You should provide a translation for this letter for people to read. I always pass your stuff onto friends. Once again, thanks for all the work you do in bringing this important issue to readers. Also, another war with Iran is looking more likely and the Gaza ceasefire is barely holding as Hamas has not been dismantled. There is stuff going in Syria and Lebanon. The IDF needs new recruits ASAP and the situation with the Charedi is untenable. Also, no one should be able to vote if they don’t serve.
Has revoking the right to vote been seriously discussed? Other societies have done so for refusal to serve, sometimes permanently, as some places do with those convicted of felonies or moral turpitude, which in some countries includes refusal to serve at times of war.
They also lose the right to serve in government and hold licenses, not just driving licenses.
>>>The politicians’ response to the outcry disproves a frequent criticism that I receive, that there is no point to “bashing” charedim as it doesn’t actually accomplish anything. Today’s news shows that it does.
It shows no such thing because nothing in this letter or the politician's response can be in any way at all attributed to charedi bashing - and certainly not yours or anyone you inspired. Pressure, yes. Personally, I've supported pressure - even the general sort of financial pressure you describe- provided it is not as draconian and spiteful as you seem to wish for. You can be vehement and unbending and and powerful - all without personally attacking and bashing and sowing hatred and division.
Agreed. Bashing, which by definition is personal and spiteful, does not accomplish that. It only causes the conversation to devolve into cat fights and the like. It is ineffective communication that is lashon hara and therefore bad, aside from wrong.
You're not wrong. As I've said, I didn't want to argue with him. I want to be able to support him, as I support 90% or more of what he says. But the turn to negativity he always takes upsets a whole lot of people, most who ignore him completely because they write him off as anti charedi. I don't think they would if he'd moderate a little.
Consider me a campaign manager encouraging his candidate to stay away from the extreme to attract more moderates and increase his chances of achieving the popularity to win the election. I want him to succeed. He won't with this attitude.
>"There’s an important lesson here. The politicians’ response to the outcry disproves a frequent criticism that I receive, that there is no point to “bashing” charedim as it doesn’t actually accomplish anything."
He's quoting the critics, such as yourself. Hence the quotation marks (ie scare quotes, to distance himself) around the word "bashing".
Ummm. Isn't his point that there is a point to bashing charedim? Aren't the quotes just an attempt to distance himself from what is obviously a negative word that he doesn't use but that he acknowledges accurately describes what he does? Are you really telling me he is not at all in the business of Charedi bashing?
I don't deny that. I am equally upset if not more so with charedi leadership, especially certain ones. That's why I want RNS to succeed in his efforts. I just hate to see it done in a bad way that is against the Torah. This is winnable without being a zero sum game. Win it like a mensch that gives us a path to shalom, not with a sledgehammer
Yes. Bashing people and acting out of anger and promoting machlokes and showing no positive vision at all is against the Torah. My entire family - my mother and all my siblings - are dati leumi and all my nieces and nephews have been to, are in are are going to the army. My mother in particular is livid with the charedim as are many, many people I know and have heard from. They all - all - still show more respect and desire for shalom and a positive resolution than you do. You only want to destroy them and however wrong they are and however bad their attitude to the rest of klal Yisrael, there is a whole lot that is good about them and they remain our brothers and sisters. You treat them like the enemy and that approach is against the Torah? So are they? Yes. Fine. What does that have to do with you?
He's addressed these kinds of criticisms many times before here. I'm not an expert on what is against or not against the Torah, I'm not even religious. But there is a pattern on issues with the Charedim that goes back at least to the 80s of "just be nice" whenever any criticism is raised, including when the criticism is of longstanding, egregious, systematic, nation-threatening, ethically-outrageous-by-any-decent-standard-including-enough-decent-Jewish-standards, things. I don't think RNS is being rude. He's being blunt because bluntness is called for. There are times where the attitude has to be: no more games.
Here is everything RNS could be (from his perspective, with his angle); it is seeing him in contrast to this that I find him so disappointing. It's Rabbi Yehoshua Pfeffer, a charedi RNS has praised fully and sincerely, in his weekly blog:
Dear Reader and Friend,
One item missing from the new draft-law framework publicized yesterday is the clause relating to combat soldiers. With respect to recruitment targets, and unlike the previous draft-law proposal, there is no designated quota for combat roles.
One can understand the instinct within the Haredi community to omit such a clause. Combat service is far more totalizing than other military tracks; its impact on a young man is deeper, more transformative. It may be harder to maintain tailored conditions for a Haredi soldier in a combat setting than in an office role (even if this is no longer actually the case). And the special social standing of combat soldiers presents a perceived threat to the status of full-time yeshiva students.
Even so, I regret the omission.
