Thursday, June 11, 2020

My Wonderful Friends

I am blessed with some wonderful friends. Good people. Kind people. Intelligent people. Thoughtful people. Sensitive people. People who would never discriminate against someone just because of the color of their skin, and who would actively oppose anyone who did otherwise.

Within this very same group of people, some of them are convinced that the George Floyd riots were understandable and even necessary, and some of them are convinced that the riots were counterproductive as well as inherently wrong. (Just to clarify, for those for whom it is not obvious - I am referring to the rioting, not the protests.)

But it gets even more extreme. Some of the holders of each position are not only convinced that their position is correct; they are convinced that those holding the opposite position are utterly immoral and beneath contempt, and should be silenced.

As for me - well, I heard the position of the first group, and I thought, "You're right!" Then I heard the position of the second group, and I thought, "You're right!" And if you're going to tell me that they can't both be right, then my response to you is - you're right!

But whoever is right, I am convinced that neither side deserves contempt. Can't we try to understand other people's perspectives, or at least politely disagree, instead of just writing them off and condemning them as evil?

(All the above seems to be increasingly true not just about the Floyd riots, but about all kinds of issues.)

UPDATE: A number of people expressed indignation at how any decent person could possibly justify rioting. You can see my Facebook post for some examples in the comments, but meanwhile someone pointed to the fascinating case of the riots in the 1902 Kosher Meat Boycott - I strongly recommend reading the Wikipedia description of these.

UPDATE 2: In response to this post, someone wrote to me at length to condemn me as racism-spouting fool!

232 comments:

  1. I have also encountered this phenomenon, in many issues.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I think the operative principle has to be: אל תדין את חבירך עד שתגיע למקומו.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Agreed thoroughly. No one should in favor of affirmative action or racial preferences unless he personally has sacrificed his job to someone less qualified, in the name of the cause.

      Likewise, no one should open his mouth to speak about "protests" or race relations unless he personally lives in a black neighborhood.

      Delete
    2. No one should speak in favor of police violence or harrassment unless he personally has been beaten, shot, unlawfully searched, or racially profiled in the name of the cause.

      Delete
    3. To Hat: I agree that Chauvin was a bad cop and the thing he did to Floyd was evil. But that does not mean the thing he did was racist or that all cops are racist. There are much good police, indeed the vast majority of them are good.

      Delete
    4. No one should speak in favor of police violence, period. In fact, no one does. But you have plenty of dummies who speak in favor of black violence - like the dumb kid in the video giving the thumbs up to the rioters, until they threw the bricks in his OWN window. And you have plenty more happy to preach in favor of "diversity", not one of whom would ever give up his own job to support it. Hypocrites, every one of them.

      Delete
    5. Df, your own position appears more concerned that nobody should speak against police violence, because... whatabout positive discrimination.

      You state "In fact, no one does" support police violence. On this very page Unknown declares that "I am angry and saddened to see Orthodox groups supporting BLM, cyring over George Floyd, etc..." To be saddened by people crying over George Floyd is to take a pro police violence position.

      There is, however, none so blind as will not see.

      Delete
    6. "Not to support BLM is to support police violence" - The Hat, in the comment just above.

      And there you have it, folks. And that is why it is impossible to have dialogue with such people.

      Delete
    7. That isn't what I wrote though is it DF. You changed the quote, because the facts didn't fit your feelings.

      Delete
  3. I do not see how you can justify rioting, the destruction of property and even murder. As Ben Azai told Rabbi Akiba to leave Aggada and stick with the laws of purities, I tell you to leave United States politics and stick to what you excel at.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree, except some people who disagree with rioting do justify murder. I disagree with both.

      Delete
    2. "I tell you to leave United States politics and stick to what you excel at." Huh? Where do I come into this? I'm just reporting what some of my friends say,.

      Delete
    3. By saying that they are right

      Delete
    4. Well you did say both sound right and none deserve contemp, that is not "just reporting" . If one is living in America while some people promote beheading of statues, defunding of police and forcing organizations to apologize for denouncing extremism than it is a fair point to say that you live in Israel and should not mix in.

      Delete
    5. I think it's ok to tell your friends (who hold the opinion that rioting is ok) to have a good day and definitely say their opinions are wrong. It is not ok to riot over a criminal.

      Delete
  4. According to statistics, black violence crime in the US is eight times more prevalent than white violent crime. Should this have any impact on the debate.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. FBI collects some amazing data: If I did the maths right - Blacks are about 13% of USA population, but commit just above 45% of all murders. Again despite being only 13% of population - In 2017 blacks murdered 576 whites, and whites murdered 264 blacks. Of all blacks murdered, just under 90% of them were killed by blacks. Blacks murder whites at a higher rate than whites murder whites. Whites do murder blacks, but blacks murder whites at a 12 times higher rate. https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2017/crime-in-the-u.s.-2017/topic-pages/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-6.xls Nevertheless I harbor no ill will towards blacks, nor do I think any of the above is based on black racial inferiority or a propensity to murder. I lean to environment and social issues. The people suffering the most from black crime are the blacks themselves - black on black crime.

      Delete
    2. oops here is the FBI data link - https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2017/crime-in-the-u.s.-2017/topic-pages/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-6.xls

      Delete
    3. Right!

      But on the one hand, if you call attention to this statistic, people call you racist!

      But on the other hand, the purpose of "Black Lives Matter" and pointing out the white-on-black police crime is to highlight racism endemic in the system, and it is not to ignore the black-on-black crime, which stems from "regular" crime triggers (like poor education, poverty, bad environment etc).

      But still...

      Delete
    4. Poor people commit crimes. For example, poor Jewish immigrants were a big part of the London crime scene (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Yiddishers) before gentrifying. Jews can become respectable by the simple act of removing the obvious markers of religion. But how can a black man escape your prejudices?

      Delete
    5. "Black Lives Matter"'s only aim is to bring dow the government. Nothing more.

      In a word, it has nothing to do with black lives mattering.

      Delete
    6. Yosef R "white-on-black police crime" you mean when a white cop is alleged to have unjustly killed a black person ? AFAIK studies have shown Cops are color blind. BUT, because blacks are disproportionately involved in crime they come in contact with police more often which may result in blacks being killed by cops disproportionately. Then to, perhaps blacks react differently when approached by cops and if true that can play a role in negative outcomes for blacks. ACJA

      Delete
    7. Black Lives Matters doesn't exist either as a corporate entity, or a defined party with a constitution. It's a whole bunch of different people with different ideas. It the Rorsach test, and those invested in the current system where black lives don't matter will claim to see all sorts of extremism so that they can avoid a world in which black lives really did matter.

      Delete
  5. Replies
    1. Ask Colin Kapaernick.

      Delete
    2. But no, nobody should wantonly and indiscrminately destroy the property, livelihoods or life of another. It's a fact that if you harden your hearts to peaceful protests you make violence more attractive. But it is wrong.

      Delete
  6. I don't see how you can justify stealing and/or damaging the property of innocent, unrelated random third parties.

    You should at least be more specific and differentiate between protests, riots, and looting. It might also make a difference whether you damage, say, the police station from where the policeman came, as opposed to damaging other things -- it might be less wrong.

    Finally, and unrelated to the above, we should note that racism is not the main problem affecting US blacks today. The main problem is the welfare state, which encourages single motherhood an unemployment.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Why is destroying a Police Station-paid for using "innocent, unrelated random third party" taxpayer funds-any better?

      Delete
    2. "Finally, and unrelated to the above, we should note that racism is not the main problem affecting US blacks today. The main problem is the welfare state, which encourages single motherhood an unemployment."

      I applaud you for not hiding your unfounded bigotry. Of course, Haredi society does not rely on such welfare or benevolence and seeks jobs and employment to gain parnassah, right? Bizarrely, sections of the Haredi sector in IL is the most inclined to attack police, assault other citizens, misuse public funds and riot, so the irony is rich.

      Delete
    3. Meir Moses, Haredi reliance on welfare is also a problem, exactly as you say. I don't know what "bigotry" and "irony" you're talking about

      Delete
    4. Meir Moses - RNS just got through talking about civility, and here you go accusing Gabriel of "unfounded bigotry." Thank you, my friend! I said below that it is always the left side that starts up, and you were good enough to prove it again.

      I also find it entertaining to watch you argue out of both sides of your mouth when it comes to Black and (how you characterize) Charedi behavior. In the spirit of civil dialogue, share with us your opinion - "to attack police, assault other citizens, misuse public funds" - is that acceptable or not? And if so, educate us why you feel its perfectly normal for one group, but not the other. Then finally, let us know if you actually live in or near a Charedi neighborhood or a Black neighborhood.

      Delete
    5. Meir Moses To claim Haredi 'attack and assault' behavior is even remotely similar to the savages and barbarians involved in the riots over Floyd demonstrates that you are either delusional, misinformed or suffer from an ailment.

      Delete
    6. To be fair, we are not fans of Chareidi-on-DL/MO violence either, but of course the scale and scope of the violences are massively different.

      Delete
    7. "The main problem is the welfare state, which encourages single motherhood an unemployment."

      I will give you the benefit of the doubt that you either have never lived in the US or left here decades ago. But the welfare system was changed in the 1990s here so that it no longer encourages single motherhood and supports employment.

      "savages and barbarians involved in the riots "

      Much of the looting, at least here in New York City, was clearly organized criminal activity. Not barbarians but sophisticated theft, complete with lookouts and getaway cars.

