On the Contribution of the Haredim – A Look at Some Foolish Arguments (Column 629)

With God’s help

Disclaimer: This post was translated from Hebrew using AI (ChatGPT 5 Thinking), so there may be inaccuracies or nuances lost. If something seems unclear, please refer to the Hebrew original or contact us for clarification.

In recent weeks, the controversy over drafting the Haredim has flared up again (and not “drafting yeshiva students,” as Haredi demagogues try to sell us). Time and again we hear the preposterous claims about the Haredim’s marvelous contribution to security, society, and the economy, about their outstanding volunteering, and so on. Honestly, it’s hard to believe anyone needs arguments to see that this is demagogic nonsense—but it turns out there are quite a few fools who buy this tripe. To my astonishment, even among the Haredim who put forward these arguments there are some who truly believe them and don’t realize they’re being fed apologetic propaganda for distribution.

Drafting Haredim or Drafting Yeshiva Students

As noted, the Haredim insist on presenting this as a controversy about drafting yeshiva students rather than drafting Haredim. But that is, of course, a lie. First, all those who did not decide to devote themselves to Torah also do not enlist. True, some Haredi spokesmen repeat again and again that they should be drafted, but in practice these are empty words. There is strong opposition to the enlistment of any Haredi—both politically and via social pressure on those who enlist. I won’t even get into the fictitious registrations to avoid the draft and other well-known tricks.

By the way, the lie of Torah magena u’matzla (“Torah protects and saves”), which I already addressed in Column 609, even on their view, applies only to those who sit and learn—not to everyone who wears a suit. We’ve never heard that a suit “protects and saves.” On the contrary, the fear among suit-wearers of the army’s supposed negative influences suggests the suits don’t really protect. Beyond this, even if it’s only those who have genuinely accepted upon themselves the yoke of Torah—a very small minority—we must ensure their number does not exceed what is reasonable. Even they do not deserve a sweeping exemption.

I must say that one of the ugliest and most demagogic pamphlets I’ve seen lately is the following letter:

If this is the level of thinking, here’s more evidence of the disconnect between analytical ability in Talmudic analysis and basic common sense. Beyond the fiction that “Torah protects and saves,” he is essentially claiming that wearing a suit counts as combat support. The fact that there is shirking of service in the general public as well, and that the IDF does not operate at peak efficiency and effectiveness (to put it mildly)—a fact Haredi spokesmen gleefully repeat—is, of course, true. But there it is not organized, institutionalized, and ideological. In addition, I read a few years ago that the ratio of combat support to combat soldiers in the IDF is among the lowest in the world. One must remember that every combat soldier requires a certain number of combat-support personnel—even if not exactly the numbers we have—without whom soldiers cannot fight. “Combat support” is not a synonym for “draft-dodger.” Thus his argument collapses. These foolish comparisons are penny-ante demagoguery. It’s very easy to accuse others—sometimes with a measure of truth and sometimes not at all—and use that as the basis for your own shirking.

On the contrary: if you have an idea to improve the army’s effectiveness and efficiency, please, enlist and cooperate to improve the situation. Haredi armchair experts explain to us that we actually don’t need soldiers, and that the IDF is overstaffed anyway (they know this from an equidistant-letter study of the Gemara). Other Haredi experts recommend a professional army. Good for them—they examined both feasibility and the social, economic, and security implications thoroughly during the mashgiach’s Monday lunch-break talk (right before the mussar session—“Turn it and turn it, for everything is in it”).

In recent weeks all this chatter has been refuted by the leadership of this distorted public itself. The government they are part of decided to extend the duration of regular service and quadruple the length of reserve service. Naturally, without touching the enlistment of Haredim. They do this with brazen impudence as if there were no problem. There is no limit to the chutzpah and the desecration of God’s name. I doubt any Torah they study will protect them in the Heavenly Court, where they will receive their due as the worst offenders among Israel, great and small. I only hope Deri, Gafni, and Goldknopf won’t forget to announce that the talking points need updating (since, all of a sudden, we do lack soldiers).

The common claims directed at the national-religious public (including from not a few national-religious rabbis) that its members feel greater solidarity with secular Jews than with Haredim, or the claim that they feel solidarity with combat support in the army rather than with “support” in yeshivot—these too are shabby demagoguery. Of course I will feel solidarity with those who shoulder the burden—rather than with those who may be close to me in values but brazenly shirk carrying the burden and use the entire society as a cash cow. By the way, do the Haredim feel solidarity at least with that small percentage of combat soldiers? How many hours in the yeshiva are dedicated to fostering that sense of solidarity? Or perhaps the sticky slogan “your brother,” which appears here as in every Haredi propaganda pamphlet, does not actually reflect any sense of brotherhood.

