Many Canadian voters don't seem to remember Pierre Elliot Trudeau, the prime minister of Canada from 1968-1983 (minus 9 months somewhere there in the late 1970's). For those who don't it's worth recalling who the man was.
PET, as he was unaffectionately known, was a very intelligent man. Unfortunately he also had a good dose of narcissism and the belief that he was not only very smart but was the smartest man in the country. He balanced this with a sense of comptent for all those who were less intelligent than him; his cabinet ministers, his caucus, and the great unwashed masses of voters who were, unfortunately in his eyes, necessary to ensure he remained prime minister because, after all, no one was as well qualified as him for the job.
Those of us who actually remember his rule and aren't dependent on the hagiographizing the CBC did after he left power and turned him into some kind of saint remember that his rule started with "Trudeaumania" and ended with corruption, binge government spending and a sinking of Canada's reputation in the world.
His was the government that introduced mandatory bilingualism into the civil service, thus ensuring French Quebecois dominance of that area. He is remembered for effectively fighting the separatist forces in the 1980 Quebec referendum but, as author George Jonas as noted in The National Post on more than one occasion, that was because he was trying to deliver the whole country to the French, not just one province.
He was also morally corrupt, seeing virtue in mass murderers and autocratic thugs like Mao Zedong and Fidel Castro which heaping disrespect on American presidents and the Queen of Canada, Elizabeth II.
And now, decades later, we in Canada are faced with the possibility of another Trudeau ascending "the throne", as it were. PET's son Justin, the current leader of the Liberal party, is currently sitting pretty in the polls. There is no federal election scheduled until next year but if the current numbers hold there is a good possibility of him becoming the next prime minister.
What do we know about Justin?
Well, unlike his father who had an actual long-term career before entering politics Justin really hasn't accomplished anything. He taught here and there for short periods of time and.... well that's about it. No prior history of leadership positions. No real deep experience with national policy making.
Then there's his beliefs, something he's very happy to share. He has let us know, for example, that he admires the Chinese government because they can inflict their policy on the population without having to waste time with such annoyances as consulting that population. He sees tremendous potential for this model when it comes to implementing environmental policies, for example. Democracy, it would seem, is as much an annoyance for him as it was for his father. It's silly to rely on the general voting public because they might not make the right decision, ie. the one he wants to make.
He's also very selective on who he thinks a real Canadian is. He looks to Quebec and its famously permissive and moral simplistic culture and has opined, again publicly, that if the rest of the country develops a more conservative bent then Quebec would be justified in seceding from Canada so these liberal values of theirs aren't affected. In other words, he's a loyal Canadian only as long as Canada reflects his values.
There was his publicity stunt in which he fired all Liberal senators from his party in order to show his seriousness on Senate reform. Now, for my American reader(s), it is important to understand that the Canadian Senate is not equivalent to the American one. It is a house of patronage, a place media celebrities and failed politicians go to retire and suck off the public teat until their turn 75. It rarely does anything productive and if it disappeared into a giant sinkhole its absence would take weeks to be noticed.
On the surface, then, Trudeau's stunt was a good one. We don't like senators, so his party no longer has them. Unfortunately he made this decision without telling any Liberal senators, some of them good party members since his father was prime minister. Few of them agreed and they still call themselves Liberals and feel they're part of the party. A great stunt that changed nothing.
Finally there's his most recent announcement. Again, for my American reader(s) it's worth noting that Canada has not had any laws regulating abortion since the late 1980's when the Supreme Court of Canada struck down the existing ones. Any attempt to bring up the discussion of some kind of regulation or at least oversight brings out the usual crew of harpies who scream "You hate women! You're all fascist arseholes" and the like. In this regard I'm jealouse of the USA. The discussion there may be heated but at least there's a discussion. In Canada no one wants to bring up the subject because they don't want to deal with the histrionics.