      Delete
    8. @Charlie Hall - Those organized criminals are also savages and barbarians. I have seen what the other more numerous non organized barbarians and savages have done and it is horrific. ACJA

      Delete
    9. "Those organized criminals are also savages and barbarians. "

      Would you agree that more organized criminals such as Shalom Rubashkin or Bernie Madoff are also savages and barbarians? They stole a lot more from a lot more people.

      Delete
    10. Gabriel - you do know that if black people aren't going to be condemned to poverty and the attendant risks of crime, they need to get hired, right? By predominantly white people, including people like yourself.

      Delete
    11. @XCharlie Hall - Come on, where are your critical thinking skills ? Are not Shalom Rubashkin or Bernie Madoff involved in white collar crime ? You can not understand the difference between the savages and barbarians who violently loot, kill, maim etc: and those two ?

      Delete
  7. How about if your friend claims that learning Torah protects from the corona virus? Would that justify some contempt and writing them off as evil?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What if there are sources that explicitly support such a claim, such as the gemara in ketubot 77b with RYBL? Still foolish?

      Delete
    2. If someone believes that the Gemara in Ketubot 77b means that learning in yeshivos protects from coronavirus, then yes, they are still foolish. (Note: This does not mean that RYBL was foolish.)

      Delete
    3. Do you mind explaining the difference? I'm sincerely curious to hear your explanation. In the gemara RYBL reasons based on the passuk that if Torah gives chen, certainly it protects, and therefore he is not at risk of getting sick while learning with highly contagious sick people. Sounds similar enough to me.

      Delete
    4. Any chance you can respond, or is it too involved for this forum?

      Delete
    5. Sorry to suggest, but it seems to me like you do not have anything substantial to refute this point. In which case it's not RCK that you think is foolish for (perhaps) saying it, but rather RYBL and the gemara because they also felt that one is protected when he is learning Torah.

      Delete
  8. You're talking about the riots or the peaceful protests?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. We also have to differentiate between angry riots and happy looting

      Delete
    2. I'm talking about the riots. None of these people would condemn the peaceful protests.

      Delete
    3. I condemn the peaceful protests. They are based on lies about the treatment of black people at the hands of the police and encourage resentment and, ultimately, violence.

      I don't know if I count as a "friend," though.

      Delete
    4. @Nachum - watching the news you would think it is open season for police murdering blacks. Hard data shows that otherwise. Also, people that are not involved in police work and not at the scene are not qualified to judge what actually happened based on a small film clip of an event. Also, accidents happen - does anybody really think the cops wanted to execute Floyd ?

      Delete
    5. Watching the news we think it's open season for police in the US murdering anybody. Did you try to compare numbers with other western countries? They speak volumes.
      There is a clear violence problem with the police in the US, not to mention their carceral system. And still they have one of the highest crime rate.

      Delete
    6. ACJA: your last sentence is basically my feeling about almost every single cop-on-black incident over the past years - that the goal was not to kill, but circumstances (fear, action of the perp=victim, etc) induced the act that led to the killing. THIS incident - while I agree that the cop didn't want to kill Mr. Floyd - involves acts by the cop that are really really difficult to justify. When other cops are standing around, available for backup, when bystanders are actively calling attention to the perp/victim's complaints, then to lean on a guy's throat for as long as he did as heavily as he did seems very difficult to defend.

      (Still not a justification for rioting, of course.)

      Delete
    7. @Jew well: Correlation is not causation. Did you ever think that maybe US police have the most issues with violent encounters with criminals BECAUSE the US has the highest crime rate and therefore the most violent criminals (and the most brazen of violent criminals)? You have no way to prove this doesn't contribute to the amount of police violence, and actually within a sane worldview it's very likely that it does.

      Delete
    8. "They are based on lies about the treatment of black people at the hands of the police"

      I would recommend talking to some black people about how police in most of the US treat them. I have *personally* observed racist cops.

      "does anybody really think the cops wanted to execute Floyd ? "

      Nobody thinks it was planned and premeditated. But it was clearly a homicide.

      Delete
    9. @student v: I'm not sure you understand what causation and correlation are?
      I didn't imply any causation. You did with your ad hoc hypothesis. But even if it were true, that would for sure make them more violent even with people who don't deserve it.
      As an aside, if you're jew I would like you to avoid answering to me on Shabbos on orthodox blogs. Thanks.

      Delete
    10. It wasn't "clearly" a homicide at all, but it's irrelevant and beside the point. Even if it was, complete with mens rea and everything, therefore what? It gives license to mayhem? Anyone who so much as mentions the name "George Floyd" is ducking the issue and cant be taken seriously.

      Delete
    11. @Jew Well - The time listed doesn't reflect the time I typed and submitted the comment, smart alec.
      I don't use the computer on Shabbos.
      The comments get reviewed/moderated by Rabbi Slifkin before they are posted, so I have no control over when they appear.

      Nice attempt to ridicule me though. Another failed argument ends with insult. Not surprising.

      You did try to imply causation: "Did you try to compare numbers with other western countries? They speak volumes.
      There is a clear violence problem with the police in the US,"

      Compare the numbers. The numbers are higher. Therefore US police have a violence problem. Ie, the highder numbers are caused by police having a violence problem.

      This brainless exercise ignores other factors, one of which I mentioned, which quite possibly could play a role in this difference in numbers.

      Cry more!

      Delete
    12. "to lean on a guy's throat for as long as he did as heavily as he did seems very difficult to defend."

      We don't know how much weight he put on his neck. I do think that to place his knee on his neck for as long as he did [8mins] much have been contributed to deep hatred. Tho we do not know if he was racist.

      Delete
    13. @Yosef R - Why was Floyd pinned to the ground. I understand this was happening in view of bystanders and thus unlikely cops would intend to kill Floyd. They had called an ambulance for him. Was Floyd doped up enough to trigger the police response ? Was he having seizures ? Was he injuring or potentially injuring himself if left unpinned ? Did he violently resist arrest ? I have heard Floyd had a violent past. When Floyd claimed he could not breathe and I would like to know why cops did not back off. Was it acceptable police procedure ? Are there extenuating circumstances ? Perhaps the cops used poor judgement. These and other questions need to be addressed in a court of law rather than people jumping to conclusions, protesting, rioting with the media and BLM egging them on.
      ACJA

      Delete
    14. @cHarlie hall "But it was clearly a homicide." It does seem so, but I prefer to wait until all the data and disputes are resolved. You do realize that not all homicides are illegal and some are defensible. ACJA

      Delete
    15. @ACJA To answer your question why the three cops seemingly did nothing when Floyd said he could not breathe might be attributed to casual complaints made on the part of the criminal during the arrest. Far too often criminals will say, for example, that the handcuffs are too tight. Cops are told to usually ignore these claims since it may be a tactic to draw attention away and may be used in an attempted escape. This could explain the cops' seemingly lack of interest. Lost of people say they can't breathe when pinned down.

      Also, we do not know at all how much pressure the cop was putting on the man's neck. It might have been a lot of weight, or none at all. Evidently, the autopsy said he had coronavirus and other complications may have resulted from the pressure on his neck, but not that the cop intentionally killed him in broad daylight, in public, and with his body-cam turned on.

      Delete
    16. @Turk Hill. As to why *4* cops seemingly did nothing I have a much simpler explanation which fits all the facts. In fact, 1 of the cops *did* do something, or at least say something. Per his attorney on Good Morning Britain, the trainee said to Chauvin twice "should we turn him over", when he became limp and unresponsive. Chauvin ignored him, and the trainee stopped asking.

      They all knew the score as well as the spectators screaming at them to stop, that they were killing a man. Here was a man gasping for air and drooling into the tarmac. He stops moving and talking with a guy's knee pressed into his neck - it's not hard to work out the medical issues that sort of practice is going to cause.

      They didn't intervene precisely because they were police officers in America, where the law that is adhered to is not what is written in the books, but rather what is practiced and enforced daily on the streets - that is to say, the law of loyalty, complicity, and silence.

      Delete
    17. @student v: Sorry, didn't know that, but no attempt to ridicule you. What would I gain from it?
      ''The numbers are higher. Therefore US police have a violence problem. Ie, the highder numbers are caused by police having a violence problem.'' Not at all, the higher numbers of homicides ARE a violence problem.

      Delete
  9. Irony of ironies, when it comes to chareidim you are right and they must be wrong.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well, Chareidim don't argue about it on FaceBook...

      Delete
  10. Rabbi Chaim Navon and Yair Lapid-it’s so unusual to hear a reasoned discussion of opposing viewpoints. In Hebrew


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1488&v=jeLokq37MoM&feature=emb_logo
    Kt
    Joel Rich
    _._,_._,_

    ReplyDelete
  11. This is why I deleted my social media accounts (Twitter, Facebook etc).

    In almost every discussion/argument, each voice takes up a particularly strident approach at opposing ends of a spectrum, and will shout their opinion at the other.

    Expecting anyone to back down and concede defeat is futile. Ergo, social media arguments are futile.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Common ground right there! Social media debates are doomed to failure.

      Actually, probably so are most debates. The only people who might have their opinions changed are the bystanders who didn't have strong opinions going into it.

      Delete
    2. Youtube, Twitter and FB are censoring people's comments, posts, videos and accounts. They are becoming the thought police.

      Delete
    3. ACJA Go to Thinkspot. Nothing is censored there. Created by Jordan Peterson (Not advertising).

