Israeli police deploy as Ultra Orthodox Jews protest against government’s measures to stop the spread of the coronavirus in the orthodox neighborhood of Mea Shearim in Jerusalem, Monday, March 30, 2020. (AP Photo/Mahmoud Illean)
Shelly Schreter – Our Haredi Problem
Large numbers of haredim around the world have been testing positive for the corona virus. Communities in Boisbriand, Quebec and Bnei Brak, Israel have actually been blockaded by the authorities, attempting to stop its spread. We have seen shocking images of loaded body bags piled up, for lack of space, in a hospital corridor in Borough Park, NY. Several haredi communities are among the corona “hot spots” in Israel, requiring special enforcement of safety measures by the police, who have occasionally encountered resistance and taunts of “Nazi!”
It is impossible not to connect the dots of dysfunctional corona behaviour of significant numbers of haredim in different countries. I choose my words carefully, because just saying that immediately arouses accusations of anti-Semitism and defensive arguments that these are small pockets of deviant extremists who misrepresent the normative behaviour of the vast majority of haredim. My counter: this is irresponsible denial which serves an escapist approach to a really serious problem that costs lives and feeds anti-Semitism.
I am not “anti-Haredi”, and was brought up in Montreal to relate to them with respect and appreciation. I have haredi family members. My four grandparents, victims of the Holocaust, were all what are today called haredim. I believe that most haredim are good citizens who pay taxes and obey laws. (I don’t think it is the “vast” majority – certainly not in Israel – but do not know of any reliable data on the subject.) Because of my relative familiarity with haredim over the years, I am well aware of the tremendous diversity of haredi society, characterized both by severe rivalries and schisms, as well as by many positive features of communal solidarity, mutual assistance and real spirituality. I regard haredim as my Jewish brothers and sisters, and disregard those among them who do not reciprocate that attitude.
Unfortunately, that is not the whole story. If haredim really could cut themselves off from the outside world in hermetically sealed enclaves, where they could enjoy their preferred lifestyle without bothering or being bothered by anyone, as some of them aspire to do, what would it matter? So they would be one more exotic sub-culture, one more cult-like group, existing on the margins of society, with their particular customs. A subject for anthropologists, perhaps.
The reality is that virtually no one, certainly no large and growing community like theirs, can achieve that degree of social insulation in a democratic country where they have to earn a living, shop in stores, ride public transportation, buy or rent homes, consume public medical, welfare and other services, establish and maintain institutions to meet their needs, etc. The remarkable success of the haredim in reviving their communities has yielded a large population which is forced to expand, if only to provide housing and living space for its younger generations. This brings them into interaction and sometimes confrontation with other groups in society, making their self-isolation more difficult to sustain. If, as now, there is a disease spreading in haredi communities, where some portion of their population violates the required precautions, it is not only their problem. Inevitably, it directly impacts anyone who crosses their paths or lives near them.
How did we get here? Why do haredi communities, in some part, behave this way? What is it about their culture which seems to incline at least some of them to flout public health regulations? Why are those haredim whose behaviour is law-compliant and normative, and who I want to believe are the majority, unable to influence the attitudes and actions of those who are not? What is the role and responsibility of haredi leadership in this situation?
The Holocaust decimated much of the haredi heartland in Eastern Europe, leaving truncated communal remnants in Israel, various European countries and North America. The survivors regarded themselves as the “saving remnant” of age-old Judaism, going all the way back. Historically, they perceived the non-Jewish societies in which they lived – with considerable justification, especially after the Holocaust – as hostile. This in turn validated widespread illegal or anti-social tactics in relating to those malevolent, anti-Semitic societies, in order to evade as much as possible their deep-rooted prejudices, discriminatory laws, onerous taxes, military drafts and periodic mass violence.
As if that was not bad enough, the gradual emancipation of Jews in Western Europe from the late 18th century onward gave rise to a profound rift within Jewry. Assimilation to non-Jewish cultures and ideologies attracted more and more Jews away from traditional observance, even penetrating the Eastern European heartland through the 19th and early 20th centuries. A second major “front” for the survival struggle of traditional Jewry thus opened up, an internal one, in which they had to fight for the allegiance of the younger generations. One of the heresies to be resisted most fiercely was Zionism, which not only upended the theological and religious foundations of orthodox Judaism, but also by extension challenged the authority of the established rabbinical leadership.
The post-war haredi survivors were thus engaged in a two-front war for survival. They felt constantly under threat, from non-Jewish society and from heretical Jews, and perhaps even from the potentially subversive danger of self-doubt. This is a gross over-simplification, of course, but my point is that the essential mind-set of the post-war haredim was one of antagonism, or at least resistance to inimical, besieging forces.
Of course there was plenty of co-operation between haredim and outsiders, as the long process of recovery and rebuilding advanced. For one example, in Israel, the haredim formed political parties and participated in almost every government coalition, ideology notwithstanding, trading their votes for public subsidization of their separate schools and other institutions, and for military draft exemptions for their young men. I contend that this co-operation was tactical, a practical necessity of the moment, which did not essentially alter their basic adversarial mind-set; and that further, the assumptions about antagonistic East European societies (and the haredi attitudes this justified) were effectively transferred, however inappropriately, to the free, democratic societies in which the haredim now found themselves.