And Trudeau is fine with that. So fine, in fact, that he announced that anyone who is pro-life is persona non-grata within the Liberal party. Yes, he clarified that he doesn't expect people to change their personal beliefs. Pro-lifers can still join the party but once they are members they must publicly support abortion just like he, a good Roman Catholic, does.
All this before the man has achieved an ounce of power. Can you imagine the demagogery he'll unleash once he actually does?
Navonim - The Ramblings of Garnel Ironheart
BUY THIS BOOK! Now available on Amazon! IT WILL MAKE YOUR LIFE COMPLETE!
Tuesday, 20 May 2014
Sunday, 18 May 2014
Did He Say It Or Not
As first reported on Failed Messiah and other blogs (which have since removed the posts for reasons unknown), a Rav at the heiliger Mir Yeshivah recently gave a class in which he claimed Rav Aharon Leib Shteinman, shlit"a, called for an armed revolt against the Israeli government for its daring to consider drafting Chareidi boys into the army.
The reaction to the speech was swift and fierce. How could a "Gadol" say such a thing? How could a maggid shiur repeat it with obvious approval?
And then it turned out not to be true. Rav Shteinman never said such a thing, at least not to this Rav. He had made pretty much the entire thing up and had to issue an apology. Sorry, it's all a mistake, I shouldn't have done this, let's move on and why are you all still paying attention to me? I said I was sorry.
There are a few reasons why the issue cannot simply be left alone. Let's point them out:
1) Even if this Rav was simply sharing his feelings, why did he feel he needed to state them in the name of Rav Shteinman? Did he feel that doing that would give a needed legitimacy to his statements? Perhaps make them more acceptable to his students?
2) Did it occur to him that there is already a credibility issue when it comes to statements from "the Gedolim"? As Rav Eliashiv, zt"l, noted years ago, "If you didn't hear it from my mouth, don't assume I said it." Have we reached the point that, unless they're caught on video, any statement, any official teshuvah, can be safely ignored since we didn't hear it directly from "the Gadol" in question?
3) Did Rav Shteinman, in fact, say something to this effect? Well it's not impossible. Since the current government took power we have heard all sorts of name calling out of the Chareidi community. Words which should be used with great caution, like "Nazi" and "Cossack", are tossed around like candies at a bar mitzvah. Is it so hard to think that Rav Shteinman might have muttered something like "Well they're just like Amalek and I wish the same thing would happen to them!"? And if he did then is this Rav actually doing us a service by letting us know?
It's almost getting to repetitive to write about this. Yes, we all know the Chareidi community is upset about the draft. We also all know that it's for all the wrong reasons, such as a fanatical aversion to any hakaras hatov to the State of Israel which has bankrolled their existence for 66 years and a distaste for any serious interactions with their fellow Jews in which they are not in control. It is still upsetting to consider that men who claim to be serious learners, who spend days trying to understand all the implications of a single word in the Gemara, can carelessly throw out such insults and then be genuinely flummoxed when those insults invite an angry response.
At least the secular community has shown tremendous patience in response to the extended temper tantrum they've been witnessing. Let us hope and pray that this patience doesn't run out soon.
The reaction to the speech was swift and fierce. How could a "Gadol" say such a thing? How could a maggid shiur repeat it with obvious approval?
And then it turned out not to be true. Rav Shteinman never said such a thing, at least not to this Rav. He had made pretty much the entire thing up and had to issue an apology. Sorry, it's all a mistake, I shouldn't have done this, let's move on and why are you all still paying attention to me? I said I was sorry.
There are a few reasons why the issue cannot simply be left alone. Let's point them out:
1) Even if this Rav was simply sharing his feelings, why did he feel he needed to state them in the name of Rav Shteinman? Did he feel that doing that would give a needed legitimacy to his statements? Perhaps make them more acceptable to his students?
2) Did it occur to him that there is already a credibility issue when it comes to statements from "the Gedolim"? As Rav Eliashiv, zt"l, noted years ago, "If you didn't hear it from my mouth, don't assume I said it." Have we reached the point that, unless they're caught on video, any statement, any official teshuvah, can be safely ignored since we didn't hear it directly from "the Gadol" in question?