      Delete
    4. "They are becoming the thought police."

      No, they aren't. Twitter and Facebook are private companies and if you don't like what they allow or disallow you can start a competing social media platform.

      I deactivated my FB account a week ago and my Twitter account last Sunday. I don't know whether I will be back or not. I was spending too much time on both, getting into fruitless arguments.

      Delete
  12. RNS accuses frum people of racism. Frum people push back. RNS says "cant we all get along?"

    It's always the same story. The left, represented nicely on this issue by RNS, is always the one starting up. When they realize, invariably for the first time, that many people don't actually share their opinions, they are taken aback, and resort to crying "disproportionate response". In fact, one commenter in that previous thread spoke about the need for civility in the very same comment that he attacked others for racism! And just above, RNS tries to justify his frequent attacks on charedim - despite the subject of this post - as though he was merely calling them "foolish", and therefore he wasn't doing anything wrong! And he expects the right wing to just sit back and take it!

    The Upshot is: the left simply has no idea that they are instigating fights. It comes from ignorance, and a myopic media that has taught them to think that their view is the only enlightened one. Education is the answer. I encourage the left to widen their reading and learn about the diversity of opinion.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Eh, I do not consider myself a leftist by any stretch, yet I find myself acknowledging that some values espoused by the opposing side are not wrong! Being kind and respectful to all people regardless of skin color I think is something we should be able to get behind without having it make everyone perceive us as having an "-ism."

      I of course agree that the Left often starts up without realizing it.

      Delete
    2. "RNS accuses frum people of racism. "

      I *personally* have heard a *lot* of racism from frum people.

      "their view is the only enlightened one"

      If you think that racism can be an enlightened view, you are part of the problem.

      " It comes from ignorance"

      Indeed the concept of race is absent from Torah Judaism. Jewish racists somehow never learned that during their education -- or learned that and choose to ignore it.

      Delete
    3. I don't know what you're talking about, Charlie Hall, but you're deliberately avoiding the point - that it is the LEFT, not the right, that always starts with the name calling and nastiness. Always and invariably. And its because your side is ignorant of other viewpoints. You (ie, lefties) need to broaden your horizons. This comment section is a decent start, but not nearly enough.

      Delete
    4. "that it is the LEFT, not the right, that always starts with the name calling and nastiness"

      There has never been a US political leader engage in the level of namecalling and nastiness that Donald Trump has. Are you redefining him as part of the Left? OR are you defending Trump?

      Delete
    5. Trump doesn't need my defense, Charles, he's the US President. There's never been another US political leader so falsely maligned and attacked by the media. Did you just expect him to sit there and take it, or are you defending the media?

      Delete
  13. You don't know anything about systemic racism or the protests or US politics. If you do, you haven't demonstrated it here. Put up the syag!

    ReplyDelete
  14. The Kosher Meat Boycott & Riots of 1902 - when desperate & poor people's rights are trampled on violence is often an outflow - not a justification: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1902_Kosher_Meat_Boycott?fbclid=IwAR1K6QiR6FTL2msqBlo726_cU2mpCOvipmPoBlHY47wd7HdV_87cn7IIqy4

    ReplyDelete
  15. A good framework to help understand how seemingly reasonable people with the same goals can have such strong disagreements is Thomas Sowell’s A Conflict of Visions: Ideological Origins of Political Struggles. He outlines the differences between ‘Constrained’ and ‘Unconstrained’ vision and how related fundamental differences in intuition about human nature and the way the world works result in drastically different approaches to people with the same goals solving the same problems.

    The constrained vision sees human nature as unchangeable, inherently self-interested and limited in its capacity to understand and optimize real world problems (at a societal scale). The constrained vision believes that there is no ideal solution to most problems – only trade-offs between competing interests and between desired benefits and practical constraints – and that because the real world is too complex to understand we should respect the robust systems that have developed over time to balance the complexities, as rapid change is likely to cause more unintended harm (collateral damage) than desired benefit.

    The unconstrained vision sees human nature as having the intellectual capability and moral drive to develop the ideal solution to every (societal problem) if given the right opportunities. The unconstrained vision believes that the smartest people with the right data can plan a much better society now than our current one which is a hodgepodge of the various errors and accidents of history. With the ideal solution within reach, compromise is not necessary and collateral damage is often seen as acceptable since it is the price of the path to achievable perfection.

    In general, those with constrained vision look at how the unconstrained want to solve society’s ills and think them foolish because they believe they will make things worse. Those with unconstrained vision look at the constrained unwilling to try to solve society’s ills (because they don’t believe they successfully can without making things worse) and think them evil for not even trying.

    Social media has made things much worse because its enabled clustering along these paradigms (even when we share the same goals) and removed the other contexts in which we can view others that don’t share our paradigm in ways that help us understand them as clearly not stupid/evil in general.

    Interestingly, the book was given to me to read by my very Yeshivish (old-school) Lakewood-trained Rabbi.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This is nice but what are the success rates of the respective schools? What do they show in their resumes?

      Delete
    2. chaim,

      Sowell himself is a 'constrained vision' guy, but this book is neutral (he has others where he argues for reality being constrained).

      The point is that without understanding that others have a completely different vision about how the world works, you end up arguing through each other and misplacing irrationality and evil.

      For example, just by your question ("this is nice but what are the success rates of the respective schools") I can pretty much be guaranteed you are of the constrained persuasion (as am I), focusing on relative cost/benefits and historical outcomes. Someone with an unconstrained vision would have asked, "this is nice, but how can this help us all get along so we can finally focus on a better future".

      Delete
    3. As a practicing, religious (if heretical) Jew I take deep exception to the idea that discrimination and violence by a more powerful group should be allowed to continue because that's human nature.

      I believe that some things are right, and some things are wrong. I believe everyone knows the difference, and I believe people have the capacity and responsibility to choose. I believe when people choose badly they have agency for that choice.

      What you seem to believe is that everyone is basically an animal, what happens is what is inevitably going to happen anyway, and that nobody need to takes responsibility for the things they do and the world they live in.

      Please correct me if you think I'm mischaracterising your views.

      Delete
  16. The "riots" are understandable and necessary? What trash is that? Setting aside the absurdity of justifying stealing and the like, does anyone think rioters are taking flatscreen TVs to right the wrongs of society? Think how much injustice is corrected when the screen is 4k!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I live in the poorest urban county in America, Bronx NY. The "riots" are basically arson and looting of minority owned businesses, threatening an economic miracle that has reduced unemployment by 2/3 and a social miracle that reduced violent crime by 85%.

      But the "riots" aren't limited to poor areas. Did anyone see the surf shop in Santa Monica California being looted? What looked like well off white folks were carting off surfboards! And in parts of Manhattan, getaway vehicles were strategically placed to cart away loot.

      Delete
  17. Reasonable people can / should / will disagree on issues and most likely will do so respectfully.

    Racists are not in that category.
    Their viewpoints should not be tolerated, and the freedom of speech issue is a fig leaf to enable them to say bad things about black people.
    Ask your racist commentators if they think Facebook or Twitter should remove anti-Semitic posts and then flag their responses for hypocrisy.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Racism, is the worst possible crime. The next worst possible crime is that committed against the environment, because if we continue down this road, like life itself will end in about 10 and a half years. People should not be allowed to express any views that anyone thinks are racist, anywhere at any time, because that causes society to fall apart, and we should be able to have peaceful protests against racism because it is so bad. The police are bad because they are racists, even the black ones, unfortunately, because they do not understand that their jobs only came from a place of privilege, and they shouldn't do them that way. I do not know if David Dorn was a racist, but he was part of the same system. We must root out all racism, no matter what, because it's a symptom of the problem of privilege in this country. And we need this change now.

      Delete
    2. @Chaim X "The police are bad because they are racists, even the black ones, unfortunately, because they do not understand that their jobs only came from a place of privilege, and they shouldn't do them that way." I can not tell if you are being sarcastic or are just delusional.

      Delete
    3. Marveling at the stupidity here. Of course, David Dorn wasn't a racist. He was a black police officer. He was the best of America. A forgotten hero because that doesn't fit well with their leftist narrative. Saying that all police are racist is very simplistic and unappreciative. If you like the life you lead at all, thank your local police. They're the only reason you have anything of value that isn't already stolen by some common thief. I hope you will retract your statements regarding the police.

      As for racism, I agree. It is evil and must be eradicated. Saying that racism must be eradicated should not be confused with advocating censorship. We need freedom of speech.

      Delete
    4. The failure of BLM to acknowledge black police officers is sadly no surprise. I blasted them mercilessly when they didn't mention this heroine a few years ago:

      https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/05/nyregion/nypd-bronx-police-shooting.html

      Earlier I had called them out because the founders of the movement openly praised this woman as the inspiration for their activism:

      https://www.fbi.gov/wanted/wanted_terrorists/joanne-deborah-chesimard

      BLM has since scrubbed all mention of this convicted cop-killer from their web site, and interestingly the founders of the movement have been pretty silent this entire period of protesting. But there has been no retraction.

      Delete
  18. Post-modernism has damaged your thinking. The rioting can be seen as "right"? Who are these strange friends of yours?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well, they didn't mention this, but this is an example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1902_Kosher_Meat_Boycott

      Delete
    2. Good Lord, talk about WEAK. This is the best you can do? This bit of ephemeral nothing from 120 years ago?

