can be really impactful to allow people to have that experience without it being something that they're having to do for the first time or practice with within their family unit. I think that's really really powerful. Did you have any folks who kind of mentioned the impact it might have on their families?

Speaker 5 25:00

Yes, in fact that was some folks talked about. That was part of the motivation that they came because they are feeling particularly older folks who expressed it, but I think it was probably true of younger folks. They now are on such a different place in terms of Israel and Palestine, with their children and their grandchildren. They just are feeling intimidated to try to pursue those conversations because it's not getting them anywhere.

Speaker 4 25:25

I'll give a little shout out to Carolina Jews for Justice in the past because we intentionally, years ago, long before any of these issues emerged well, I mean, there always have been some issues we set up an intergenerational conversation within Carolina Jews for Justice and we met by Zoom. We met in person. We had younger people instruct older people about pronouns and why they were important. It was eye-opening, I think, maybe to both sides of the generational divide, but I think that was so valuable, to have that dialogue across the generational gap.

Speaker 3 25:58

So then we hear these beautiful bright spots. What are our learnings? What are our next time? It'll be different. What are those?

Speaker 1 26:05

Well, I would say that the experience itself was very positive, with resetting the table, both working with them, setting up the event and the events themselves went very smoothly, even if there had been some apprehension ahead of time. I think, to use the word Frank mentioned bold there's an opportunity to be more bold, I think, at the next steps, whatever those turn out to be, those turn out to be, and I think that the apprehension might be a little stronger, as we recognize that now that we have a tool in place and we've touched on some difficult topics, digging into those requires not so much a safe space but a brave space where one can step forward and maybe step on some toes but really express, using these tools in this format, where you're coming from, what your mindset is and how things have changed, what you're open to all those things. It's a little scary to be vulnerable in that way and I think it takes a brave space, and I think that will be next down the road.

Speaker 4 27:06

Yeah, I think there were challenges with the time constraints that we had. So we had two days, back-to-back days, but there were three hours each day and we had different participants each day. In those three hours we certainly could learn the methodology, but it left people a little frustrated that they weren't able to go deeper in their small groups and make more progress, and that's always difficult. If you try to stretch it out too much, people get tired, you know. So we have to overcome those challenges of just the logistics and the time constraints involved.

Speaker 5 27:37

And I think, the other logistics. As you were talking, I was thinking about the feedback. I think with some people there still is an intent to try to influence others to their opinion. I'm not sure we took care of that and I don't think realistically it was you know it we could have, but I think in planning how we do that that will be. We will really have to look at that.

Speaker 4 27:58

And I think if the next stage includes bringing in some of the people on the periphery that we were afraid to bring in honestly before, that could present a whole nother challenge, because I think there are some of those people who who will try to convince the other side that they are right and the other side is wrong, and I hope the methodology works with those people. But we may find out.

Speaker 3 28:20

Yeah, they might surprise you.

Speaker 4 28:22

You're right, and I think that's the hope and expectation of resetting the table is that we would be surprised pleasantly, yeah.

Speaker 3 28:28

Give space for the surprises, yeah.

Speaker 1 28:30

Very often what I saw as a conversation went to, even in these brief conversations oh, now that I've heard your story, if I had gone through those experiences and seen what you've seen, then I might believe what you believe.

On the Possibilities of Community Connection

Speaker 3 28:43

You know you were talking about. Getting to those common values is like one of the main priorities right For the, for resetting the table and just conflict resolution in general, as people hear each other's stories and maybe even seek to convince each other, centering on those common values of like. At the end of the day, we want to be able to be in space with each other. That's really why we're here, even if you're not going to be able to convince me of your opinion. How can we get to a place where we are able to be in space with each other? I think it's really exciting what you're doing. Honestly, I think it's exciting and ambitious and something that I really hope catches on hope it becomes a fad in the community. To be honest, as we're closing out the conversation, what do you think is possible if we were able to expand this model to the whole of Western North Carolina?

Speaker 5 29:33

From my perspective, I think one of the things personally I miss I really miss is having more conversations with other communities. I think we did it easier a few years ago. I think October 7th has made that harder and I miss that personally for myself. I miss it for our communities. I learned a lot personally and I think our communities have in many ways remained divided and in some ways become more divided. I see that as something that we can aspire to, work towards, but this is hard. As we've been saying, not everybody's ready to jump in. You have to really really start with the folks who are ready to jump in and take the risk.

Speaker 4 30:15

I'll add that resetting the table really grew out. It did not just grow out of inter-Jewish conversations. The model works for conversations that are fraught, no matter who the population is, what the issue is that they're trying to address. So I think it would work well for conversation across communities in Western North Carolina who may or may not be Jewish, or maybe a mixture of Jewish and non-Jewish groups or all non-Jewish groups. The potential for that methodology to work exists, no matter what the issue is and no matter who the folks are who are in the room.

Speaker 1 30:47

I agree with Judy that a vision that would be a dreamy, wonderful ideal is various communities within Western North Carolina, who've either been pushed to the margin or forgotten or are relocating their identities, to be able to talk to each other, because they've already had the internal conversations, and then to have conversations across those boundaries to strengthen Western North Carolina as a whole, where there's opportunity to really continue to learn from each other and our experiences.

Speaker 3 31:18

That's beautiful. I believe it can happen.

Speaker 1 31:20

We hope so. We all do One conversation at a time.

Speaker 3 31:23

Absolutely Well with that y'all. I want to thank you. Frank Sam Judy, thank you so much for coming in. It's been a real pleasure.

Speaker 1 31:30

Thank you Tara. Thank you Tara. I feel that way too.