Search Results for: farber

The media would frequently ask Ron Paul why he was running for president when victory was highly unlikely. Are you in it to become president or “just to spread your ideas”? The gist of his answer was that is a false dichotomy; he was aiming for both. Moshe Feiglin’s Zehut is trying to do the same.

You cannot aim for both using rhetorical compromise, however. Rand Paul and America’s “Libertarian Party” do this all the time, only managing to arouse distrust and loathing in both anarchists and authoritarians.

Question: Whose vocation is politics?

Max Weber answers:

Only he has the calling for politics who is sure that he will not crumble when the world from his point of view is too stupid or base for what he wants to offer. Only he who in the face of all this can say ‘In spite of all!’ has the calling for politics.

Whom does this quote describe? Who never crumbles? Ron Paul. And maybe Feiglin (a little).

When Rafi Farber decided to run, I wrote it sounds like “he’s asking to be electrified (metaphorically?)” – God forbid! Farber is astute, though. He says the same here himself:

The question can be raised, why even attempt anything with Zehut? The answer is for the same reason that I am running on its ticket. Because we have a religious obligation to try, and leave the rest up to God. I’m running for religious reasons, not for any practical reason. I will vote Zehut for religious reasons, not for practical ones. If God wants us to succeed, we will, but not if we give up or don’t try. … When a regime is really threatened, all the meaningless politician talk goes out the window and they start beating you.

Fine. But then no rhetorical compromise, otherwise you aren’t causing any Kiddush Hashem thereby, no matter what! (One may omit less central aspects of the message for the sake of instilling more central aspects, though, just as men do in all communications.) If you don’t clearly announce Whose sake it’s all for, what honor would He get by helping you succeed?!

Rabbi Yitzchak Brand once footnoted this in regards to Feiglin; I suspect his essay was subsequently deleted, as his support for Feiglin weakened with time – so, no link.

“Lost Causes Are the Only Causes Worth Fighting For“

So say it: We believe in Hashem! We are Jews! The land is ours! We oppose democracy! Knesset Members are all the same! And keep going…

And, as Feiglin has shown many times over, steadfast “Zehut” (identity) is also the pragmatic choice.

The problem is, most people cannot be so “suicidal” in so seductively practical-seeming an arena as democratic politics. Far better therefore, for most, to avoid full-time politics. That is why I wrote this post over here. My counsel isn’t “give up” or “don’t try”. I say go for a bully pulpit without a baton. Translation: private influence.

Then, unless you see a burning bush, stay far, far away from the palace!

1. Our About page is non-descriptive, I mean hardly descriptive, even undescriptive (and nondescript, too).
2. “This is not a news site“; we keep it unpredictable. We try to discuss the upcoming Parsha or Holiday.
3. The editor wishes you would all copy him and start your own, competing playgroup. Until then, please send us your articles (especially in English)!
4. Our site theme (skin) is free: Lifestyle, by themehit.com. For now, anyway.
5. Some of our content, is, pssst, controversial…
6. It’s not your VPN/ad blocker/internet filter/old computer; we do abjure ads (and refuse donations). Send us good Jewish readers instead.
7. Rafi Farber endorsed us. Yes! For real!
8. I try to schedule the day’s articles for Nine AM.
9. Who is our intended reader? Read this.
10. We don’t discuss the Beis Hamikdash nearly as deeply as I wish.

Rafi Farber of The Jewish Libertarian recommends this humble site of ours.

Really.

An excerpt to prove it:

I feel alone most of the time, notwithstanding my amazing wife and family. But here and there someone pops up who, surprisingly, also gets it, and gets me, mostly.

The webmaster at Hyehudi is one of those guys. See his post on Women at the Wall here. Not what you’d expect from a Haredi guy. I don’t know who he is and he wishes to remain anonymous, understandably so. He’s some sort of Haredi libertarian guy. I can’t make it out completely. There’s a lot I disagree with him about but the disagreements are all inconsequential and academic, since they are restricted entirely to the private sphere of our own thought and not public policy which affects the lives of others.

…

Look at his website and subscribe to his newsletter. It’s well worth it, if only to hear thoughts from someone like me who has stayed closer to mesorah and Torah Shebe’al Peh than I have.

I hope not to disappoint him.

Why are women praying with Tefillin, Tallis, and Kippah at the Western Wall a topic of discussion? It’s all hypothetical, to the best of my knowledge. If it ever occurs (unlikely!), we’ll figure it out then.

What do you mean?

Let’s go through it, shall we?

“Praying” – The official Reform position is atheistic (!). What they are doing sounds like wailing. Aaaaaaaaaaaaaah! This is because they still refer to it as the “Wailing Wall”, not the “Western Wall”. The word “west” is severely “racist”. “Wall” probably too, since it sounds like “Berlin Wall”, or separation or an exclusionary non-state project, or a Trump speech.

“At the Western Wall” – Feiglin, David Sidman, and others assert the zone has no holiness; it’s nothing but a “parking lot“. No, it does have the sanctity of a synagogue. But this is not true for areas not made so through prayer! So, is where they are a synagogue? Was the area accepted as such? Does it even have the sanctity of the Ezras Nashim (I mean that of the Mikdash Me’at!)?

“Tefillin” – Apparently they never even glanced through those charming Chabad handouts describing the correct positioning of Tefillin Shel Rosh. As far as I can tell, the WoWing wailing Wymyn (sic) of THE wall have never put on Tefillin, period, let alone at the Kosel, where they are far too distracted.

“Tallis”? Why? Does it even have Techeiles? Exactly.

And if their food isn’t kosher, why do we assume their Tallis and Tefillin are any better?

Wearing a Kippah? Why not? Women are supposed to wear a Kippah (and even more, in more public areas), see footnote #1 on p. 2 here.

So what’s left?

They entered a government-controlled area with a Sefer Torah!

Ooh, is it against “Hilchos Medinah”? The Law of Return excludes the word “kehilchata” from its definition of “Jew”, but surely the Sefer Torah must meet some halachic standard, perhaps as determined by the Chief State “Rabbinate”. (If their lawyers wish to use this argument, please have them contact me to negotiate my finder’s fee.)

The solution? This. You can tell it’s likely the solution from the fact it angers nearly everyone.

UPDATE: Rafi Farber loves this article!