      Instead of defending a lost cause, a wise general steps back and re-evaluate. Like we have often heard preached here about mistakes in science, the ability to recognize a mistake is a feature, not a bug.

      Delete
  19. Nope. Violent crime and theft is where we draw the line as a moral society. That can never be acceptable no matter how badly we want to cater to feelings and "grievances" of rioters.

    When you bend over backwards to allow for any and every possible spin on a situation, you end up twisted into a pretzel and standing for nothing, with no enforcement of conduct at all anymore - That is when innocent people get victimized and hurt in society. To "tolerate" that is extremely cruel. Wake up please.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Violent crime and theft is where we draw the line as a moral society."

      We stopped drawing that line a long time ago, at least regarding theft. The kosher meat boycott was precipitated by abusive monopolists who were basically stealing from the poor -- and the meat trust was nowhere the most abusive monopoly. It is considered to be good business practice to improperly steal business from other businesses. One billionaire I used to know before he was rich got to be a billionaire by selling products that did not exist yet. Entire large corporations today have business models that rely on massive lawbreaking. It should be no surprise that today the US has a President who for decades cheated customers, employees, suppliers, contractors, creditors, and business partners, in every way imaginable -- and yet is admired as a successful businessman.

      The Torah explicitly objects to almost all of these examples, but we have forgotten those teachings. :(

      Delete
    2. Correct. It was stated a long time ago that kindness to criminals - allowing it, in other words - is cruelty to society. Look at Times Square today, which has turned overnight into a wasteland. Drunks and vagrants just lying in the middle of the square. Not a police presence in sight. That's what NY gets for having THE most corrupt, anti-Semitic, and incompetent mayor in its history.

      Delete
    3. Do you really think Joe Biden made his money kosher style? Didn't Hunter Biden make a million dollars per year in Ukraine, despite knowing nothing about oil?

      Delete
    4. @DF I agree. A few months ago the mayor and others denounced Orthodox Jews for praying because of coronavirus. However, when black lives matter protests take place they are allowed to congregate in the thousands. This is obviously anti-Semitic/anti-religious. As a result, religious communities are suing Bill de Blasio.

      Delete
    5. PS Not to mention that the mayor said that coronavirus will not harm the protest/rioters. Sound familiar?

      Delete
    6. "THE most corrupt, anti-Semitic, and incompetent mayor in its history"

      You just showed how completely ignorant you are of NYC and its history. The facts:

      If De Blasio is corrupt -- and there is no real evidence that he is -- it is nothing compared to the many Tammany Hall hacks who occupied to mayor's office for much of a century and a half.

      Not only is De Blasio not anti-Semitic, but there has never been a mayor who has done more to pander to the organized frum community. When the charedi leadership says, "Jump!", his reaction is "How high?" That has been the case for his entire political career -- he used to represent Borough Park in the City Council. It was the charedi leadership whose support made him the mayor in the first place back in 2013. And he has paid them back appropriately, preventing the Health Department from doing anything about metzitzah be peh, and preventing the Education Department from doing anything about the lack of secular studies in yeshivot. And he channels universal pre-K funds to religious institutions, probably in violation of the State Constitution. Note that when a charedi group embarrassed him by having a funeral without social distancing, it was the charedi leadership who apologized after De Blasio got pissed off.

      And regarding incompetence, Lindsay, Beame, and Koch -- not to mention the Tammany hacks -- make De Blasio seem like the most spectacular success by comparison. Objectively, prior to the pandemic and the protests, De Blasio had more successes than failures. He was the mayor who got universal pre-K. He was the mayor who finally got ferries running. He has run roughshod over NIMBYs to get more housing built. And no mayor since Seth Low has had lower homicide rates.

      I am actually not a fan. I did not vote for him when he ran in 2013. But one must look at things objectively.

      Delete
    7. " religious communities are suing Bill de Blasio."

      The Supreme Court had a similar case from California and ruled that courts have no business micromanaging public health. Chief Justice Roberts in his opinion gave a rare tonguelashing to the dissenters for not understanding the facts.

      Besides, it isn't De Blasio's call. It is Cuomo's.

      The fact is that nobody should be having large congregations, for protests or religious services. BTW did you object to the armed mob that took over the Michigan State house with their Confederate flags and swastikas?

      Delete
    8. @Charlie Hall Cuomo and De Blasio condemned an Orthodox Jewish funeral when they shouted for social distancing. However, when the protest took place in the thousands, they happily endorsed them, even saying that the protest won't get sick because of the cause. Sound familiar?

      He may have helped Jews in the past but it is not fair to condone violent riots while at the same time condemn a peaceful minyan.

      Oh, and btw, I do object to the takeover Michigan Statehouse. And in case it matters to you, conservatives are not neo-nazis/Confederate sympathizers.

      PS Plz, stop calling everyone who disagrees with you a nazi. Because eventually the use of that term will fade out and when a real nazi comes along you won't be able to recognize one.

      Delete
    9. Oh, he's not anti-Semitic, is he? Pulhease. Jewish Uncle Tom's. He actively encourages thousands of people to riot, yet today he sent his thugs out to WELD SHUT parks in Jewish neighborhoods so kids cant play. What kind of a sick man does this? WELD SHUT, you hear? So kids - who have a greater chance than being struck by lightning than dying from Corona - can't play. Blacks rioting, fine. Jewish kids playing, bad. Sure, he's not ant-Semitic at all! My God, wake up.

      Delete
  20. I would add this: Rabbi Slifkin, you seem to have taken a VERY different approach to the riots by extreme haredim in your town. (What were they right about???) And those are child's play compared to what went on in major US cities.

    Aside from the fact that chaos and the complete destruction of civilization and the widespread poverty and despair that comes with anarchy leads to a completely unfettered targeting of Jewish people by the mobs, you should also consider how inconsistent you are being when it comes to the suffering of other people who don't live in your town.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "What were they right about???"
      I can't think of anything, and I haven't heard anyone give a remotely reasonable defense of them.

      "Aside from the fact that chaos and the complete destruction of civilization and the widespread poverty and despair that comes with anarchy leads to a completely unfettered targeting of Jewish people by the mobs"
      You're right!

      Delete
    2. Those rioting extreme haredim in your community have just as much logical rationale as the BLM riots in America. Zero. 0 = 0

      But in the case of both groups, in their own perception they see themselves as victimized, victims of your oppression, and therefore justified.

      Delete
    3. Doesn't the basic right of being able to breath constitute a reasonable ground for protest?

      Delete
  21. WAIT - I do not know ANYONE - whether they support Black Lives Matters or not - that claims that the RIOTING / VANDALISM / LOOTING / ARSON - were "understandable or even necessary". The Vandalism / Looting / Arson was condemned by the BLM movement and has been stopped (at least some of it was actually done by right wing groups.) The protests - stopping traffic and shutting down parts of cities, people may have different opinions about. Put that at the top of your article for clarity.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I know several such people. See for example what this person posted on my Facebook page:

      I'm not Rabbi Slifkin, but as an observant Jewish woman who absolutely understands the riots (though I do not support looting), perhaps this will give you some perspective. To begin with, you need to stop looking for "rationale" as though the rioting were organized and deliberate in the manner of a protest march. That is not what this is. This is the grief of a community writ public. It is a howling to the heavens. It is a public mourning for the deaths of their fathers, their children, their husbands, their daughters. It is terror for their own lives, and not knowing if any time they leave the house they might be killed. It is an outpouring of sheer, unrestricted emotion . . . and that looks like a 'riot' to you because you are expecting an entire community of grief-stricken people who have been terrorized and traumatized non-stop to "behave themselves" nonetheless. But terrified people do not grieve politely or quietly. And if it were the Jewish community being shot in our homes, in our backyards, if it were our children, our young people out for a jog . . . I would hope that our community would "riot" as well, and grieve loudly and break things, and make their terror and their grief known to the heavens in a way that no one could dismiss or ignore.

      Delete
    2. And this pathetic "logic" isn't contemptible?

      Delete
    3. This woman's opinion is utterly contemptible. I don't care what you think about science, Chazal, Rishonim, Torah protecting, anything. This view is perverse and detached from reality. Black people are just casually being killed by cops? What insanity is this? Congratulations, you've seen both sides so well that you've achieved nihilism.

      Delete
    4. What are the demands of the BLM protestors? What policies are they riotting for. i mean, what peacefully are they protesting about? What do they want to happen?

      Delete
    5. Wow, what a total load of hooey. Does this person care at all about the black-on-black violence that kills more blacks than police ever do? Seriously! This is absolute garbage from a factual point of view.

      Delete
    6. Well, no, the riots would still be unjustified.

      But they are even more so considering that her litany of horrors simply...isn't happening.

      Delete
    7. "grief," "howling," "mourning," "terror," "outpouring," "emotion" "grief" (again), "terrorized," "traumatized," "terrified," "grieve" (slick variation), "grieve" (again), "terror," "grief" (one more time).

      This is a word salad of
      EMOTIONS EMOTIONS EMOTIONS EMOTIONS EMOTIONS

      Not logic, not rationale, not reasoned argument or discussion.

      Whatever I do is right because EMOTIONS. How can you not empathize with my always 100% justified and praiseworthy EMOTIONS? My claim to victimization makes me right.

      And trying to tell us we are callous for not granting these EMOTIONS their rightful temper tantrum display in the form of theft vandalism and murder. Did the laws of the Torah get suspended so that emotions can be exercised? Someone tell me where we got notification of this.