To begin with, the most acute manpower shortage in the IDF today is specifically in combat units. Infantry battalions are desperate to fill depleted ranks. A Haredi presence in combat brigades could provide a meaningful answer to this deficit — and no less importantly, could enrich these units with a deepened Jewish spirit. From a broader societal perspective as well, there is no true substitute for combat roles. When we speak of partnership in carrying the national burden, this is the primary meaning.
But beyond all this, the omission overlooks — or denies — the profound privilege of being counted among the fighters of Israel’s army.
We should recall that the census at the opening of Sefer Bamidbar — the famous tally of 600,000 Israelites — was a military census: “From twenty years old and upward, all who go out to the army in Israel, you and Aharon shall count them” (Bamidbar 1:3). As the Ramban explains in one interpretation, this was the very purpose of the count:
“Moshe and the tribal leaders needed to know the number of front-line warriors, as well as the contingent each tribe would supply in the battles of the Plains of Moav. The Torah does not rely on miracles that ‘one will chase a thousand.’ This is the meaning of ‘all who go out to the army’ — the census was for the army of war.” (Ramban ad loc.)
In other words, the storied number of “six hundred thousand” — the subject of endless derashot, commentaries, and mystical readings — is the number of soldiers. This says something essential about the Jewish people: we are a nation of fighters, charged with repelling those who seek our harm and safeguarding the good that dwells within our home.
This, of course, does not diminish the importance of the IDF’s many non-combat roles. But the role of the fighter retains a unique place.
There is another point of great significance: a large part of military service involves relinquishing one’s individual identity for the sake of the collective. In the army, one serves the entire nation — not oneself. And again, the most powerful expression of this principle lies in combat service, where there is no acquisition of a profession and no real pathway of personal advancement. Perhaps it is precisely this — the exchange of a sectorial or individual identity for a fully national one — that unsettles some Haredi representatives.
--- End of post before linking articles
This kind of writing will accomplish SO much more than anything we see on this blog. RNS should constantly be referencing Rabbi Pfeffer and soyrting him - he even personally joined the army despite being in his late 40s or early 50s, a highly respected Rav and accomplished Dayan and a member and leader of many boards of important organizations.
RNS has a role to play and I'm not suggesting he change who he is or his strident advocacy. But thoughtful dignity and voice (and example) of leadership Rabbi Pfeffer represents should be a guiding light to RNS.
I appreciate your comment. Here's what concerns me: The comparisons that come to mind in response are feminism and the right against racism. Feminists confronted a world in which men were taking advantage of women. There were many kinds of feminists, in degree, etc. but there was a point when being nice was not going to work because it wasn't worth it for men to make allowance. At the same time, most women navigated that responsibly and many others did not. Those who did not did lasting damage to society who have had to live with the fallout. Same with racism. MLK was mensch who fought hard. Others fought and left a legacy that turned into this systemic racism, DEI, etc that has only provoked a horrific culture war. The only thing that works is a strong, insistent voice that reflects a universal moral clarity that can overcomes stubborn social wrongs in a manner that provides a positive way forward. Bashing people and getting personal and sowing division and hatred is not only morally wrong, it ALWAYS makes things worse in the end.
Yes, and I don't think RNS has been uncivil or anything close to the culture war stoking behaviors that the American left has exhibited in varying and increasing ways since the 1960s. Calling a spade a spade and standing up in a civil, adult way for what you believe is right, is distinctly different from trying to see spades everywhere and being some degree of any-means-necessary about fighting them because of reheated Marxist-revolutionary logic wafting through the ideological blob of the American left. These are two very different things. And at some point it becomes bad faith not to see that.
YK- meaning, may your strength increase. Unfortunately, your opinion will be discounted by some secondary to your admission of ‘not being religious’. Sad.
I have been clashing with him about this for a while and while he is not nearly as bad as the American left, etc., he too often makes the same mistake of crossing the line from positive force to negative force. As I've said before, 90% or even more of each post is on target but at some point he drives across the line with a "low blow" that is both unbecoming and destructive and that switches me from agreement to borderline disgust. There are many people out there fighting this fight and almost all in the voices I hear from the dati leumi community have some degree of fury but don't cross the line
You should provide a translation for this letter for people to read. I always pass your stuff onto friends. Once again, thanks for all the work you do in bringing this important issue to readers. Also, another war with Iran is looking more likely and the Gaza ceasefire is barely holding as Hamas has not been dismantled. There is stuff going in Syria and Lebanon. The IDF needs new recruits ASAP and the situation with the Charedi is untenable. Also, no one should be able to vote if they don’t serve.
Has revoking the right to vote been seriously discussed? Other societies have done so for refusal to serve, sometimes permanently, as some places do with those convicted of felonies or moral turpitude, which in some countries includes refusal to serve at times of war.