3) Did Rav Shteinman, in fact, say something to this effect? Well it's not impossible. Since the current government took power we have heard all sorts of name calling out of the Chareidi community. Words which should be used with great caution, like "Nazi" and "Cossack", are tossed around like candies at a bar mitzvah. Is it so hard to think that Rav Shteinman might have muttered something like "Well they're just like Amalek and I wish the same thing would happen to them!"? And if he did then is this Rav actually doing us a service by letting us know?
It's almost getting to repetitive to write about this. Yes, we all know the Chareidi community is upset about the draft. We also all know that it's for all the wrong reasons, such as a fanatical aversion to any hakaras hatov to the State of Israel which has bankrolled their existence for 66 years and a distaste for any serious interactions with their fellow Jews in which they are not in control. It is still upsetting to consider that men who claim to be serious learners, who spend days trying to understand all the implications of a single word in the Gemara, can carelessly throw out such insults and then be genuinely flummoxed when those insults invite an angry response.
At least the secular community has shown tremendous patience in response to the extended temper tantrum they've been witnessing. Let us hope and pray that this patience doesn't run out soon.
Monday, 5 May 2014
Depserately Needed OutReach
That Jewish society evolves over time should not come as a shock to anyone. Israeli society, as a part of the greater Jewish nation, is no different. Today on Yom Ha'atzmaut it would be a good idea to reflect on how Israeli society has changed, from the ealy days of the first Aliyos to today.
The changes currently occuring are worth paying attention to and, for the Religious Zionist movement, responding to with a new initiative. Secular Zionism, written off in the surge of post-Zionism after the first Oslo Discord was signed, has started to stage a comeback due to the efforts of its two current champions, Yair Lapid and Tzipi Livni. Yair Lapid's Yesh Atid, its religious members not withstanding, is about creating a secular israeli movement with cultural trappings of Judaism as long as they don't interfere with secular liberal values. Much like the original Labour Zionists, Lapid wants to remold Israeli society in a secular Western one with cultural hints of its religious origins. Tzipi Livni is even more direct as her ongoing opposition to Bibi Netanyahu's efforts to ensure Israel is recognized as a Jewish state indicate. Having failed to sell out Israel to its enemies through negotiation she is open about her desire for the state to commit cultural suicide and give up its principle Jewish nature.
Against this we have the Chareidi community which, more than ever, wishes to monopolize Judaism to itself, leaving everyone else, regardless of level of identification or observance, on the outside. For their leadership Israel is a piggybank to be raided whenever desired and then spit on after the withdrawal is made. Yes there is a large and powerful Chareidi outreach industry but it is not interested in greater Jewisih nationhood, only in bringing people into whatever branch of the Chareidi community the particular organization represents while presenting that branch as the totality of Judaism.
It is therfore imperative that Religious Zionism, still feeling some sense of confidence with the presence and success of Bayit Yehudi, to get into the outreach game.
Religious Zionist outreach should not follow the Chareidi model. It is not in anyone's interest to hire people to preach to the unattached about the benefits of wearing a kippah serugah and singing loudly on Yom Ha'atzmaut. Rahter, this outreach should follow the model created by the early Zionists if it wishes to make a real difference.
For those who don't remember, Secular Zionism's early modus operandi was to speak of the "New Jew". Now, this Jew had very little to do with Judaism and, in fact, defined himself by opposing many Jewish values. Zionists spoke of the downtrodden, defeatist golus Jews and how the New Jew, unlike his predecessor, would stand upright, be equal with members of other nations and embrace world culture in its fullest. He would embrace work, culture and enlightenment and these New Jews would show the world that our nation, far from being a different, isolated culture, represented the best of what the family of nations had to offer.
The advantage of this model was that it was global. It appealed to the non-religious European socialist Jew, the one who already had a foot out the door due to assimilation and the allure of non-Jewish philosophies. It also appealed to the religous Jew, sick of his ghetto existence, overbearing rabbinic leaders and a life of poverty and wordly ignorance. The promise of a new Jewish society, even if there was nothing really Jewish about it except the ethnic background of its members, held great appeal.