      Let's talk about some facts. 10 unarmed black men were killed by police in the line of duty in the USA in 2019. (Number since adjusted to 15).
      That's bad, and the number of unarmed whites killed was even higher. (20, recently adjusted to 25). We don't know the circumstances of all these cases and surely it cannot be that 100% of them were due to police misconduct and totally divorced from violent and dangerous actions taken by these unarmed suspects. Of course I'm sure some were misconduct, and that's terrible. No one supports police brutality.

      Now ask yourself, does this fit with the picture being painted by this facebook commentator, "mourning for the deaths of their fathers, their children, their husbands, their daughters" and " not knowing if any time they leave the house they might be killed." NO, it does NOT.

      The chances of members of the black community being killed by an adult black man is orders of magnitude higher than the chances of being killed by police. Those are facts, no matter what our feelings are about them.

      Delete
    8. The woman on your FB pg is typical of common lefties. She thinks "rioting" is "ok." She thinks they need to “vent.” Lady, you can't burn the whole city.

      "It is terror for their own lives, and not knowing if any time they leave the house they might be killed."

      This could not be further from the truth. As of last year there were about 10 unarmed black deaths due to police. Half of them assaulted the police. One was an accident. Two cops were fully charged. Your down to two assaults. Two killings, considering that the whole country, overall is made up of 325 million Americans, that is hardly a genocide, and it is a damnable lie to suggest it is. It is a complete lie, a provable lie. On the other hand, 7,000 African Americans were murdered black on black. Those are the facts.

      Yes, more unarmed whites were killed by by police. In fact, more police were killed than all races combined. Imagine if the police were to riot and burned cities, too. It would be anarchy. But that is what some in the left want. They want to defund the police. So when you call "911" the next time a thief breaks into your store the other line will say "sorry, there's no one available to take your call. Have a good day" — beep.
      It’s pathetic.

      You have the facts now so you can decide.

      Delete
    9. I must add that they have yet to prove that this was a hate crime.

      Delete
    10. I also disagree with the woman who "understands" the rioting. I get the feelings, but totally oppose that particular action.

      But as for how the black people - mostly men - feel with respect to police, how is this for a parallel? It is more likely that someone will get mugged in NYC than blown up in a terrorist attack in Israel (even back in the 80's and 90's), yet there are people (perhaps more people back then) who were afraid to go to Israel from New York. Statistics can go hang themselves - people are going to fear the things that are publicized, politicized, and popularized. There are black men who live in upscale neighborhoods who do fear to leave their houses to go for a walk as a cop might accost them. They take a dog or their child with them to make things look more innocent. Are they overreacting? Possibly. But there IS - unfortunately - this fear now.

      Still not a reason for violence, of course.

      Delete
    11. "This is the grief of a community writ public."

      Wow. So clueless. :(

      Delete
    12. To RNS: You should probably unfriend her. Just kidding.

      Delete
  22. I do not think we should be silent and allow the rioters to do whatever they want. We need to criticize them for what they are, miserable thugs. Tho we need to respect your friends opinions, we do not need to respect anyone who breaks windows and causes violence.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. True. Also true that I do not think we should be silent and allow the police to do whatever they want. We need to criticise them for what they are, miserable thugs. Tho we need to respect your friends opinions, we do not need to respect anyone who harasses, shoots, chokeholds, steals and murders.

      Delete
    2. To Hat: If you are referring to Chauvin, I agree. If you're referring to all police, I, of course, disagree. And I disagree with defunding the police and all the other nonsense the left try to push. Not all police are bad and not all police are racist. They are certainly not miserable thugs like those rioters in Chaz.

      Delete
    3. Turk Hill, I suggest you revisit your characterisation of the mostly peaceful protestors before you object to the gross generalisations of others.

      The police are institutionally racist. I've never been stopped and searched / frisked. Because I'm white.

      Delete
    4. The Hat, Yes I have no problem with peaceful protesters. My problem is with rioters who loot. As of last year, there were about 10 unarmed black deaths due to police. Half of them assaulted the police. One was an accident. Two cops were fully charged. Your down to two assaults. Two killings, considering that the entire nation is made up of 325 million, that is hardly a genocide, and it is a damnable lie to suggest it is. On the other hand, 7,000 African Americans were murdered black on black. Those are the facts.

      Yes, more unarmed whites were killed by police. In fact, more police were killed than all races combined. You only never hear about them because they're white.

      Actually, most police are not racist. Here's an analogy. Imagine you're afraid of sharks. Ok, so the last thing you want as a job will be a commercial diver. If a person is a racist then he is afraid of blacks and will never join the police department. Period.

      And if you think Chauvin's a racist, you're probably wrong. For one, if he was afraid of blacks why would he kill Floyd in public and with his vest-cam on? Wouldn't he try to kill blacks at night when no one could suspect him? In short, he probably was not a racist but to lay on that man's neck for eight minutes shows deep hatred. There is a history tho. The two worked together as bouncers. This may explain the hatred.

      Delete
    5. 250 black people were shot by the police in 2019 (https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2019/national/police-shootings-2019/). 124 were shot while fleeing the scene. 20 of the 250 were unarmed.

      Of course more white people were killed the police. 60.4% of the US population is white. 13.4% are black (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_ethnicity_in_the_United_States#:~:text=As%20of%20July%202016%2C%20White,estimated%2018%25%20of%20the%20population.)

      25% of the people shot by the police were black (https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2019/national/police-shootings-2019/)- an overrepresentation of 87% ((25% - 13.4%)/13.4%)

      89 police officers were killed in the line of duty in 2019 (https://www.fbi.gov/news/pressrel/press-releases/fbi-releases-2019-statistics-on-law-enforcement-officers-killed-in-the-line-of-duty). That's clearly less than the number of people killed by police.

      I think you ought to reflect on the considerable divergence I have uncovered between your feelings, confidently expressed, and the hard facts.

      I don't think you should cite the egregious and unashamed nature of Chauvin's killings as proof of his .... innocent intent? Lack of racial intent? All it seems to demonstrate was a arrogance. Related - this was the third man he killed. I don't doubt that if there wasn't a Covid 19 crisis which means large number of unemployed people available to riot and protest, he would have escaped sanction, and I further predict that he will not be found guilty of a criminal act because This is America.

      Delete
  23. So per these Leftist friends, it's ok if the rioters destroy the property of completely innocent people, even of completely innocent fellow black people.

    Please ask them: would they still think this if the rioters were burning down homes and stores owned by these Leftists themselves? Or is it only ok, even virtuous, when it's someone ELSE's property?

    Just another example of how our kind, caring Leftists are always ready to give you the shirt off someone else's back.

    Andy

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. For all those who think rioting and destruction of innocent people's property is warranted in this situation:

      Maybe we could start a registry where you can list the locations of your homes, cars, businesses, etc. We could then forward the list to the rioters; and maybe start a Go Fund Me page to provide them transportation to these locations.

      Now THIS is a cause that I could really get behind.

      Andy

      Delete
    2. As much of the rioting is in the cities, it has been suggested that most of the victims of the violence are black people - homes, cars, businesses, etc. And many of the perpetrators are white activists! So ridiculous...

      Delete
    3. Some of the looting was less than a mile from my house. I am much more of the Left than the Right, at least in terms of US politics. (I find Israeli politics to be completely confusing and won't get involved until I make Aliyah.) I am campaigning against Donald Trump and for Joe Biden.

      And I have been outspoken not only against the rioting, looting, and arson but also against the mass protests and against the stupid "defund police" movement. We still have a pandemic, and we need larger, better trained, and better paid police forces -- and also police forces that have weeded out both the racists and the corrupt cops. (I have personally had dealings with both categories. :( )

      Delete
    4. Charlie Hall - you're known, not just here, but in the affluent community in which you live, as an extreme left wing partisan. So why, suddenly, are you against the holy protests? And why, suddenly, do you break ranks with your comrades to oppose defunding police? Why, Charlie? Because suddenly its your OWN property in danger?

      Maybe if you lived in New Mexico you'd also, suddenly, start supporting immigration reform. And maybe if you actually worked for a living in the real world instead of cloistered academia, and stood to lose your OWN job in the name of affirmative action, you'd also, suddenly, see things in a different light.

      Delete
    5. "in the affluent community in which you live, as an extreme left wing partisan"

      LOL it is quite clear that you don't know me, my community, or what I am about.

      Delete
    6. Sigh. No Charlie, unfortunately I do. I have family who live and work in the Bronx, and we are all familiar with your wealthy Riverdale section. And you ducked the point again - why, suddenly, do you oppose the rioting and the defunding when you ordinarily just kneejerk support all the leftie causes? The answer is obvious, as stated above. And its why none of you hypocrites can be taken seriously.

      Delete
  24. No matters how wrong was to kill that black... Why those who suffer from that should be innocent people those only crime is that their ancestors made the blacks free, gave them civil rights and permitted them to live in their neighborhoods?

    Another question. If USA is so bad place for them, why they don't move back to their homeland, to Africa? There is a great country called Liberia that was created especially for this purpose.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. A few thoughts.

      1) Nobody's ancestors made anyone free. Everyone is born free and I don't believe anyone owes society a debt of gratitude for not oppressing them.

      2) The emancipation of slaves in the US was materially incomplete, and discrimination in the spheres such as education and policing continues today. It is clear from your questioning of blacks continued presence in the US that you don't regard them as full citizens. That is not the individual fault of white people but the collective failure of the United States.

