NYT’s Pacific COVID Unselfawareness…

New York Times Decides Lockdowns are Actually Draconian and Economically Destructive when China Does Them

“Many were fed up with Mr. Xi … and his ‘Zero-Covid’ policy, which continues to disrupt everyday life, hurt livelihoods and isolate the country,” writes the Times in pacific unselfawareness.

Three years ago, Zero Covid was the aspiration of public health bureaucrats and politicians across the West. Charlatan techbros like Tomas Pueyo appeared on national television to demand nationwide house arrest; leaders like Angela Merkel surrounded themselves with virus-eradicationist modellers and imposed unprecedented months-long closures upon their countries. When protests inevitably broke out, they were violently suppressed; the protesters were slandered as conspiracy theorists and fascists.

The New York Times played a leading role in this long and excruciating charade. In April 2020, they reported that “an informal coalition of influential conservative leaders and groups, some with close connections to the [Trump] White House” was responsible for “quietly working to nurture protests and apply … pressure to overturn state and local orders intended to stop the spread of the coronavirus.” In March 2021, they ran an obnoxious opinion piece about What Happened When Germany’s Far-Right Party Railed Against Lockdowns, which called German protesters “an amorphous mix of conspiracy theorists, shady organizations and outraged citizens” and appeared to accuse the right-populist party Alternativ für Deutschland of opportunism for joining their ranks.

What a difference a few years have made.

China Protests Break Out as Covid Cases Surge and Lockdowns Persist is a lead headline in today’s New York Times: “Strict Covid restrictions are hurting the country’s economy and angering members of the public, who are taking to the streets,” we read in the article that follows. Western anti-lockdown protesters are fascists and conspiracy theorists; Chinese anti-lockdown protesters, on the other hand, are ordinary people who are just fighting the power:

“Lift the lockdown,” the protesters screamed in a city in China’s far west. On the other side of the country, in Shanghai, demonstrators held up sheets of blank white paper, turning them into an implicit but powerful sign of defiance. One protester, who was later detained by the police, was carrying only flowers.

Over the weekend, protests against China’s strict Covid restrictions ricocheted across the country in a rare case of nationwide civil unrest. There had been signs of dissent, but the new wave of anger may pose a bigger challenge for the government.

Some demonstrators went so far as to call for the Communist Party and its leader, Xi Jinping, to step down. Many were fed up with Mr. Xi, who in October secured a precedent-defying third term as the party’s general secretary, and his “zero-Covid” policy, which continues to disrupt everyday life, hurt livelihoods and isolate the country.

Western lockdowns were necessary to save lives. Chinese lockdowns are the repressive tactic of an undemocratic regime.

The Chinese government on Monday blamed “forces with ulterior motives” for linking a deadly fire in the western Xinjiang region to strict Covid measures, a key driver as the protests spread across the country.

In much the same way, the New York Times blamed shadowy political actors with ties to Trump for anti-lockdown protests in 2020.

Outside China, the rest of the world has adapted to the virus and is near normalcy. Take soccer’s premier event, the World Cup. Thousands of people from across the globe have assembled in Qatar and are cheering on their teams, shoulder-to-shoulder, without masks, in packed stadiums.

China’s approach won praise during the beginning of the pandemic, and there is no doubt it has saved lives. But now that approach looks increasingly outdated. Almost three years after the coronavirus emerged, the contrast between China and the rest of the world couldn’t be starker.

Emphasis mine, because it’s probably the most amazing line in the whole piece. Here we have America’s foremost propaganda outlet, trying desperately to accuse China of unjust dictatorial repression, for the crime of implementing in a more organised and coherent way the very same Zero Covid policies that Times journalists spent nearly two years supporting. What’s actually wrong with the harsh Chinese lockdowns? Well, say the Times, who can’t say anything else – they’ve become unfashionable.

Continue reading here…

From Eugyppius, here.

Meir Kahane: ‘Of Sheitels and Chandeliers’

Of Sheitels and Chandeliers

“Speak unto the congregation of the Children of Israel and say unto them: Be holy, for I, the L-rd your G-d, am holy.” (Leviticus 19:2).