The main failing of Secular Zionism was that it was geared towards nation building. One the country was built and running it lost a lot of its appeal. It's one thing to appeal to a person to become a pioneer and drain the swamp. The pioneer who becomes a career person and lives in the apartment building where the swamp once stood isn't always as full of idealism.
The other failing is that its underlying motto, "Let's show all the peoples of the world that we can do whatever they do!" isn't really that inspiring. Okay, you've built a secular socialist democracy. So what? It's been done.
Here is where Religious Zionism must come in. Like the secular counterpart, Religious Zionism calls out for the creating of a "New Jew". This model, however, is vastly different from the secular one. First we must examine what the Old Jew is. One type of Old Jew is one that practices a Judaism bereft of any national element. He has a life of common ritual, perhaps even a specific outfit he wears every day like a uniform, but outside of the personal element there is no real application of his Judaism. Because he doesn't understand the priorities of a nation he cannot fully comprehend certain issues. The same Jew who will only touch a jug of milk with four hechsherim doesn't feel repelled by cheating on his taxes. He can understand how tefillin are made, not so much how societies function on a macro level because it's simply not part of his Judaism. Despite this he sees other Jews, religious and non-religious, and wonders about his connection to them. He hears the Chareidi propaganda on how evil the State of Israel is but can't udnerstand it because it contradicts the reality of Israel he has seen with his own eyes.
The other type is one that sees being Jewish as an ethnic identity. Being Jewish means a special type of cuisine, certain holidays, perhaps an appearance from time to time in the local "temple" as a show of cultural awareness. He might not even been aware of the national concept of Judaism, seeing himself as a Canadian of Jewish background, a Jewish Canadian rather than a Canadian Jew. Yet when the annual JNF appeal envelope arrives in his mailbox or the newcaster on the radio starts a sentence with "In Israel today..." something stirs within him, a sense that there is a connection to other Jews he has nothing in common with even though he doesn't understand why that connection exists.
(Before anyone starts screaming, I'm not suggesting all Jews other than Religious Zionists fit into one of these two categories. I'm identifying two specific groups within the Jewish community that I believe are relevant to my point)
Religious Zionist outreach needs to develop a system that reaches out to these two groups. For the Chareidi the message must be a simple one of completeness. A Chareidi, by definition, wants to be the best Jew he can be, to worship God in as full a fashion as possible. Almost two thousand yeaers of exile has caused us, including "the Gedolim", to become convinced that Judaism minus the national component, is a complete package but even a cursory perusal of the classic sources like, oh say, the Tanach and Talmud shows that this is not the case. Adding the national component to his observance would enhance the Chareidi Jewish practice by reintroducing those long-dormant elements. Now the Chareidi learns Nezikin and about whose ox gores whose before falling into a pit someone else left in the public thoroughfare. Imagine approaching these teachings from a perspective of modern concepts in damage. Imagine that being the mandatory way of learning those gemaras because they are now relevant in daily societal life.
In addition there is a concept of greater Jewish nationhood that Religious Zionism offers. As opposed to the parochial "Us first and only" ghetto model of Judaism espoused by many Chareidi leaders Religious Zionism offers the Chareidi a chance to be part of a growing, dynamic nation. Imagine Chareidim in the workplace serving as positive models of strict Torah observance in both personal and public arenae, just like their Religious Zionist counterparts. Imagine Chareidi soldiers infused with a sense that they are not simply doing their civic duty but performing the mitzvah of protecting other Jewish lives every moment they're awake.
For the non-religious Old Jew Religious Zionism offers the ultimate cultural identity. For many non-religious Jews our nation is irrelevant because it doesn't seem to offer what modern society does. Religious Zionism, with its mission to create and run a modern state al pi halacha as much as possible, provides an alternative model. You can be a modern person, you can be a member of a society, all while expressing Jewish values and behaviours. If one is looking for a complete cultural identity along with a sense of purpose, Judaism can offer this and, along the way, these folks can learn that through Torah observances one leads a more complete life, feels a greater sense of identity with the Jewish nation and helps move history forward to the completion of the Final Redemption.
