I honestly think that both Fleischer and Naftali are both streets of most hasbara at the moment. Hananya Naftali is a Christian, which in some ways is worse than nothing, but in other ways better. From what I understand, Fleischer is a sincere Jew, though he is not always sincere in public forums.
If Substack wasn’t lame and you could add pics in the comments, I would add the SpongeBob laughing meme to the fact you got banned from Slifkin’s blog. Tell me the story tomorrow buddy!
There's nothing to tell. Rabbi Doctor Slifkin has a fake open-comments policy in which dozens of wannabe Charedi trolls beclown themselves defending the incoherent and nonsensical positions of the community they aspire to be a part of, so he can look good. If someone writes something challenging, he quietly gets rid of them. He waited until I wrote something dumb and banned me. Fair play.
I think Slifkin is confused about whether it makes him look good or not. Sometimes he interjects in the comments that he won't ban because they make him look good, then bans them anyways, then blocks all comments on subsequent posts for a couple of weeks.
I think משכיל בינה is right that most of the comments make him look good (and bring up his ratings), but then there are some challenging ones. During the weeks when he was on a warpath against the Charedi 100-million-dollar campaign, he was nervous of being challenged so he blocked everything.
>the incoherent and nonsensical positions of the community
I am curious about this comment. Obviously, the current Charedi community (media?) takes incoherent and nonsensical positions, and they certainly need to be more productive.
However, everything you write on this blog about the demographic crisis seem to be pointing to the conclusion that the core Charedi position, as set down by the Chazon Ish and others, was the right approach.
The story goes that the Chazon Ish once sat someone down and explained to him how exponential growth works, that with a TFR of 10 (actually 10.5) a couple can have 1 million 6th generation descendants.
This was always the core of Charedi approach, and they have been quite successful, as evidenced by this studyhttps://chotam.org.il/%D7%A2%D7%9C-%D7%A1%D7%93%D7%A8-%D7%94%D7%99%D7%95%D7%9D/%D7%A0%D7%95%D7%A9%D7%90%D7%99%D7%9D-%D7%A0%D7%95%D7%A1%D7%A4%D7%99%D7%9D/%D7%A4%D7%A8%D7%A1%D7%95%D7%9E%D7%99%D7%9D/%D7%94%D7%93%D7%9E%D7%95%D7%92%D7%A8%D7%A4%D7%99%D7%94-%D7%A9%D7%9C-%D7%94%D7%93%D7%AA%D7%99%D7%95%D7%AA/ . If not for the Charedim Israel may have had only 5 million Jews, with a fertility rate below replacement level similar to all other Western countries as you commented here https://www.aporiamagazine.com/p/reversing-the-fertility-collapse/comment/52516723. Had the country followed the Charedi example more closely we may have had 20 million Jews in Israel and a one-state solution would be possible. (Additionally, I believe that had the country been more accommodating to the Charedi lifestyle there would be many more Western Charedi olim, and Charedim in general would be more productive.)
There are many positive things one can, and perhaps should, say about Charedim, but the official line of the community with regard to the public policy is genuinely mad and thus those who take it upon themselves to represent it just beclown themselves.
Schneider’s an effeminate soy boy not a dish but otherwise an interesting and incisive take.
The difficulty Israel and zionists have is that the country is an imperialist entity and probably has been since its inception. Whether or not its colonialist is debatable and beside the point.
The actions of so many Jews in demonising imperialism, and Isreal itself in having hidden behind anti imperialist and anti colonialist rhetoric, have come home to roost. The right thing to do is to promote imperialist ideology but they can’t do that, so the die is cast.
Hey Maskil, what do you think about the book start up nation? Will you by any chance ever do a post on it? If there's any book that shows the merit of the Zionist position, and shows the miracles the Zionist ideology is capable of, it's that. When I first read it I was pretty convinced. Now I'm not so sure.
Been thinking about this post for a while since I read it. It could be that you'll discuss this later on in future posts, but I wouldn't be so quick to equate (dumb) public defenders of Zionism and Israel with the intellectual value of Zionism itself.
I think there are a fair amount of more nuanced thinkers who support Zionism but don't bother to become a public spokesperson for it. If you're a nuanced thinker and support Israel's existence you'll either draw the wrath of Sara Netanyahu, or you'll just end up spending the majority of your time speaking with completely insane anti-Semitic people (Skyy News and Eylon Levy come to mind) who you wouldn't convince anyway. As a result, the vacuum is filled by people who are perhaps not the best representative for Zionism on the world stage.
There are a few exceptions to the rule (I like Blake Flayton and Hen Mazzig, but I suspect they are both too liberal for you), but by and large I think most people view defending Israel and Zionism to the outside world as a lost cause. That doesn't mean that they don't try to promote Zionism or Israel, though. Those people either end up voting with their money, or working for various groups that are better about strategizing and knowing when to speak and when to keep silent. Mark Mellman and Democratic Majority for Israel come to mind.
