Liberalism’s Success Is Its Enemy or in Pogo's Words, "We Have Met the Enemy and He is Us

Modern Liberalism’s success is also its enemy. Liberalism is a philosophy that is by definition a minority worldview. Being “left” or “liberal” or what some psychologists call “openness” can be a wonderful thing. You are open to experiences and people, can care about them and help them.

This is probably part of Rabbi Asher Weiss’s surprisingly popularity in the modern orthodox community. He is “liberal” or “open” Chardei in stark relief to many other who are not.

However, when the entire establishment is (supposedly) liberal then you are left with a problem. How can you be more open than open? If a door is open ,it is open. You can't be more open that the establishment if you are the establishment? 

This has created the strange world of today. A world where liberalism is the governing philosophy, making it so very difficult for so-called liberals to be more open than that.

Liberals are stuck having to see their "opponents" in as worst a light as possible, as they, the liberals must clearly be reacting against something vile.  Liberals have to avoid discussion and finding common ground with their "opponents," as then they would not be their, "opponents," who the liberals are struggling heroically against.  

Liberals also find themselves on a desperate quest  for new ways to be more "open"as their "opponents," rapidly embrace all those causes that liberals once used to differentiate  themselves. This has shunted the liberals towards some causes that are very strange indeed, not to mention, quite illiberal. 

as their opponents must be worse than them, as they are very open. 

It May Not Be True, But It's Right, Dammit

The crisis of truth is what is tearing america apart. It probably has its origins in the post war period and the inability to come to terms with sympathy for the Soviet Union. Lionel Trilling tried to deal with in his so-called "failed" novel, "The Middle of the Journey," but he was ignored.

Too many highly intelligent people devote their careers to defending ideas (and creating intelligently underpinnings for them) that they themselves would never have thought made sense if they were not already current.
 If you want to feel intelligent and moral you go along with whatever the papers and networks are saying are right and true, not what actually is. "Morality," is prisoner of the great party machines and used as a cudgel. 

In all this, the highly intelligent and educated have created a world where they and their intelligent forebears have never erred. All bad seeped in from the other side. They instead create enormous edifices of words and charts, "proving" their infallibility.

Until those of great minds and abilities learn to admit they made mistakes and not every idea they push is correct, the United states will continue to be hover over this abyss. 

Shul; Where Everyone Know Your Name?

Why can’t shuls cater to the majority? Since when is judaism a religion for the very inspired? Even before corona, many of the " "young married generation" (even daveners) don't seem so comfortable in most shuls.

The MO community doesn't have the "black hat" social expectation that you need come to davening, so it might be "worst." Why people don't come to shul, or don’t want to, or don't daven? Is shul a club for older people? Do people not know what the words mean? Does davening take too long for many, with stilted singing? Are shuls welcoming? Is there a seat where they can sit? If you don't pay $1000+ membership do you even have a seat or siddur or are you just stared at? Does the rabbi say hello to them? Are there social activities connected with the shul that are relevant for people who measure their spare time every week in the

Shuls can learn from Cheers, where everybody knows your name. Not becoming a bar, but I rather creating more and more points of entry so more and more people can be associated with the shul and the community.A shul needs multiple points of entry for each profile of congregant. Whether they are the 30ish looking for a serious minyan, or coming for social opportunity’s, each activity of a shul should try and have a point of entry for them. As well, shuls have to build trust.Building trust is the sort of thing a shul can only do once. Once lost, you can’t get it back.

The same shiur can appeal to nobody or to many other people. You can call it Halachos of Tefillah, and get a serious or committed crowd. You won’t even get the walk-in, as they are afraid they are in the middle of a series. However, if each shiur has its own engaging stand-alone title as well,. (Speaking with God, is He really listening? ) you have opened the door to someone looking for a stand-alone shiur, as well as to appeal to someone with a weaker background. If this shiur also offers (very light) refreshments and time for a Q and A (instead of davening or the rabbi running out) than this shiur offers two more points of entry, namely social time and opportunity to speak with the rabbi.

Membership.