In other words, I'm not suggest Religious Zionist equivalents of Chabad Houses or Aish HaTorah seminars. Yes there are elements of those models that need to be imitated if this outreach initiative is going to succeed but as opposed to how the Chareidi model works, waiting for the non-religious guy to come to them, Religios Zionism needs to go to the people, in both the Chareidi and non-religious communities and show, through example, through vigorous challenge and debate, the value of the complete national approach to Judaism and how it is the future model of our nation.
The changes currently occuring are worth paying attention to and, for the Religious Zionist movement, responding to with a new initiative. Secular Zionism, written off in the surge of post-Zionism after the first Oslo Discord was signed, has started to stage a comeback due to the efforts of its two current champions, Yair Lapid and Tzipi Livni. Yair Lapid's Yesh Atid, its religious members not withstanding, is about creating a secular israeli movement with cultural trappings of Judaism as long as they don't interfere with secular liberal values. Much like the original Labour Zionists, Lapid wants to remold Israeli society in a secular Western one with cultural hints of its religious origins. Tzipi Livni is even more direct as her ongoing opposition to Bibi Netanyahu's efforts to ensure Israel is recognized as a Jewish state indicate. Having failed to sell out Israel to its enemies through negotiation she is open about her desire for the state to commit cultural suicide and give up its principle Jewish nature.
Against this we have the Chareidi community which, more than ever, wishes to monopolize Judaism to itself, leaving everyone else, regardless of level of identification or observance, on the outside. For their leadership Israel is a piggybank to be raided whenever desired and then spit on after the withdrawal is made. Yes there is a large and powerful Chareidi outreach industry but it is not interested in greater Jewisih nationhood, only in bringing people into whatever branch of the Chareidi community the particular organization represents while presenting that branch as the totality of Judaism.
It is therfore imperative that Religious Zionism, still feeling some sense of confidence with the presence and success of Bayit Yehudi, to get into the outreach game.
Religious Zionist outreach should not follow the Chareidi model. It is not in anyone's interest to hire people to preach to the unattached about the benefits of wearing a kippah serugah and singing loudly on Yom Ha'atzmaut. Rahter, this outreach should follow the model created by the early Zionists if it wishes to make a real difference.
For those who don't remember, Secular Zionism's early modus operandi was to speak of the "New Jew". Now, this Jew had very little to do with Judaism and, in fact, defined himself by opposing many Jewish values. Zionists spoke of the downtrodden, defeatist golus Jews and how the New Jew, unlike his predecessor, would stand upright, be equal with members of other nations and embrace world culture in its fullest. He would embrace work, culture and enlightenment and these New Jews would show the world that our nation, far from being a different, isolated culture, represented the best of what the family of nations had to offer.
The advantage of this model was that it was global. It appealed to the non-religious European socialist Jew, the one who already had a foot out the door due to assimilation and the allure of non-Jewish philosophies. It also appealed to the religous Jew, sick of his ghetto existence, overbearing rabbinic leaders and a life of poverty and wordly ignorance. The promise of a new Jewish society, even if there was nothing really Jewish about it except the ethnic background of its members, held great appeal.
The main failing of Secular Zionism was that it was geared towards nation building. One the country was built and running it lost a lot of its appeal. It's one thing to appeal to a person to become a pioneer and drain the swamp. The pioneer who becomes a career person and lives in the apartment building where the swamp once stood isn't always as full of idealism.
The other failing is that its underlying motto, "Let's show all the peoples of the world that we can do whatever they do!" isn't really that inspiring. Okay, you've built a secular socialist democracy. So what? It's been done.