So, I think this is substantially true, but, even so, it still represents a change because it used to be the case that Zionism had both articulate public defenders and people behind the scenes bribing politicians. Another important consideration is that the younger generation aren't influenced by the behinds the scenes stuff, so this kind of Zionist advocacy will just literally stop working at a certain point.
Yesn Matti Friedman is smart, also Haviv Rettig Gur. But both of them shy away from debate, and, I think not coincidentally, are very liberal zionists.
Yes, Florida is safer for Jewish retirees. Most American crime is low-functioning ethnic groups (which in Florida includes white groups as well) shooting each other. This is a societal problem in that it makes many cities unliveable, and this in turn has perverse economic consequences. But for individuals you can just go live somewhere safe and don't visit the dangerous bits. The single biggest risk factor for being a victim of crime is being a criminal.
This by the way, is why people are wrong to say school shootings in America are not a big issue. As a proportion of total murders, they are small, but as a proportion of total murders of people who are not ghetto hooligans, they are much higher.
It's also the case that almost all travel in America is by car, you can even visit the dangerous bits without an issue. And even work there. The main issue is living there (it's also not a good idea to shop there- but some stuff you can *only* buy there 😉).
It's cringe to appeal to the world on behalf of 🇮🇱 from a place of victimhood, such as by invoking the Holocaust.
Douglas Murray and Richard Hanania are not cringe because they make zero apology for Israel.
Anyone who says "Israel has the right to exist" or "Israel has the right to defend itself" is repeating a meme that subconsciously suggests that Israel maybe *shouldn't* exist or *shouldn't* defend itself. (See Scott Adams).
The core tension is that Israel was created to redeem Jews as masters of their own fate. That is incompatible with victimhood.
At the same time, Israel is not strong, it is fragile. Israel hasn't won a war in 50 years because it is dependent on the US, which backs both sides of the Israeli-Arab (now Iranian) conflict. You could say this is a failure of Zionism, in the sense that the revolution succeeded but the counter-revolutionaries doggedly persist after 75 years.
The solution is not to "explain" Israel (hasbara) but to champion its strengths and accomplishments ("Israel strong") while mercilessly mocking the Palestinians for their fanaticism, cry-bully tactics, and strategic failure. Chris Rufo's anti-woke strategy would be a useful framework -- associate the Palestine "brand" with all of their worst pathologies.
I don’t know your background but you sound like you come from an English speaking county. If all the survivors in DP camps and all the people kicked out of the Middle East and North Africa could have come to the US, Israel would probably not exist today. But they couldn’t then, and in fact they can’t now beyond a small percentage. So “Zionism” today is, at baseline, the belief that a minority in the Middle East will not survive without a strong state to protect them, and they have nowhere else to go.
I think it’s more than that too but you don’t need anything more.
I think the main driver is education polarization in the US which is likely driving it elsewhere as well. Most educated people are left wing, that trend is getting worse, and supporting Israel is right wing for real substantive reasons. First, on the left you can no longer believe that a state being well run and western makes it better or more deserving of support - in fact, it’s the opposite if anything. Second, in the absence of any kind of threat to the west in many decades, serious use of force is viewed with suspicion and even hatred. The war on terror just reinforced the belief that if you feel threatened and respond with force, it’s a mistake. Third, nationalism and patriotism are viewed negatively on the left. Support for Ukraine is not processed as support for Ukrainian nationalism, but rather support for the rules based international order of “invading countries bad” (unless you’re Palestinian). That’s before bringing in the more well know frameworks of oppressor vs oppressed and brown vs white, which of everyone is now familiar with. There are more issues, but if you are an intelligent person who reads other intelligent people, nearly everyone is left wing and the left is primed to dislike Israel for substantive reasons.
I honestly think that both Fleischer and Naftali are both streets of most hasbara at the moment. Hananya Naftali is a Christian, which in some ways is worse than nothing, but in other ways better. From what I understand, Fleischer is a sincere Jew, though he is not always sincere in public forums.
What kind of nationalism is groovy though?
Ukrainian nationalism is pretty fashionable.
Right on brotha!…uhm bro-et?
https://www.newsweek.com/ukraine-military-has-new-transgender-spokesperson-1817334
Whateves go Azov Brigade go!
Ever since you were banned from Slifkin's blog, I always thought you should have your own blog, you're a great writer.
If Substack wasn’t lame and you could add pics in the comments, I would add the SpongeBob laughing meme to the fact you got banned from Slifkin’s blog. Tell me the story tomorrow buddy!