It is not an easy thing to be holy, and there is not a man alive who has not stumbled as he has walked down the road of life, and fallen – even if but for a moment – into impurity. It is not an easy thing to be holy and in the Jew’s climb up the difficult sides of the mountain of sanctity there are always slips and falls. But it is holiness and sanctity that remain the ultimate goal and purpose of the Jew, for to be holy is to approach the Almighty who IS holiness, while to emulate Him is the reason for man’s being.

Holiness. To willingly deny oneself material pleasure; to sacrifice a desire; to give up a delicacy; to weave this into a philosophy of life with its value dominating those contradictory ones of materialism and transitory riches; to take one’s ego and self and “I” and bend it beneath the yoke of sacrifice and denial. To become richer by far with far less, to become stronger with the ability to do without. This is holiness, this is sanctity, this is the purpose of all the individual mitzvot.

And how, when we grow in an atmosphere of supposed Judaism, in which there is no conceptual Judaism, when we merely load ourselves with mitzvot as a donkey laden with sacks, when we strew our mitzvot helter skelter without plan, blueprint or program, we end up with structures that are technically Jewish, but that in reality are empty and barren of everything that is holy and meaningful. The mitzvah becomes a thing to be done because of habit and ritual, while its purpose and reason are lost in the mists of a background that never understood the concepts and values that are the heart of the individual Torah commandment.

Little wonder that the Ramban – Nachmanides – found it necessary, when commenting on the commandment “Be holy!” to warn against the meticulously observant Jew who could be a “naval b’rshut haTorah,” an abomination within the limits of the Torah, within the permission of the Torah!

It is almost inconceivable if we did not see it every moment of the day. To be a scrupulously observant Jew, one who carefully and technically follows every nuance and custom and yet who qualifies as a naval b’rshut haTorah, an abomination within the permission of the Torah …

I do not even discuss, at the moment, the painfully obvious reality of supposedly religious, Orthodox Jews, who are as capable of sheer hate as any Sabbath violator. All of us know, to our sorrow, the “religious” Jew who – not merely because he or she stumbles and errs every so often, but as a matter of total, continuous practice – mixes mincha, the afternoon service, with the most vicious lashon hara, character assassination. All of us know how many fraudulent business deals have been planned over a glatt kosher lunch. The fact that this enables the irreligious Jew, who is just as bad, to point an eager finger at “religious Jews” and brand Torah Judaism as a whole as hypocritical, is only the least of the results. For the irreligious Jew does not understand and prefers not to understand that if violating the Sabbath takes a Jew out of the category of “religious” or “Orthodox”, so too does his planned and deliberate and permanent pattern of lying, stealing and lashon hara. Such a person is no more a representative of Torah Judaism than the desecrator of kashruth.

AlI this, however, stems from a definite cause. It has its roots in a particular evil. The irreligious Torah Jew, that phenomenon noted as far back as the days of the prophets, has his source in a particular philosophy of life that is as un-Jewish as that of any gentile’s and that is the product of an utter lack of conceptual, ideological and philosophical study and thought. What emerges from the irreligious “religious” society is a culture that can best be described as Accomodation Orthodoxy, Comfortable Compromise, or the World of Sheitels and Chandeliers.

It is the world of the glorious ability to enjoy everything that the gentile does with a veneer of “yiddishkeit.” Vacation in this kind of a world becomes not a time when one is finally free to learn Torah without the oppressive interference of work, but a glorious opportunity to go on a trip to Puerto Rico, where one is promised the chance to gamble all night under the auspices of a glatt kosher tour. Indeed, the world of “modern orthodoxy” stamps everything right down to the night club with the obscene jokes and half-naked dancing girls – KOSHER, if the word “glatt” is prefixed to it.

It is the world of the meticulous observance of the law of covering the married woman’s head with a gorgeous sheitel from the salons of Paris and London, that turns the simple woman not into a paragon of holiness, but into a thing far more physically attractive than she ever could be with the natural qualities given her by Heaven.

It is a status symbol, an effort to become more desirabIe than less so, a thing that becomes an object of vanity rather than modesty, a total contradiction of the spirit of the Law.