Here is where Religious Zionism must come in. Like the secular counterpart, Religious Zionism calls out for the creating of a "New Jew". This model, however, is vastly different from the secular one. First we must examine what the Old Jew is. One type of Old Jew is one that practices a Judaism bereft of any national element. He has a life of common ritual, perhaps even a specific outfit he wears every day like a uniform, but outside of the personal element there is no real application of his Judaism. Because he doesn't understand the priorities of a nation he cannot fully comprehend certain issues. The same Jew who will only touch a jug of milk with four hechsherim doesn't feel repelled by cheating on his taxes. He can understand how tefillin are made, not so much how societies function on a macro level because it's simply not part of his Judaism. Despite this he sees other Jews, religious and non-religious, and wonders about his connection to them. He hears the Chareidi propaganda on how evil the State of Israel is but can't udnerstand it because it contradicts the reality of Israel he has seen with his own eyes.
The other type is one that sees being Jewish as an ethnic identity. Being Jewish means a special type of cuisine, certain holidays, perhaps an appearance from time to time in the local "temple" as a show of cultural awareness. He might not even been aware of the national concept of Judaism, seeing himself as a Canadian of Jewish background, a Jewish Canadian rather than a Canadian Jew. Yet when the annual JNF appeal envelope arrives in his mailbox or the newcaster on the radio starts a sentence with "In Israel today..." something stirs within him, a sense that there is a connection to other Jews he has nothing in common with even though he doesn't understand why that connection exists.
(Before anyone starts screaming, I'm not suggesting all Jews other than Religious Zionists fit into one of these two categories. I'm identifying two specific groups within the Jewish community that I believe are relevant to my point)
Religious Zionist outreach needs to develop a system that reaches out to these two groups. For the Chareidi the message must be a simple one of completeness. A Chareidi, by definition, wants to be the best Jew he can be, to worship God in as full a fashion as possible. Almost two thousand yeaers of exile has caused us, including "the Gedolim", to become convinced that Judaism minus the national component, is a complete package but even a cursory perusal of the classic sources like, oh say, the Tanach and Talmud shows that this is not the case. Adding the national component to his observance would enhance the Chareidi Jewish practice by reintroducing those long-dormant elements. Now the Chareidi learns Nezikin and about whose ox gores whose before falling into a pit someone else left in the public thoroughfare. Imagine approaching these teachings from a perspective of modern concepts in damage. Imagine that being the mandatory way of learning those gemaras because they are now relevant in daily societal life.
In addition there is a concept of greater Jewish nationhood that Religious Zionism offers. As opposed to the parochial "Us first and only" ghetto model of Judaism espoused by many Chareidi leaders Religious Zionism offers the Chareidi a chance to be part of a growing, dynamic nation. Imagine Chareidim in the workplace serving as positive models of strict Torah observance in both personal and public arenae, just like their Religious Zionist counterparts. Imagine Chareidi soldiers infused with a sense that they are not simply doing their civic duty but performing the mitzvah of protecting other Jewish lives every moment they're awake.
For the non-religious Old Jew Religious Zionism offers the ultimate cultural identity. For many non-religious Jews our nation is irrelevant because it doesn't seem to offer what modern society does. Religious Zionism, with its mission to create and run a modern state al pi halacha as much as possible, provides an alternative model. You can be a modern person, you can be a member of a society, all while expressing Jewish values and behaviours. If one is looking for a complete cultural identity along with a sense of purpose, Judaism can offer this and, along the way, these folks can learn that through Torah observances one leads a more complete life, feels a greater sense of identity with the Jewish nation and helps move history forward to the completion of the Final Redemption.
In other words, I'm not suggest Religious Zionist equivalents of Chabad Houses or Aish HaTorah seminars. Yes there are elements of those models that need to be imitated if this outreach initiative is going to succeed but as opposed to how the Chareidi model works, waiting for the non-religious guy to come to them, Religios Zionism needs to go to the people, in both the Chareidi and non-religious communities and show, through example, through vigorous challenge and debate, the value of the complete national approach to Judaism and how it is the future model of our nation.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)