There's nothing to tell. Rabbi Doctor Slifkin has a fake open-comments policy in which dozens of wannabe Charedi trolls beclown themselves defending the incoherent and nonsensical positions of the community they aspire to be a part of, so he can look good. If someone writes something challenging, he quietly gets rid of them. He waited until I wrote something dumb and banned me. Fair play.
I think Slifkin is confused about whether it makes him look good or not. Sometimes he interjects in the comments that he won't ban because they make him look good, then bans them anyways, then blocks all comments on subsequent posts for a couple of weeks.
I think משכיל בינה is right that most of the comments make him look good (and bring up his ratings), but then there are some challenging ones. During the weeks when he was on a warpath against the Charedi 100-million-dollar campaign, he was nervous of being challenged so he blocked everything.
>the incoherent and nonsensical positions of the community
I am curious about this comment. Obviously, the current Charedi community (media?) takes incoherent and nonsensical positions, and they certainly need to be more productive.
However, everything you write on this blog about the demographic crisis seem to be pointing to the conclusion that the core Charedi position, as set down by the Chazon Ish and others, was the right approach.
The story goes that the Chazon Ish once sat someone down and explained to him how exponential growth works, that with a TFR of 10 (actually 10.5) a couple can have 1 million 6th generation descendants.
This was always the core of Charedi approach, and they have been quite successful, as evidenced by this studyhttps://chotam.org.il/%D7%A2%D7%9C-%D7%A1%D7%93%D7%A8-%D7%94%D7%99%D7%95%D7%9D/%D7%A0%D7%95%D7%A9%D7%90%D7%99%D7%9D-%D7%A0%D7%95%D7%A1%D7%A4%D7%99%D7%9D/%D7%A4%D7%A8%D7%A1%D7%95%D7%9E%D7%99%D7%9D/%D7%94%D7%93%D7%9E%D7%95%D7%92%D7%A8%D7%A4%D7%99%D7%94-%D7%A9%D7%9C-%D7%94%D7%93%D7%AA%D7%99%D7%95%D7%AA/ . If not for the Charedim Israel may have had only 5 million Jews, with a fertility rate below replacement level similar to all other Western countries as you commented here https://www.aporiamagazine.com/p/reversing-the-fertility-collapse/comment/52516723. Had the country followed the Charedi example more closely we may have had 20 million Jews in Israel and a one-state solution would be possible. (Additionally, I believe that had the country been more accommodating to the Charedi lifestyle there would be many more Western Charedi olim, and Charedim in general would be more productive.)
Perhaps you'll eventually get to this discussion.
The next article BN will be about Israel's TFR.
There are many positive things one can, and perhaps should, say about Charedim, but the official line of the community with regard to the public policy is genuinely mad and thus those who take it upon themselves to represent it just beclown themselves.
I agree with you. For this reason, I have recently taken it upon myself to present this side of Charedim.
Schneider’s an effeminate soy boy not a dish but otherwise an interesting and incisive take.
The difficulty Israel and zionists have is that the country is an imperialist entity and probably has been since its inception. Whether or not its colonialist is debatable and beside the point.
The actions of so many Jews in demonising imperialism, and Isreal itself in having hidden behind anti imperialist and anti colonialist rhetoric, have come home to roost. The right thing to do is to promote imperialist ideology but they can’t do that, so the die is cast.
No way, he's an 8 at least. Ask a woman.
Hey Maskil, what do you think about the book start up nation? Will you by any chance ever do a post on it? If there's any book that shows the merit of the Zionist position, and shows the miracles the Zionist ideology is capable of, it's that. When I first read it I was pretty convinced. Now I'm not so sure.
Book reviews are a good idea. I have a backlog of articles in my head, but once I'm done with them, I will start on them.
Michael Shellenberger is Jewish? Looking at the about section I’m guessing you’re not a fan of Subliminal? 😅
Is there a strand of Zionism that you would support even if at a minute level
You're right, Shellenberger isn't Jewish. Edited.
I think classic pure Herzlian Zionism was pretty cool.
Been thinking about this post for a while since I read it. It could be that you'll discuss this later on in future posts, but I wouldn't be so quick to equate (dumb) public defenders of Zionism and Israel with the intellectual value of Zionism itself.
I think there are a fair amount of more nuanced thinkers who support Zionism but don't bother to become a public spokesperson for it. If you're a nuanced thinker and support Israel's existence you'll either draw the wrath of Sara Netanyahu, or you'll just end up spending the majority of your time speaking with completely insane anti-Semitic people (Skyy News and Eylon Levy come to mind) who you wouldn't convince anyway. As a result, the vacuum is filled by people who are perhaps not the best representative for Zionism on the world stage.