They also lose the right to serve in government and hold licenses, not just driving licenses.
Not a realistic option.
Understood.
But why is it less realistic than other sanctions?
>>>The politicians’ response to the outcry disproves a frequent criticism that I receive, that there is no point to “bashing” charedim as it doesn’t actually accomplish anything. Today’s news shows that it does.
It shows no such thing because nothing in this letter or the politician's response can be in any way at all attributed to charedi bashing - and certainly not yours or anyone you inspired. Pressure, yes. Personally, I've supported pressure - even the general sort of financial pressure you describe- provided it is not as draconian and spiteful as you seem to wish for. You can be vehement and unbending and and powerful - all without personally attacking and bashing and sowing hatred and division.
Financial pressure only happens when politicians feel public pressure.
Agreed. Bashing, which by definition is personal and spiteful, does not accomplish that. It only causes the conversation to devolve into cat fights and the like. It is ineffective communication that is lashon hara and therefore bad, aside from wrong.
"It only causes the conversation to devolve into cat fights"
Talk about a " self-fulfilling prophecy" ;)
You're not wrong. As I've said, I didn't want to argue with him. I want to be able to support him, as I support 90% or more of what he says. But the turn to negativity he always takes upsets a whole lot of people, most who ignore him completely because they write him off as anti charedi. I don't think they would if he'd moderate a little.
Consider me a campaign manager encouraging his candidate to stay away from the extreme to attract more moderates and increase his chances of achieving the popularity to win the election. I want him to succeed. He won't with this attitude.
>"bashing"
"spiteful"
"personally attacking"
All your classic mischaracterizations. These characterizations are simply false, with no basis. Just red-herring tone policing
Bashing was his word. Oops
Nice try. Here's what he writes:
>"There’s an important lesson here. The politicians’ response to the outcry disproves a frequent criticism that I receive, that there is no point to “bashing” charedim as it doesn’t actually accomplish anything."
He's quoting the critics, such as yourself. Hence the quotation marks (ie scare quotes, to distance himself) around the word "bashing".
Ummm. Isn't his point that there is a point to bashing charedim? Aren't the quotes just an attempt to distance himself from what is obviously a negative word that he doesn't use but that he acknowledges accurately describes what he does? Are you really telling me he is not at all in the business of Charedi bashing?
"Isn't his point that there is a point to bashing charedim?"
That's a classic loaded question (look it up).
No, his point is that there's a point to critiquing charedim.
"Bashing" is his critics' characterization, such as yourself, in an attempt to red-herring tone police
Who is sowing hatred and division?? Just like Hamas is primarily responsible for Gaza deaths… get cause and effect right on this is well.
I don't deny that. I am equally upset if not more so with charedi leadership, especially certain ones. That's why I want RNS to succeed in his efforts. I just hate to see it done in a bad way that is against the Torah. This is winnable without being a zero sum game. Win it like a mensch that gives us a path to shalom, not with a sledgehammer
"against the Torah"???!!
Yes. Bashing people and acting out of anger and promoting machlokes and showing no positive vision at all is against the Torah. My entire family - my mother and all my siblings - are dati leumi and all my nieces and nephews have been to, are in are are going to the army. My mother in particular is livid with the charedim as are many, many people I know and have heard from. They all - all - still show more respect and desire for shalom and a positive resolution than you do. You only want to destroy them and however wrong they are and however bad their attitude to the rest of klal Yisrael, there is a whole lot that is good about them and they remain our brothers and sisters. You treat them like the enemy and that approach is against the Torah? So are they? Yes. Fine. What does that have to do with you?
He's addressed these kinds of criticisms many times before here. I'm not an expert on what is against or not against the Torah, I'm not even religious. But there is a pattern on issues with the Charedim that goes back at least to the 80s of "just be nice" whenever any criticism is raised, including when the criticism is of longstanding, egregious, systematic, nation-threatening, ethically-outrageous-by-any-decent-standard-including-enough-decent-Jewish-standards, things. I don't think RNS is being rude. He's being blunt because bluntness is called for. There are times where the attitude has to be: no more games.
I thought I was commenting to you but it went on the post on general. See my comment at 5:17pm on 11/27
Here is everything RNS could be (from his perspective, with his angle); it is seeing him in contrast to this that I find him so disappointing. It's Rabbi Yehoshua Pfeffer, a charedi RNS has praised fully and sincerely, in his weekly blog:
Dear Reader and Friend,
One item missing from the new draft-law framework publicized yesterday is the clause relating to combat soldiers. With respect to recruitment targets, and unlike the previous draft-law proposal, there is no designated quota for combat roles.