      3) The rioting of and looting is unjust.

      4) As a matter of empirical observation rather than moral justification, those who are unfairly discriminated against by society have less interest and inclination in observing its rules. Again I stress: that doesn't make it right.

      It is important to note that same empirical observation rather than moral justification explains why the Jews terrorised the British in the late 1940s, and why the Arabs terrorise the Jews now. Indiscriminate and immoral destruction is the preserve of the desperately oppressed and powerless.

      5) Citizens of a country of any race have a legitimate expectation that the country treats them fairly.

      6) US citizens' homeland is the United States.

      Delete
    2. What the Jewish underground did against the British was NOT indiscriminate at all. (nor was it immoral)

      Delete
    3. It turns out that I have direct ancestors who were in America before slavery was turned into law. Slavery did not exist in English law prior to the mid 17th century. Giving credit to those who freed people who never should have been enslaved is like giving credit to an arsonist firefighter for putting out the fire he set. Similarly, there should never have been a debate regarding civil rights, or the ability to live in any neighborhood.

      And I ditto the comment that the homeland for US Citizens is the United States -- whether your family has been here for thousands of years, for hundreds of years (me), or less than a decade.

      Delete
    4. Student v: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_David_Hotel_bombing was an act of wanton and indiscriminate violencr. What, for example, did the 17 Jews do that deserved the death penalty?

      Delete
    5. We all know about that incident, and that was never the intended result. They were expecting evacuation, but communications were out of whack and then they were unable to coordinate and correct on the fly.

      This is just another example of mindless "whataboutism" by leftists to shut down the uncomfortable message.

      If you talk about the problem of arab terror -- Yeah, but what about Baruch Goldstein.

      If you talk about the problem of riots and looting -- Yeah but what about that kosher meat riot thingamabob that I just found on wikipedia from 100 years ago?

      If you mentioned irgun responding to force with force and doing so in targeted manner --- Yeah but what about that king david botch up where the operation went awry?

      Just stuff it.

      Delete
    6. " what about Baruch Goldstein."

      There are some frum Jews today who consider Goldstein a hero.

      No, I won't stuff that.

      Delete
    7. I'm going to start with the misnomer of "leftist".

      I would describe my political philosophy as radically centrist. I'm radically opposed to all forms of violence. I'm not of the left, I think a lot of left discourse is deliberately intellectually bankrupt and really revolves around clan identity. In fact, I think clannishness is at the root of almost all of societal problems. I believe everyone knows right from wrong.

      I think that the root of a functional and cohesive society is to love your neighbour as yourself, and not to do to others that which is hateful to you.

      I'm radically opposed to Palestinian terrorism. I'm radically opposed to Jewish terrorism. I'm radically opposed to indiscriminate looting and arson. I'm radically opposed to indiscriminate police violence. I am radically opposed to all the massacres committed in 1948 by both sides. I don't engage in apologetics for the Etzion or Chevron massacre. I don't engage in apologetics for the De'ir Yassin massacre, or the Sbarro massacre, or the Haifa massacres or the King David massacre. It's a matter of fact, not opinion, that Israelis forces since 1948 have immorally massacred around 10 times more Palestinians civillians than vice versa. I don't generalise about Jews being particularly murderous. I don't generalise about Arabs being particularly murderous. I do generalise about the iniquities of the occupation, because it treats Jews in a privileged way compared to Arabs. I judge each situation as I find it, and I believe wrong is wrong and right is right, without reference to who is doing what, without giving anyone any particular benefit of the doubt, and without fear or favouritism.

      The alternative viewpoint is a vision of society full of racism and a permanent state of group conflict, where the law of the jungle prevails. A world where selfish human nature means that intractable political conflicts are left to smolder, occasionally erupting into full scale violence. Where groups communicate their needs to each other through the medium of force and violence, and the end state is informed by the brute strength with which they can bring to bear so as to convey their message.

      This isn't whataboutery. It's consistency. It's insisting on the primacy of humanity. It's about believing in humanity. It's about not privileging any group whatsoever on any grounds.

      Having regards to the type of world we want for all our children, it's common sense really.

      Delete
    8. The tragedy was exponentially compounded by the lack of British foresight.

      The King David Hotel had in safekeeping in the government offices the British dossiers on the Palmach, the striking force of the Haganah. It was these records that the Resistance Movement plotted to destroy.

      A group of some ten Irgun men disguised themselves as the Sudanese who daily supplied milk to the British headquarters. They carried large milk cans on their shoulders, except that the cans were full of powerful explosives instead of milk. The explosives had a time-clock fuse.

      The disguised Irgun men entered the King David Hotel without a hitch, and arrived in the basement kitchen. Instead of carrying their milk cans into the kitchen they placed them against the basement pillars.

      British guards noted an oddity in the behavior of the milkmen as they started to leave. They were ordered to halt. A basement battle erupted. Several British soldiers were shot Two of the Jews were wounded. The entire Irgun group escaped, however. One of their wounded died in the flight.

      The British guards who had dispersed the “milkmen” were unaware of the explosives left behind against the pillars. As was customary in the destruction of public buildings where civilians might be present, the Irgun Command began telephoning warnings to the British headquarters in the King David Hotel. The calls informed the authorities that the building would be blown up in twenty minutes.

      “This is the Irgun speaking,” said call after call in English. “Your hotel is mined. It will be blown up and destroyed in twenty minutes (in eighteen minutes—in ten minutes). We warn you to evacuate the building.”

      One of the first warning calls was received by an aide of Chief Colonial Secretary of Palestine, Sir John Shaw. Informed of the warning, the Colonial Chief said, “I am here to give orders to the Jews, not to receive orders from them.”

      With this in mind, Mr. Shaw hurried to the front door of the hotel, placed guards on it and issued orders that nobody was to leave the British headquarters. A fine voice of Empire, Mr. Shaw’s but sounding off at a wrong time. A good number of military and government officials evaded the guards and slipped out of the building. But many did not.

      At 12:30 p.m., precisely twenty minutes after the first warning, the King David Hotel blew apart. The wing containing the government offices and the Military High Command was demolished.

      Ninety people were killed. Many were injured. The British records were destroyed.

      At one o’clock, a Haganah spokesman for the Hebrew Resistance Movement announced a bit bombastically over the secret radio that the Under-ground had destroyed the British military and government Headquarters in Jerusalem, together with all its dossiers and and documents.

      Two hours later the fact that ninety had been killed and scores injured by the explosion first became known. Mr. Shaw, a survivor of the episode, spoke emotionally over the British radio, describing the dreadful business. His information was detailed, including even the fact that his pet dog had suffered death. He made no mention, however, of the Irgun warnings, or of his own refusal to “take orders from the Jews.”

      Delete
  25. Headlines put out a podcast about this and there is some fascinating source material about rioting etc for the sake of a cause.

    http://podcast.headlinesbook.com/e/6620-show-275-hafganos-and-racism-in-halacha-and-hashkafah/

    ReplyDelete
  26. RNS - Assuming it is immoral to kill innocent people, maim innocent people, steal from others, destroy other people's property these riots are indefensible. BTW - Don't you think halacha would condemn these riots that have included the above acts ? Also your Kosher riot comparison is a nonsense. You should be able to figure it out on your own.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Facts don't care about your feelings. There's more crime in the black community than in the white community. That's a fact.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's a fact that poor people, who are less invested in the system of property rights by virtue of holding less property, commit more crimes. To be clear, I don't condone looting, arson and rioting.

      But the question is - why are black people poor? Is it perhaps because they were systematically discriminated against by the state in the provision of education, and by people's prejudices?

      I sometimes feel that you need to meet more black people. Mike (https://www.thejc.com/comment/comment/a-girlfriend-s-dad-chased-me-out-with-a-baseball-bat-1.500556) is an eloquent, and intelligent man who changed perspectives.

      Delete
    2. Yes, I agree with Ben Shapiro that "facts don't care about your feelings." And if the Demoncrates deny that there are more black-on-black violence than police killings then will they say the facts are racist?

      Yes, these bloody rioters killed three cops, including a black cop. Where is the memory of Debra Clayton? A female black cop who was killed by a thug. Where is the memory of Captain David Dorn? He was also shot by another thug protecting his friend's pawn shop. Where' his huge funeral. Why doesn't Joe Biden give a speech for him?

      Also, note that at the Floyd funeral it was a white horse that led the coffin. Why not a black horse?

      Delete
    3. I am not so sure that that is a fact. While homicide rates are higher in black neighborhoods, in some places like NYC homicide rates have plummeted so greatly (partly because of policing!) that the differences are much smaller today. There is FAR more illcit drug use in white suburbs and local police and DAs look the other way lest the DAs get voted out of office. By far the highest rates of rape anywhere (probably in the world) are in Alaska which has very few black people. And most financial fraudsters are white, and most get away with it.

      Delete
  28. When did the comments section on this blog become overrun by the KKK? Switch blacks for Jews and it's like reading mein kampf

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I didn't see any calls for genocide of blacks, or forced expulsion, or oppressing blacks in any way, G-d forbid. I'm pretty sure that all commenters agree that the cop needs to face justice, severe justice if need be. Most commenters just think that responding by destroying innocent people's property, including innocent fellow black people's property, is despicable.

      So your comparisons of commenters with the Democrat party's terrorist organization known as the KKK, and with Mein Kampf,are extremely difficult to comprehend.

      Andy

      Delete
    2. I would posit that antipathy towards Charedim and Arabs legitimises other types of sectarianism.