It is the world of the chandelier and the desperate, neurotic and un-Jewish value system that places materialism and desire for wealth and status at the top of the priorities. The throwing of fortunes into fancy homes; the following up of additional fortunes into their renovations; the expensive clothes and vacations and all the things that mark the conspicuous consumption that Torah always condemned in the world of gentiles and secularism. Yet, here they are, in “religious” garb, in the form of the meticulously observant Jew whose table is graced with only glatt kosher and who delights in taking to task the Conservatives for their hypocrisy and compromise and twisting of Judaism. The sad truth is that the irreligious religious Jew is just as guilty of comfortable accomodation, and the world of sheitels and chandeliers is his world as well.

It is not very difficult to be an observant Jew in the America of 1978, if one defines “religious” as the practitioner of Jewish folklore and ritual. The almost universal five-day work week and the presence of the OU, OK and an increasing alphabet-soup kashrut business, combined with the college education that makes every Jewish mother beam and every graduate guaranteed shelter from poverty, make the modern Orthodox, whether in Flatbush or Boro Park garb, eminently comfortable.

But religion and religious conviction are eternally measured by the yardstick of deep faith and true commitment, and that yardstick is a concrete, not an abstract one. It is in the area of genuine sacrifice, where the Jew is called upon to truly give of himself and give up of himself, that the real religious Jew is tested – and so woefully found wanting.

The mitzvah of living in the Land of Israel and leaving the abomination and impurity of an Exile that our rabbis called a place of G-dlessness and idolatry; the obligation to honestly and sincerely look at our failure to adhere to the mitzvah that the Sifri calls equal to all the combined mitzvot; the need to lift ourselves up and leave the fleshpots (albeit glatt) of the comfortable and warmly soothing Exile, and make the sacrifice, the very real sacrifice, of a lowered living standard, and an apartment rather than a house, an apartment that may not have a chandelier – if it is difficult to live in Israel, what does that matter to a Jew who really knows that it is difficult just to be a REALLY RELIGIOUS JEW? The Jew who never misses mincha and dedicates himself to the difficult observance of the eating of hot chulent on the Sabbath in the comfort of the gentile Exile, is not a religious Jew so long as he willingly and deliberately fails to bend his neck beneath the yoke of Torah that demands the doing of the real sacrifice. It is not hard to pray the mincha service or to wear the luxurious sheitel. It is very difficult to give up comfort and fulfill the mitzvah of living in the Land. Those who cannot bring themselves to obey the mitzvah are the ones who fail and who fail Judaism.

The mitzvah of dedication to the Jewish people. If one is obligated to wash one’s hand of impurity before eating (and what religious Jew would ever overlook that?), then surely one is obligated to wash one’s hands of the blood of a fellow Jew – and one’s hands become tinged with blood, not through active assault or murder, but through passive acceptance and refusal to prevent that evil. The finding of a murdered corpse under unknown circumstances called for the elders to go out to the spot and declare: “Our hands did not have a share in the shedding of this blood.” No one for a moment accused the elders of the actual murder, but they were declaring that they had not allowed the victim to go homeless or without accompaniment. For the Torah decreed that mere passivity in the face of danger to a fellow Jew is a shedding of blood!

And if so, how many religious Jews are shedders of blood and violators of the cry: “Thou shalt not stand by the blood of thy fellow Jew”? How many of the Comfortable Accommodation set are unwilling to risk their time and bodies and endanger themselves for fellow Jews? How many were as silent and indifferent as anyone else to the plight of poor and threatened Jews in the inner city areas, to Soviet Jews and Syrian Jews? How many refused to allow their children to attend demonstrations and to get involved? How many are adamantly opposed to their children living in Israel, desiring rather that their offspring share their sin of living in Galut under the bizarre theory that the family that sins together shares fate together?

How many wavers of the Torah banner become hysterical when their child declares his desire to give up a college career and, instead, learn in a Kolel, a yeshiva for married men, for a number of years? How many are obsessed with the new Orthodox status symbol, “my son the doctor-rabbi,” and how clear it is that it is the physician that is the healthier of the two titles in the minds of the doting parents? How many pay lip service to the importance of total dedication to Torah study and the virtues of the talmid chacham, scholar, just so long as it is not their daughter who has to marry the man who cannot give her the chandeliers and the French sheitels?