One can understand the instinct within the Haredi community to omit such a clause. Combat service is far more totalizing than other military tracks; its impact on a young man is deeper, more transformative. It may be harder to maintain tailored conditions for a Haredi soldier in a combat setting than in an office role (even if this is no longer actually the case). And the special social standing of combat soldiers presents a perceived threat to the status of full-time yeshiva students.
Even so, I regret the omission.
To begin with, the most acute manpower shortage in the IDF today is specifically in combat units. Infantry battalions are desperate to fill depleted ranks. A Haredi presence in combat brigades could provide a meaningful answer to this deficit — and no less importantly, could enrich these units with a deepened Jewish spirit. From a broader societal perspective as well, there is no true substitute for combat roles. When we speak of partnership in carrying the national burden, this is the primary meaning.
But beyond all this, the omission overlooks — or denies — the profound privilege of being counted among the fighters of Israel’s army.
We should recall that the census at the opening of Sefer Bamidbar — the famous tally of 600,000 Israelites — was a military census: “From twenty years old and upward, all who go out to the army in Israel, you and Aharon shall count them” (Bamidbar 1:3). As the Ramban explains in one interpretation, this was the very purpose of the count:
“Moshe and the tribal leaders needed to know the number of front-line warriors, as well as the contingent each tribe would supply in the battles of the Plains of Moav. The Torah does not rely on miracles that ‘one will chase a thousand.’ This is the meaning of ‘all who go out to the army’ — the census was for the army of war.” (Ramban ad loc.)
In other words, the storied number of “six hundred thousand” — the subject of endless derashot, commentaries, and mystical readings — is the number of soldiers. This says something essential about the Jewish people: we are a nation of fighters, charged with repelling those who seek our harm and safeguarding the good that dwells within our home.
This, of course, does not diminish the importance of the IDF’s many non-combat roles. But the role of the fighter retains a unique place.
There is another point of great significance: a large part of military service involves relinquishing one’s individual identity for the sake of the collective. In the army, one serves the entire nation — not oneself. And again, the most powerful expression of this principle lies in combat service, where there is no acquisition of a profession and no real pathway of personal advancement. Perhaps it is precisely this — the exchange of a sectorial or individual identity for a fully national one — that unsettles some Haredi representatives.
--- End of post before linking articles
This kind of writing will accomplish SO much more than anything we see on this blog. RNS should constantly be referencing Rabbi Pfeffer and soyrting him - he even personally joined the army despite being in his late 40s or early 50s, a highly respected Rav and accomplished Dayan and a member and leader of many boards of important organizations.
RNS has a role to play and I'm not suggesting he change who he is or his strident advocacy. But thoughtful dignity and voice (and example) of leadership Rabbi Pfeffer represents should be a guiding light to RNS.
Rav Slifkin summarized the disgrace of the proposed law very well:
“Its purpose is to bring charedim into the government, not into the army.”
I appreciate your comment. Here's what concerns me: The comparisons that come to mind in response are feminism and the right against racism. Feminists confronted a world in which men were taking advantage of women. There were many kinds of feminists, in degree, etc. but there was a point when being nice was not going to work because it wasn't worth it for men to make allowance. At the same time, most women navigated that responsibly and many others did not. Those who did not did lasting damage to society who have had to live with the fallout. Same with racism. MLK was mensch who fought hard. Others fought and left a legacy that turned into this systemic racism, DEI, etc that has only provoked a horrific culture war. The only thing that works is a strong, insistent voice that reflects a universal moral clarity that can overcomes stubborn social wrongs in a manner that provides a positive way forward. Bashing people and getting personal and sowing division and hatred is not only morally wrong, it ALWAYS makes things worse in the end.
Yes, and I don't think RNS has been uncivil or anything close to the culture war stoking behaviors that the American left has exhibited in varying and increasing ways since the 1960s. Calling a spade a spade and standing up in a civil, adult way for what you believe is right, is distinctly different from trying to see spades everywhere and being some degree of any-means-necessary about fighting them because of reheated Marxist-revolutionary logic wafting through the ideological blob of the American left. These are two very different things. And at some point it becomes bad faith not to see that.
YK- meaning, may your strength increase. Unfortunately, your opinion will be discounted by some secondary to your admission of ‘not being religious’. Sad.
You miss 100% of the shots you don't take, lol
I have been clashing with him about this for a while and while he is not nearly as bad as the American left, etc., he too often makes the same mistake of crossing the line from positive force to negative force. As I've said before, 90% or even more of each post is on target but at some point he drives across the line with a "low blow" that is both unbecoming and destructive and that switches me from agreement to borderline disgust. There are many people out there fighting this fight and almost all in the voices I hear from the dati leumi community have some degree of fury but don't cross the line
Alright, if you see it that way you see it that way. I don’t. Not much else to say.
This was meant in response to gnashy's second comment to me