      Delete
    3. Had George Floyd been a Jew, there would have been mass protests and rioting by Jews.

      This entire thread proves some of the things Rabbi Slifkin has been saying about Jewish racism. And Rabbi Slifkin has ever even lived in the US!

      Delete
    4. No, there would not have been. Precisely the opposite would be the case.

      Delete
    5. Hi Andy, you seem not to have picked up on the idea that black people are genetically inferior (Gabriel M, DF), that black people deserve racial profiling because they commit more crime (Roger) and that there is no systemic racism in the US police (Turk Hill).

      Delete
    6. The Hat---

      You seem to not have picked up on the idea that even if people believe that blacks are inferior, which we agree is wrong, that does NOT mean that they want to commit genocide on blacks, expel them, lynch them, or burn crosses on their lawn.

      Many here have written about Orthodox Jewish racism. Certainly it exists; whether in higher or lower percentages than for other groups, nobody knows. But one significant mitigating factor is that, at least in my experience, the racism is limited to comments, and to the minority of blacks who commit crimes and don't even try to be employed. The same people who make these comments treat the majority of blacks who are decent, hard-working people with respect; they hire them, use their services, buy from their stores, help them on the job, save their lives as Hatzolah members, and otherwise try to help when they can.

      I don't know ANY Orthodox Jews who would advocate genocide, expulsion, or oppression of blacks in any way. To compare these people with the KKK or Mein Kampf, one would have to be a demagogue of a particularly despicable type.

      Andy

      Delete
    7. "I don't know ANY Orthodox Jews who would advocate genocide, expulsion, or oppression of blacks in any way."

      If you read the comment section of certain American frum internet sites, you won't see genocide advocates, but you will find people who want to deny black civil rights and even some who want them all to "go back to Africa". Never mind that most black people had ancestors in America long before the ancestors of most frum Jews arrived.

      Delete
    8. Andy - YOU get it, precisely, but you're wasting your time with people like the guy you responded to. Most of that type are older and stuck in a different era, and are simply unable to shift their paradigms.

      Delete
    9. "Had George Floyd been a Jew, there would have been mass protests and rioting by Jews."

      Really Charlie? That's funny. I don't recall the windows of the Jew-hating Black Hebrew Israelite cult getting smashed after the Monsey attack by the man they helped radicalize. I don't recall protests and rioting in the streets. Funny though you just get to make up hypothetical scenarios that never happened and claim that refutes criticism of real things happening right now.

      Delete
    10. Isaac, Where did the comments support chauvin? I don't know any white person who justifies chauvin's acts. Do you?

      Delete
    11. Andy, we aren't disagreeing much here. I never accused frum Jews of genocide, expulsions, lynching or burning of crosses, Chas veshalom. I do think understand that Gavriel M - and he can correct me and I do apologise if I am mischaracterising his views - thinks that the Jim Crow laws were a good thing.

      Delete
  29. One should read Beevor's book about the Spanish Civil War what is happening now is a replay of what happened in Spain and in parts of Europe. The left resorts to name calling but unable to make any logical argument for the causes it supports. But it does not need to, you just have to appeal to peoples feelings and not reason. Like in Spain, the leftist path was the only path and by force of any sort, it hoped to remake humans. They failed because they fought each other worse than the Nationlists, who were united. We can only hope that left will end up mauling each other to being again ineffective. I lost friends over politics since 2016 even though they knew my politics before the election. In short, the left poisons everything and my friends went crazy and it explains why they support the riots, etc.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "They failed because they fought each other worse than the Nationlists, who were united."

      More importantly, they failed because the Nationalists had the military support of the German Reich and Fascist Italy behind them, whereas the Republicans had lukewarm support from the Soviets. A lot has been written about this.

      Delete
  30. I am angry and saddened to see Orthodox groups supporting BLM, cyring over George Floyd, etc...because they are just pandering to thuggish power in hope that if they be nice, they will be left alone. This was done in the earlier times and in the Shoah, it did not work then and it is not going to work now. This is insanity.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm not sure what group you're referring to, but I would immediately cancel membership in or cease financial support to any organization that supports a racist group like BLM or panders to criminals. It's the least you can do.

      Delete
    2. You are angry and saddened to see... people crying over George Floyd.

      If you don't want people to "pander to thuggish power" then why support the systematically racist and corrupt police? They've gotten so used to breaking the law with regards to persecuting, assaulting, framing, abusing, torturing and murdering black people. What makes you so sure that Jews will always be immune from this abuse?

      Delete
    3. Hat BLM is racist. They say white lives don't matter, only black. That's racist. BLM also supports Palestine who supports the eradication of the modern state of Israel. BLM also supports the dismantling of the US government. In short, BLM has nothing to do with black lives mattering.

      Delete
  31. Gentlemen,

    Next time when, please God, you sit in shul, how can you justify yourselves spouting off like this when the mensch in the next seat may well be black?

    https://www.thejc.com/comment/comment/a-girlfriend-s-dad-chased-me-out-with-a-baseball-bat-1.500556

    ReplyDelete
  32. The looting, destruction of property, and attacking of innocent people are evil.

    If you think that this can legitimately be considered "right" I am left wondering in astonishment and deep dismay...

    ReplyDelete
  33. I’m also firmly in the anti-rioting camp, but I think it’s critical to add another reason why it’s so wrong. BLM is at the forefront of the HARD left craziness, including the belief that America is inherently evil, anti freedom of speech, etc. The defund the police insanity and the Seattle takeover that have comes on the heels of this comes is no surprise. Is there anyone here who is behind that? The leaders of this thing are intentionally linking a cause that we all sympathize with (the killing of George Floyd and the wider issue of (police) discrimination/brutality) with a mother lode of evil. Very dangerous!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I completely agree with you that looting and arson, like police violence, is indiscriminate and immoral. Why don't you sound off on the internet about police violence? Because police violence and racial profiling suits white people?

      If you were not outraged at the dismissal of Colin Kaparenick for peacefully protesting some facts which hurt white people's feelings then you are part of the problem of closing down peaceful channels of protest. It exposed the limits to freedom of speech and the evil of racism in America. There's nothing controversial about saying Black Lives Matter, nothing at all. Any conflation going on is by you: of the basic principle of equality before the law with the acts of individual criminals.

      Delete
    2. Hat, everyone here condemns the killing of George Floyd and police brutality in general, and has no problem with people (peacefully) protesting against it and working to ameliorate it. Likewise, we all agree with the basic principle of equality before the law.

      Yes, Colin Kaparenick is a tzadik compared to the looters and violent hooligans, in that he did engage in peaceful protest, but what was his message? “There’s a big problem here and we have to fix it” is fine. "There’s a big problem here that “pasuls” the country", as expressed by disrespecting the national anthem (ie by kneeling rather than standing) is anathema to many.

      “There's nothing controversial about saying Black Lives Matter, nothing at all. Any conflation going on is by you.” As I said initially, TOTALLY DISAGREE. BLM is part & parcel of the extreme wacko left, which is the real danger here. Some proof? As I said, how did outrage at the killing of George Floyd almost immediately morph into “defund the police” and taking over part of downtown Seattle? If left unchecked, do you think that will end well?

      I challenge Rabbi Slifkin. I really don’t think it’s difficult to determine who is in the right on this one, especially for a “rationalist” – what’s happening in the States right now has all the markings of a topic that I believe you’ve discussed before – mass hysteria, in particular, the near total disregard for the facts.

      Delete
    3. To clarify, I agree with you that there shouldn’t be anything controversial with saying Black Lives Matter. I support the idea 100%, but, again, I oppose the movement that it is part and parcel of.

      Delete
    4. The Hat, Again, Black Lives Matter support Palestine and the eradication of the state of Israel. They also want to bring down the American government. In short, they have nothing to do with black lives mattering.

      Delete
    5. Facts shouldn't be made up to suit feelings.

      Some people who think Black Lives Matter - that is to say the majority of the world's population - also think the things you said (to be honest storing a Palestinian state is a simple matter of ve'ohavta lreacho komocho and I support one two. So does Jared Kushner. Is he a leftard?)

      But that isn't post of the BLM policy platform. Even the (self indulgent and unserious) defund the police policy isn't position of BLM. BLM means different things to different people and has no corporate structure. The only unifying idea is that Black Lives Matter, which seems to hurt white people's feelings.

      Delete
    6. Aaron, CK was hurting badly and expressed his hurt powerfully, peacefully and with immense dignity. But apparently non violent protest isn't the most important issue. Racism in the USA where black people are routinely profiled, discriminated against, and killed by a corrupt police isn't the most important issue. The most important issue is white people's feelings.

      His America is an America where white police officers covered up the hunting down and killing of a black jogger and didn't arrest the killers for more than a month until Shaun King (a problematic grifter) posted it on his Twitter feed. His America is where a police medical examiner helped wrote an exculpatory report on the death of George Floyd. His America is an America where the chief of the air force in the Pacific region fears for his black children's lives.

      This is the land where the police taunt the man they are sitting on and tell him to get up (we've seen them growl 'comply' so often for the camera while the operation they are torturing complies). A land where white people didn't realise how corrupt the NYPD is until they literally stole dozens of bikes and beat up innocent cyclists. A land where the Sergeant supervising the choking of Eric Garner lost three weeks' holiday. A land where a CNN reporter was arrested for being a CNN reporter and there were zero consequences. A land where if Derek Chauvin had done what he did other than during a shutdown, he would still be prowling the streets under the authority of law.