The main haredi strategy was self-ghettoization, designed to insulate their families as much as possible from the corrupting, permissive culture of the outside world. This included a systematic attempt to prevent the intrusion of mass media, or the curricula of general education (in subjects such as English or math), or any other “contaminated” content into daily haredi life. This results in many graduates of haredi education, both in Israel and abroad, who lack the basic knowledge required to function in most workplaces, rendering them unemployable and thus dependent on the social welfare system controlled in effect by their rabbinical leaders. That is why the excuse that many Israeli haredim disobeyed the corona guidelines out of innocent ignorance, because they have no exposure to the mass media, inspires so much condemnation.
To be clear: This is not the uniform pattern of all haredi life, and there are many haredim who function very effectively in the wider society and economy. Also, many haredi women do acquire basic skills in their somewhat more secular education, to prepare them for their dual roles as breadwinners and mothers of large families, leaving their husbands free to focus on full-time religious studies. (I acknowledge my difficulty in understanding how they manage it. Elder sisters are pressed into childcare roles for their younger siblings from very early ages.)
While all this may not sound sustainable, it has proven remarkably successful in the 75 years since the end of the war. Robust haredi communities have grown explosively, especially in Israel and the US. The sophistication of haredi leaders in negotiating with local political systems for desired benefits has grown apace. This is especially true in Israel, where religion-state separation is non-existent, enabling haredi leaders through their political parties to secure an increasingly large share (in proportion to the growth of their population) of public budgets for separate communal development. I contend that this has influenced the prevailing culture of Diaspora haredi communities, giving them models of how to function as an aggressive interest-group in pursuit of political, economic and social benefits.
The combined result of these different trends is a haredi culture of growing entitlement, political hardball, unashamedly selfish interaction with governments and society, coupled with lax approaches to the rule of law. Public health regulations are the current prominent example. A year or two ago, it was about parents refusing measles vaccinations for their children. Now it is about the cavalier attitudes toward the corona social distancing requirements. One of the most important haredi leaders in Israel, 92-year old Rabbi Chaim Kanievsky, refused to recommend the anti-corona health measures to his many followers, finally relenting only on March 29th. I wonder how many corona infections can be attributed to his refusal to act. He is of course not the only one.
It is important to note that many haredi rabbinical leaders have supported anti-corona protective measures, some of them from early on, and should not be tarred with the same brush. But somehow, their message has failed to make a sufficient impression on sizable minorities within the haredi world, whose dismissive behaviour has been widely publicized. All too many of the non-compliant leaders, like Rabbi Kanievsky, have chosen to keep religious institutions open and family events widely attended until most recently, far too late in the process.
The negative consequences are numerous. In the current corona crisis, the first victims are haredim themselves, and their infection and death rates are climbing.
By making devotion to Jewish study and piety the gateway to a manipulative and sometimes self-destructive ethos (in addition to their draft-dodging, welfare fraud, etc.), the haredim have made Judaism hateful to many Israelis and Diaspora Jews. I speak of those who don’t know any better. For them, haredim are the purest form of Jews, and if that is their code of behaviour, who needs it?
And the worst of them, in their arrogance, really don’t care, because (unlike the exceptional Lubavitchers) they have written all the rest of the Jews off. They consider themselves the only Jews who count and who will ensure continuity: all other Jews or their children are inferior material who will not endure. And even the Lubavitchers, wonderful people who do great things for other Jews all over the world, are in the end missionaries. They welcome you and take care of you, and deserve great credit for that, but they are still peddling their one great fundamentalist Truth.
Can such circumstances fail to pour fuel on the flames of anti-Semitism, which is reappearing to an extent deemed impossible after the Holocaust? Much if not most of it is Israel-related, but the association of haredim – the most visibly Jewish of Jews – with scenarios of disease and contamination, provides a further excuse we could well have done without. It also evokes some of the most pernicious and disgusting themes of classic Nazi Jew-hatred.
This is a sorry state of affairs, to put it mildly. Will the shock of the corona crisis – the tragic parade of corpses the haredim are going to experience from within their ranks – shake them up and cause any real soul-searching or change? Will it amplify the doubts and modify the strict obedience to rabbinical leaders of any significant number of haredim? Will it enhance the influence in haredi society of the many haredim who advocate greater engagement and positive interaction with the rest of society?
I hope to be proven wrong, but I doubt it. The haredim have too much vested interest in their present institutional set-up. Their leadership is too compromised and conformist, their guiding ideology too self-contained and impervious, their anti-social rationales too ingrained.
This is a serious problem, both for the haredim and for the rest of Jewry. Some form of backlash could well occur, especially if a disproportionate number of severely ill haredim require the assistance of increasingly scarce ventilators. The recent anti-haredi violence in New York, as well as the armed attacks in Pittsburgh, San Diego and Jersey City, might – Heaven forbid! – be a harbinger of things to come. In Israel, a feeling that the present situation of the haredim is economically unsustainable has been growing for years.
Haredi Jews serve as a living example for the rest of Jewry of what Judaism consisted of for our ancestors (or at least some of them). I believe that has value, both Jewish and human. Its leaders have the right and responsibility to preserve and protect what they have created. But they need to find much more positive and updated ways of doing it, for their own sakes and for ours. Their methods achieved a great deal, from their point of view, but have now run their course, and become profoundly dysfunctional.