There are a few exceptions to the rule (I like Blake Flayton and Hen Mazzig, but I suspect they are both too liberal for you), but by and large I think most people view defending Israel and Zionism to the outside world as a lost cause. That doesn't mean that they don't try to promote Zionism or Israel, though. Those people either end up voting with their money, or working for various groups that are better about strategizing and knowing when to speak and when to keep silent. Mark Mellman and Democratic Majority for Israel come to mind.
So, I think this is substantially true, but, even so, it still represents a change because it used to be the case that Zionism had both articulate public defenders and people behind the scenes bribing politicians. Another important consideration is that the younger generation aren't influenced by the behinds the scenes stuff, so this kind of Zionist advocacy will just literally stop working at a certain point.
Finally, Hen Mazzig ... bro, no.
Oh also Matti Friedman! I maintain that Hen Mazzig is much better now than when he first started, but we can agree to disagree.
Yesn Matti Friedman is smart, also Haviv Rettig Gur. But both of them shy away from debate, and, I think not coincidentally, are very liberal zionists.
I’m sympathetic to your argument, but - is Florida so much safer? 2022 murder rate in Israel 1.6/100000. Florida is 10.3/100000
Yes, Florida is safer for Jewish retirees. Most American crime is low-functioning ethnic groups (which in Florida includes white groups as well) shooting each other. This is a societal problem in that it makes many cities unliveable, and this in turn has perverse economic consequences. But for individuals you can just go live somewhere safe and don't visit the dangerous bits. The single biggest risk factor for being a victim of crime is being a criminal.
This by the way, is why people are wrong to say school shootings in America are not a big issue. As a proportion of total murders, they are small, but as a proportion of total murders of people who are not ghetto hooligans, they are much higher.
It's also the case that almost all travel in America is by car, you can even visit the dangerous bits without an issue. And even work there. The main issue is living there (it's also not a good idea to shop there- but some stuff you can *only* buy there 😉).
The word you're looking for is cringe, not dumb.
It's cringe to appeal to the world on behalf of 🇮🇱 from a place of victimhood, such as by invoking the Holocaust.
Douglas Murray and Richard Hanania are not cringe because they make zero apology for Israel.
Anyone who says "Israel has the right to exist" or "Israel has the right to defend itself" is repeating a meme that subconsciously suggests that Israel maybe *shouldn't* exist or *shouldn't* defend itself. (See Scott Adams).
There is no contradiction here. It attracts dumb people because it is cringe.
The core tension is that Israel was created to redeem Jews as masters of their own fate. That is incompatible with victimhood.
At the same time, Israel is not strong, it is fragile. Israel hasn't won a war in 50 years because it is dependent on the US, which backs both sides of the Israeli-Arab (now Iranian) conflict. You could say this is a failure of Zionism, in the sense that the revolution succeeded but the counter-revolutionaries doggedly persist after 75 years.
The solution is not to "explain" Israel (hasbara) but to champion its strengths and accomplishments ("Israel strong") while mercilessly mocking the Palestinians for their fanaticism, cry-bully tactics, and strategic failure. Chris Rufo's anti-woke strategy would be a useful framework -- associate the Palestine "brand" with all of their worst pathologies.
Douglas Murray is in fact cringe.
I don’t know your background but you sound like you come from an English speaking county. If all the survivors in DP camps and all the people kicked out of the Middle East and North Africa could have come to the US, Israel would probably not exist today. But they couldn’t then, and in fact they can’t now beyond a small percentage. So “Zionism” today is, at baseline, the belief that a minority in the Middle East will not survive without a strong state to protect them, and they have nowhere else to go.
I think it’s more than that too but you don’t need anything more.
I agree with that.
I think the main driver is education polarization in the US which is likely driving it elsewhere as well. Most educated people are left wing, that trend is getting worse, and supporting Israel is right wing for real substantive reasons. First, on the left you can no longer believe that a state being well run and western makes it better or more deserving of support - in fact, it’s the opposite if anything. Second, in the absence of any kind of threat to the west in many decades, serious use of force is viewed with suspicion and even hatred. The war on terror just reinforced the belief that if you feel threatened and respond with force, it’s a mistake. Third, nationalism and patriotism are viewed negatively on the left. Support for Ukraine is not processed as support for Ukrainian nationalism, but rather support for the rules based international order of “invading countries bad” (unless you’re Palestinian). That’s before bringing in the more well know frameworks of oppressor vs oppressed and brown vs white, which of everyone is now familiar with. There are more issues, but if you are an intelligent person who reads other intelligent people, nearly everyone is left wing and the left is primed to dislike Israel for substantive reasons.
Side note but you should read Tzarich Iyun if you don’t already read it.
I used to, but I stopped during Covid when they posted all these articles whining about Charedim not being hypochondriac enough.
Go back, there are new good ones.