Why be a member? Some shuls think the answer is that if you are not a member, we just will give you less goodies, aliyot and whatnot. However, this seems backwards. Being a member should be a positive thing, not a negative one. However, often people don’t join as being a member just seems to be a way to end up paying more.

If membership is actually worth it, people might join. When you join you (hopefully) get a welcome packet. Why not send a non-member welcome packet to newcomers. Don’t worry, this won’t give away the goodies free. It would just have basic communal information and open the lines of communication.

Membership must then offer pluses that are realistic and useful. For instance, highly reduced high holidays seats is a draw for many younger people. Also reduced prices at all tickets events. This doesn’t really have to be a lot. You can offer 10-20% off, depending on the event, and it seems to add up, but in the long room you don’t lose much if they wil then lay out for membership instead. You might lose $50-$100 and gain $500-$1000, not a bad exchange

What about the Rabbi? Rabbis need to have as many regular in person “occasions,” as possible with congregants every week. It is probably more important to have fewer that happen all the time, than to have more that happen only sometimes. Many rabbis overstretch themselves and end up constantly cancelling shiurim etc. angering congregants even more than not having those shiurim would. Research show that congregations look for rabbis to be available most of all. Shabbat and holidays are good times for rabbis to plan to stay in shul for extra time, coming an hour early and leaving an hour early, instead of trying to slip out and in. It is hard for a rabbi to go to kiddush then give a shiur after davening and Shabbos, and then stay for to answers questions, but often that is the best time.

Women’s Concerns

Regarding women’s clerical representation. Some research indicates that many people are happy with intelligent congregation facing active Rebbitzins. While a vocal minority, talks of having female clerics of one type or the others. Most congregations have a pressing need to enable and empower the Rebbitzins, through training as well as fiscal incentives to allow for this. For shuls with Rebbitzins who are not able to be present, some shuls have had success with trial programs of female scholars in residence and either eventually hiring a female scholar in residence or the creation of a permanent program. It is also good to note that an active Rebbitzin can also be the channel to the rabbis for women’s questions, especially niddah questions.

Shul as An Open Place

Making the shul an open place. A common concern is how “left” or “right” a shul is. Many successful shuls adopt the counterintuitive program of having multiple minyanim, each leaning a different way. For instance, a more “left” shul will also have a “Beit Midrash” minyan where the davening is more “Yeshivish,” and a less “Zionistic” versions of the Tefilah for the medina will be said. A more “right” wing shul will have a “late minyan,” where the davening is more “social” the Kiddush is mixed, and the “Tefilah for the medina will be said. While “common sense” dictates this doesn’t work, there are many successful shuls where it does.

Teens and youth.

Many shuls have lackluster teen programing. A frequent claim is that the youth are not interested or that “our community doesn’t have much youth” or that the youth are too serious for teen /ncsy type events. However, many shuls bring in youth of all sorts, once they start. Teen minyanim, teen class with rabbi/ Rebbitzins, coffee with the rabbi/ Rebbitzins in a hip shop, sushi making classes, late night oneg with rabbi, Friday night onegs.

To be continued when I find my notes ...

The Fox and Rabbi Soloveitchik

 Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik was a fox and not a hedgehog according to his son-in-law Rabbi Aharon Lichtenstein. Fox-like in his varied approach to challenges, unlike a hedgehog with only has one solution to everything.  While Rabbi Lichtenstein was also a fox, most of their student are hedgehogs.

Rabbi Lichtenstein was referring to Isaiah Berlin’s application of, “"a fox knows many things, but a hedgehog one important thing," (attributed to the Greek poet Archilochus). The idea being that there are two types of thinkers, hedgehogs who see the world through one lens, with the classic example being Hegel (or Marx) and foxes who respond differently to every situation with the most famous examples being William Shakespeare or the French essayist, Michel de Montaigne.

The Rav was not predicable because he was not a hedgehog. He was not just a liberal, or  a frumy, 100% Modern Orthodox!, yeshivsh, etc. He contained multitudes.  Rav Lichtenstein was perhaps more of a hedgehog on some things (politics comes to mind) than his father-in-law, but he was still clearly his own man, in a way unique to gadola yisrael.