Judaism is not a game we play. It is based on that awesomely difficult faith that demands risk and exposure to danger when the Torah so demands. Never will I forget the words of the nationally known Orthodox Jewish leader who said to me, concerning Israeli withdrawal from the liberated lands: “Of course we must have faith, but let’s be practical.” Such people have no faith. Judaism without faith, without sacrifice and without real values and concepts, rots away and becomes a ritualistic corpse. The practitioner of such an irreligious religion truly becomes the naval b’rshut haTorah, the abomination within the technical limits of Torah. That is the very antithesis of kedusha, holiness, and not of this did the Almighty speak when He called out: “Be holy!”

(From The Jewish Press, 19 Shevat 5738 – January 27, 1978)

Something Ineffably Poetic About This Anti-Techeiles Argument…

Did you notice? One of the last refuges available to Techeiles dissidents (defeated by all the central proofs) is to say we don’t know what exact shade of blue is required. So, even conceding the murex source of Techeiles is genuine, we still cannot use it until and unless an Amora with perfect eyesight returns from the dead and testifies to an unbroken tradition since Moshe Rabbenu (and then I presume they’ll find some new excuse).

Of course, there is zero reason to ever assume the exact shade even matters. The Biblical word “Techeiles” refers to a material (same as “Argaman”, not a hue on a spectrum at all (as also admitted by leading Techeiles opponent Rabbi Inbal). (I vaguely recall Levush HaAron does bother to provide some proof against the baseless idea anyway.)

And the source of this objection is the responsa volume falsely and with malice aforethought attributed to Rishonim, the “Besamim Rosh”…

So… they are worried about lacking a tradition because of something which not only lacks a firm tradition but is a Maskilic forgery specially designed to uproot Torah and mitzvos.

I find something ineffably poetic about that fact.

Contraception Is a Question for a *Competent* Posek

How have we fallen! A reminder of the Torah-true view of having children

Too many have forgotten that birth control is assur in all forms al pi Torah. “Heterim” are for very extenuating circumstances. They are very bidieved and NOT meant to be dispensed like candy.

BS”D

As a follow up to our previous article, I wish to illustrate the correct Hashkafos regarding building a family, and the grave prohibition of contraception (unless it is for a serious medical need and has been approved by an expert Rav.)

To my great pain and surprise, I discovered that the phenomenon of very generous “child spacing” by means of birth control – for no medical reason – has become extremely widespread in many frum circles, and so has the practice of brand new couples “waiting” a year or two. It is incomprehensible to me that this is being condoned.

Here we see the terribly destructive effects at play, of the organization I mentioned in the previous article. They have normalized birth control across the spectrum of Klal Yisrael – not only to the general population, but also by having “educated” a new generation of young Rabbonim with their harmful ideas – and are preventing untold thousands of births for no good reason at all.

The pain over this terrible breach in our Mesora, and over the diminishment of Klal Yisrael, is intense. May Hashem set our nation back on track speedily, and undo the damage.

On the Torah view of bringing children into the world

Translated from Sefer Otzar Tahara by Rav Shlomo Dovid Klein (London)

(This excerpt includes most of the chapter. The PDFs attached below have the complete version.)

Part 1: Contraception – the seriousness of the prohibition

It is forbidden to take any action to prevent pregnancy, and this is a serious matter.(1)

Even when doctors advise this, there is usually no medical basis for it and it is merely based on their carefree attitude of these matters. Nevertheless, in cases of great need, there are methods that can be approved in certain circumstances, for example when a woman feels physically or emotionally weak after childbirth. One cannot set out general guidelines in these matters and a competent Moreh Horo’oh must be consulted. When contraception is permitted, one must clarify exactly which methods may be used, as some of them involve repeated serious issurim.

One cannot compare one case to another and may not rely on rulings supposedly given to others; it is essential that a Moreh Hora’ah is consulted in each individual case.(2)

Continue reading…

From Netzach Yisrael, here.