      This is America, where white people won't hire black people. Where people call the police of black people go to the gym. Where people call the police if a black man asks them to leash their dog. This is America, where the only thing that really matters is white people's feelings.

      Delete
    7. the hat,

      from your comments you seem like a pleasant, well meaning, but very poorly informed person. the US has a very large population, so invariably there will be some number of people that are racist. i'm sure that the black people who occasionally confront the mild forms of racism that most of them will experience in their lifetime find it quit annoying. on the other hand true violence as result of racism (physical assault, incarceration, murder) is so incredibly rare, that it can't even be measured statistically. police brutality is an issue, but it has nothing to do with race, and white people suffer from it more than blacks do (as the few statistics that have been collected on this issue clearly demonstrate). there is a correlation between police "abuse" and class, but that is a completely different issue.
      on the other hand there is enormous black privilege in the US that is purely race based. black people get priority in hiring for numerous positions, for admission to competitive educational opportunities, and for numerous business opportunities. this is not something that i know from reading about it in the media, but rather have personally seen it happen numerous times. in addition i have witnessed numerous episodes in which black people demanded and received social privileges such as not having to wait on line at a busy store, or not having to vacate a park at closing time, and no of the white people who were discriminated against was willing to complain because of the harsh social and sometimes legal penalties that a white person who demands equality will suffer.

      in summation, there is mild anti black racism in the US, and massive pro black racism. the media misrepresents the facts by focusing on the incredibly rare instances of blacks suffering as a result of racism while avoiding all discussion of the massive advantages that blacks are granted as a result of pro black racism.

      Delete
    8. Most Americans understand that "Black Lives Matter" is just a front for democrats. A widely seen video over the weekend showed in just two clicks how a donation to it goes straight to Bernie Sanders.

      Their end game is the Orwellian attempt to make dismissing preferential treatment (ie, reverse racism) into racism itself. I assure you that will never happen. To the contrary, the cases are already bubbling up to the Supreme Court - which was always divided, historically, even on much less divisive cases of affirmative action, ie, recruiting at black colleges but not white colleges, or targeted advertising on black magazines. Today's insanity - actual preferences of blacks over whites - will not be allowed. At that point the trial lawyers, usually on the liberal side but really just want the money, get involved, and its game over.

      Delete
    9. "This is America,..."

      If America is so awful, why do you liberals want to invite Somalis and Mexicans or whoever?

      Here's the real America. An America where 10 unarmed blacks were killed by police (half assaulting the police before the trigger was pulled). This America also consists of 7,000 black on black killings. Those are the facts, In fact, last year was the safest year for young black male suspects. Indeed, we live in the best county in the world. So much so that your waste is dumped into freshwater. Why are you so ungrateful?

      I think anyone who wants to complain should begin like this: "I know I live in the best country in the world, but..."

      This is America.

      Delete
    10. And since DF mentioned Bernie Sanders, guess how much Bernie Sanders gave to charity? Less than one percent. So much for the rich giving 99% of their wealth when Sanders himself gives nothing to the poor.

      What a wonderful country we live in where a socialist can make a million dollars from writing a book about communism. Where a communist owns thee houses and a golf course, lives in a gated community. In other words, he has a wall.

      He used to complain about "the millionaires and the billionaires." But now that he's a millionaire, he only complains about "the billionaires."

      Delete
    11. Much assertion, very little evidence. Name one above average paid profession these privileged black people are overrepresented in. Sports - fine. Anything else?

      Delete
  34. I wish people would be more tolerant. That also includes being tolerant with other people's views...Society would be so much better.I likewise find the haredim bashing on this website counter productive. I think people should try reflect on their own mistakes. Not try and find fault at others....

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree. A personal example of consistently courteous and kind discourse is as powerful in effecting societal change we would all like to see as carefully reasoned rational arguments.

      Delete
  35. Do you remember the word "prejudice"? Or "stereotype"? These are forgotten words. Because prejudice doesn't really exist on any meaningful scale. The left has changed, radically. They want preferences, not equality. That's why they have no problem saying "all cops are racist", which is a stereotype like saying all "blacks are shiftless". It's not that they don't realize the hypocrisy - the smarter ones do, they just don't care.

    It needs to be repeated, over and over and over: Until someone gives up his own job in the name of racial or gender preferences, or loses the contract he bid on, or gets refused the promotion he deserved - he has no business opening his mouth. Period.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There is hypocrisy in demanding nuance and very careful precision when your own side is being scrutinised, and then make outrageous generalisations about "the left".

      This isn't about affirmative action, or defunding the police, however much it would be convenient if it was. It's about the very basic human rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

      Some radical people on the left overreach, Fox News and the NYT gives them a platform to act like they're representative of the entire movement, and then racists use it to avoid anyone outraged by the violence of the state and the systematic pattern of cover up.

      Let me explain what Black Lives Matters is about to me. Three - three! - state prosecutors in Georgia tried to cover up the killing of Ahmed Aubrey. Nothing has happened to them for their malfeasance in a public office. A medical examiner produced a tendentious report on the death of George Floyd citing pre-existing conditions as cause of death rather than a contributing factor. No consequences. Breonna Taylor's killer cops fired multiple shots blind, including through a closed window with blinds drawn at an unseen target (unsurprisingly that officer was not the killer, but remains on the payroll, a disaster waiting to happen). No consequences. George Zimmerman stalked, harassed, fought with, and shot Trayvon Martin. No consequences. Stephen Clark was shot in the back and while on the floor because he was holding a mobile phone. No consequences. Amber Guyger got confused as to where her apartment was, and shot dead Botham Jean as he sat on his own sofa eating ice cream. She got a pathetic 10 years. Jeronimo Yanez shot Philando Castille after he panicked when Philando mentioned he was carrying a legally held firearm during a traffic stop. No consequences. Alton Sterling was shot dead when after Blane Salamonie panicked about the gun in his wastband (his hands were nowhere near the gun). No consequences.

      We've seen literally dozens of incidents in the past month alone where police made unlawful use of force and were backed up by those responsible for managing them. Until the system demonstrates any interest in the quality control of bad apples, the system is a bad farmer whose apples are unfit for purchase. The police are systematically racist, corrupt lawbreakers, and any good individual officers do is despite, rather than because of, the organisation they belong to. Their shiny badge is a badge of shame. They first and foremost serve themselves, protect themselves, and rack up formidable pensions.

      Delete
    2. @The Hat - A 2019 study in the Journal of Politics found that police officers were more likely to use lethal force on blacks, but that this most likely driven by higher rates of police contact among African Americans rather than racial differences in the circumstances of the interaction and officer bias in the application of lethal force. Source Streeter, Shea (June 7, 2019). "Lethal Force in Black and White: Assessing Racial Disparities in the Circumstances of Police Killings". The Journal of Politics. 81 (3): 1124–1132. Cited from Wiki.

      Delete
  36. Racial issues are like Judaism. Just as everyone to one's (religious) left is a heretic, everyone to one's (political) right is a racist. And just as everyone to one's (religious) right is a fanatic who thinks you are a heretic, everyone to one's (political) left is a fanatic who thinks you are a racist.

    ReplyDelete
  37. This blog would stop losing its credibility were it to be willing to critique non-haredi sectors as well regarding their negative points.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree. Slifkin is so worried of being one of the "bad ones" i.e. Haredi Fundamentalist, he goes to the other end of the spectrum to compensate. Rationalism doesn't necessitate pandering to the left, to the contrary: https://thefederalist.com/2020/06/12/welcome-to-your-new-world-order-a-rundown-of-woke-insanity-amid-the-newest-cultural-revolution/

      Delete
  38. Looting the Biblical museum is an acceptable opinion. RNS may disagree with it, but we need to be tolerant and understand both sides.

    ReplyDelete
  39. There is absolutely no comparison. The women who rioted, although controversial, kept their eye on the ball for their goals. They didnt break into jewelry stores and sneaker stores to use the riot as a pretext to do unrelated damage. Many of these riots have nothing to do with furthering their cause but are just an excuse to do damage. Surely that would not be said about the meat boycott of 1902.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. They broke into butchers stores for materialistic reasons. Not really justifiable.

      Delete
  40. Looting stores can be justified!

    Looting the Biblical Museum would be wrong as that would be anti-rationalist!

    ReplyDelete
  41. There is a lot of evidence that the meat industry is engaging in anti-competitive practices again today:

    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-06-15/u-s-meat-giants-face-biggest-attack-in-century-from-trump-probe

    Note that decades ago the organized orthodox community in the US decided that monopolies were good and it basically granted one company a near monopoly on all kosher beef production. As one might sadly have expected, the monopolist also turned out to be a crook. When he was sent to prison there was a massive outcry against his sentence, which was well within US federal sentencing guidelines; his sentencing report clearly showed that he had been running an organized criminal enterprise for decades. When Donald Trump released the crook from prison early, the frum community rejoiced.

    That in 1902 we could be concerned about just one improper category of transgression; today we approve of many.

    ReplyDelete
  42. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete

Comments for this blog are moderated. Please see this post about the comments policy for details. ANONYMOUS COMMENTS WILL NOT BE POSTED - please use either your real name or a pseudonym.

The Charedi Opposition to Women's Names

My home town of Beit Shemesh is back in the news, for yet another extraordinary case of charedi intolerance. The Yisrael HaYom website ran a...