On Volunteering and Fulfilling Obligations

There is one principled point that recurs in the shallow pamphleteering discourse of Haredi spokesmen. They supposedly volunteer in wondrous fashion, more than any other public, and thereby fully discharge their duty to society (they too, just like paroled prisoners, have “paid their debt to society”). There are charity enterprises, various gemachim, and of course Hatzalah and ZAKA, which have been in the headlines lately and made into heroes of the age. There is some recruitment of Haredim to dubious frameworks, mainly meant to integrate them into society and give them an economic base—but not always to benefit the army optimally (understatement alert). Beyond that, these frameworks comprise a minuscule percentage of Haredi draft-age men (a percentage that is not growing over the years, contrary to the misleading public image), and even this minority faces significant opposition and difficulties within Haredi society. Yet outwardly they are presented as social heroes and a symbol of sharing the burden. By the way, a significant portion of participants in these frameworks—whose numbers are tiny in any case—are not Haredim, but the media coverage is always framed as Haredi progress toward integration (see, for example, the critique here of a piece by Yair Cherki. Incidentally, Cherki himself has noted more than once that Haredi enlistment in recent years is a bluff).

Instead of wrestling with these silly claims, I’ll bring here an excellent post by Rabbi Ilay Ofran.[1] I couldn’t have put it better:

Beyond the claim about bearing the burden of obligations rather than volunteering, it’s worth recalling what Rabbi Shai Piron said: no one returns from ZAKA in a coffin. That’s an important statement when we recall the sanctimonious criticism of the “Eretz Nehederet” sketch about the knock at the door (see for example here and dozens of other articles, posts, and interviews), as well as the sanctimonious criticism by various rabbis and journalists from the national-religious sector of the campaign that presented the number of fallen soldiers from the national-religious community to argue that the Haredim must enlist (see for example here a response by my former colleagues in Yeruham, among many others). Even Rabbi Sheinvald, head of the Hesder Yeshiva in Modi’in, who came out against this campaign, later repeated the same points in a sugar-coated, flattering language—true to the best tradition of the national-religious inferiority complex toward the Haredim.

These two critiques and similar ones are entirely substantive, presenting relevant facts and arguments (see the same arguments also here and here). I cannot grasp why anyone thinks they must not be presented—“Touch not Mine anointed.” You may be a parasite, but don’t you dare remind the parasite that he is one! It reminds me of what the rabbi of the community in Yeruham told me angrily when I criticized the conduct of the council head and the Haredim who joined him, and wrote that they are corrupt and mistreating the public in Yeruham. The rabbi rebuked me for lashon hara and desecration of God’s name. And I wondered aloud: Is it permitted to steal and behave corruptly, and only warning about it is lashon hara and a desecration of God’s name? Such selective sanctimony appears again and again in the discussion of the Haredim.

The Ailments of Volunteering

Beyond the malady inherent in volunteering instead of fulfilling one’s duty, volunteering poses another problem. The moment certain matters are done on a volunteer basis rather than within an orderly state framework, that opens the door to many ills—and they will not be slow to arrive. I recently read an investigative report about ZAKA, for example. If what’s written there is correct, then contrary to the heroic halo it received after the recent war, it’s not at all clear how necessary it was. Moreover, the claim is that its actions even caused harm. For PR reasons, it was important for them to act and be seen—since that justifies their existence. By heavy-handed means they secured deployment in places where there were dedicated army units that should have done the work more efficiently and professionally. Fundraising was an inseparable part of their activity throughout. But it turns out they were apparently right: the impression created in the public was exactly what they wanted to create. See also here another investigation about inflating headcount to obtain budgets. That unhealthy competition exists as well regarding MDA versus the various Hatzalah organizations (and MDA is hardly free of failures and problems).

In general, all these Haredi volunteer activities—like Hatzalah, ZAKA, and the like—strike me as very puzzling. Aren’t they supposed to be studying in the yeshiva all that time? If they have time to volunteer and they are not learning in kollel, why can’t they enlist? We are told again and again that learning justifies not enlisting and that it protects us. Yet at the same time all those who are not learning proudly boast that they volunteer. If they’re not learning—let them enlist. I assume the blessed activities of ZAKA and Hatzalah can be performed without them as well (exactly as they were before those organizations were formed). You can’t dance at all weddings: you can’t say that learning substitutes for everything else and at the same time explain that they are engaged in numerous other activities for the good of society. Oh, actually—you can.

Core Curriculum Studies

First of all, let it be known that Haredim who study Talmud from childhood do not need a core curriculum. They can make it up in seconds the moment they need it. Every schoolchild knows that someone accustomed to analyzing a Talmudic sugya—Einstein’s relativity and quantum theory are child’s play for him. Such absurd statements can be made only by those who live in the Haredi bubble—those who have never encountered a difficult subject they couldn’t manage or comprehend due to its challenges. In mathematics or physics, a paper by R. Akiva Eiger is supposedly the equivalent of a child’s exercise by comparison. Incidentally, most students never encounter a subject or lecture of that level (to my judgment, apart from physics and mathematics, there are very few subjects with such difficulty). Such people naturally do not see that there are almost no products of the Haredi world in professions that require real education (sciences, medicine, and the like). Beyond the late start, many of them simply cannot cope with these subjects. I won’t share my experiences from courses I taught in the Haredi track at Ono Academic College, where I directly observed the wondrous analytical and logical abilities of Talmud students. Of course there are excellent talents there too, but the claim that Talmud study substitutes for education is a bad joke.