It seems obvious that many of their students and their students students are quite predicable. We know what they will say on the issue before they do. It isn’t that there is something lacking in them. Rather they are hedgehogs, seeing the world through the prism of overarching ideas. Often through the overarching ideas of the fox-like thinkers who taught them. Somewhat ironic, but also somewhat sweet. And not a surprise. 

A Region by Any Other Name..

 “The police are holy,” said the minister/official (?) during a press conference I had the misfortunate of watching while waiting in line in a small shop. They then switched to a piece about very religious people not following science. 

I was left confused. Calling the police holy for enforcing your public health efforts at containing a virus isn’t also religious? Religious language and mores are constantly being used in this strange time. Only certain people are allowed to speak. 

Even distinguished scientist and doctors are ignored if they don’t agree with the One True Prophet. 

People are put in isolation even without displaying symptoms like those who are religiously impure. Those who handle them are also, just like those who make the impure man pure (like the biblical red heifer). 

Those who disagree with what is going on are called evil.

What is true changes just as the word of God can. Even thought six months ago it was a fact that masks didn’t do anything, now they do, like the change of mind of a pope. Anyone who points this out is called stupid. Masks are worn, like a religious symbol, showing obedience or belief, just like a kippah or a cross.Just the way your sins are blamed for what happens to others, we are blamed for a virus going viral and killing.

Many had pointed out the lack of meaning in the West and finally it seems like many have finally found some meaning in this ultimately fruitless quest. 

Torah U’madda and Baruch Spinoza

In an odd way, worldly religious people are the true heirs of Enlightenment thinkers.

Strangely, worldly religious people are the true heirs of Baruch Spinoza. Not because our faith is comprised in some way by his rationalism, but because his place between the worlds of Judaism and Christianity gave him a unique perspective, just like our place between a world of faith and a world of no God allows us to understand the worldview of both the uniquely secular and the completely religious.

This bitter pill is one that neither side would swallow. The secular, stuck in their "rationalism" of their worldview, cannot realize that theirs is also unipolar world. A world with that also has beliefs, “gods,” dogma, sins, and sinners.” No different than the “purely” religious can allow that there are other ways of seeing reality, ways that may have validity, or at least some validity to them.

Only the worldly religious, who doff one hat and then the other, who try to confirm in each environment, can understand this.

Running to the Bakery, Charisma, Suicide, and self- actualization

Why does everyone run the bakery right after pesach. Can’t you wait?

dr hayim solovetchik claimed once that pleasure became allowed to orthodox jews in the 70's (the so called Me decade). I feel as people think they are supposed to always feel happy and if they don’t or even worse than that, don’t feel happy when they hit a major milestone, they kill themselves.

This pursuit of pleasure to find meaning has no end. Glatt kosher sushi is the sort of thing that should make us happy, but it doesn’t. So we than look for glatt kosher pot. But even that doesn’t work. And it gets worse and worse. We look for charismatic teachers and leaders, much in the same vein. We need to feel happy, even in shul and in class. As we can't always be happy, we then get depressed as we think there is something wrong with us for being what is actually normal.

The goal of life is not happiness. It is meaning. And the whole orthodox community (at least in the USA, here I am a neophyte) has bought the lie, along with the West, that the point of life is happiness. Its like the joke that you would think that based on the way the society carries on about it that"one night stands,"make the unemployment rate fall in by half.

Unfortunately 60 years of this philosophy has helped many fewer than it has damaged. Just all the people who have died alone (before this terrible outbreak) because they abandoned their spouse or were too busy finding self- actualization to “settle down” in that petite bourgeois phrase.  As long as your goal is to feel “right” inside, you will never succeed in meeting that goal. Telling even younger and younger people to feel “right” about themselves seem like a good way to help encourage suicide among the young, as we see in social media encouraged suicides or the what researchers call, suicide clusters.

Running for chometz is just another symptom of deep danger. Having said that, I would love a bagel RIGHT NOW.