I’ll just note what I said to a couple who visited my home a few weeks ago. I am repeatedly stunned by the gap between the lamdanut abilities and the intellectual abilities of Haredi avrechim (married scholars). People can present brilliant moves in Talmudic lamdanut and behave like complete calves when we need to define concepts and basic principles and think in an orderly way. They are so accustomed to vertlach and clever twists that their organized, systematic thinking is damaged almost beyond repair. This surprises me every time, since in my view Talmudic lamdanut should be one of the fields that most requires orderly and original thinking and the definition of concepts and basic principles. This dissonance is truly a puzzle, but that doesn’t stop Eichler from confidently explaining that core-curriculum studies are unnecessary even for a “heretic” who, against the will of all the great rabbis of the generation, chooses to go to work, heaven forbid.

The Economic Contribution

You won’t believe it, but some stubbornly argue that the Haredim’s contribution to the economy is great and immense. I first heard this brainwave from my study partner. His claim was that producers have no special contribution, since state revenues come from those who consume their products. Buyers pay taxes and VAT, and that’s the money that makes its way to the state treasury via the manufacturer and the seller. Haredim, who consume for their many children, thus pay taxes like everyone else. And even if someone is wealthy and spends more—does he deserve our gratitude for being a spendthrift? Is there an obligation to spend a lot of money? You must understand: the producer contributes nothing to the economy. The taxes (income tax and VAT) he transfers to the state treasury are passed on to the buyers (they’re baked into the price). Therefore, in the end, buyers are the ones who fund the state and put all the money in its coffers. I saw this “insight” again here from one of their great propagandists and brazen demagogues, Eichler shlita (see the interview here from 10:30 onward. The entire interview is a model of arrogance, malice, and infantile mendacity, as is customary in Eichler’s beit midrash).

This argument reminds me of a family joke that was common in our home. Whenever we saw a cost-saving device (like a water-saving toilet flush) or an economical product package, the kids told me to buy a large quantity so I would save tons of money and could stay home instead of going to work. The idea was that one could simply work by saving. That’s exactly what Eichler proposes for the State of Israel. The best thing is to “work by saving.” We should distribute money to anyone who wants it and then collect a percentage back in taxes. He’ll spend his money on purchases, and thus the state coffers will fill from tax revenues. The crucial question that all these wise guys find most convenient to ignore is: who brings something from the outside in so there is something flowing within that closed loop? That’s where production comes in. A producer’s contribution is not the taxes he pays (though that also reflects it), but the fact that he adds an external contribution to output. But that question apparently requires advanced core-curriculum studies—no wonder Eichler failed to notice it.

On second thought, it seems more akin to the known tale of Hershele, who entered a bakery and ordered rolls. Then he noticed there were doughnuts on the counter and asked to exchange his rolls for doughnuts. They exchanged them, he sat and ate, and when he finished he got up and left (without paying). The seller ran after him and demanded payment, and Hershele asked: “Payment for what?” “For the doughnuts,” the man replied. “But I gave you the rolls in exchange,” retorted Hershele-Eichler. The seller growled that he hadn’t paid for the rolls, but Hershele is not one to lose his composure in tough moments: “I didn’t eat the rolls—so why should I pay for them?!”

I refer you to a more sophisticated apologetic article that ostensibly cites data and blames the critics. In light of what I wrote here, you’ll easily spot its main flaws. Beyond the blurring of concepts—a well-known apologetic tool (“Define ‘Haredi’!”)—it brazenly ignores the question of production and focuses on the question of cost to the state treasury, subsidies, and purchasing power. Incidentally, even regarding those data, its reliance on official numbers is naïve (at best). It is impossible to ascertain the true figures in these matters, since a great deal of transfers to the Haredi world do not occur via regular budgetary line items that can be tracked, and much has already been written about this.

Conclusion: How Do Intelligent People End Up Saying Childish Nonsense with Deep Conviction?

We are dealing with a collection of ridiculous arguments, and you can hear them from any average Haredi mouth—from the greatest roshei yeshiva, through the fixers, down to rank-and-file avrechim. Intelligent people with razor-sharp analytical capacity spout absurd drivel like kindergarten children—and do so with deep, fervent self-conviction. You wonder where our wise and prudent nation has gone; where the Torah’s insight and far-seeing eyes have gone. The answer is that propaganda works—especially when it comes with pangs of conscience or with no conscience at all (see below). If you repeat a piece of nonsense enough times, even the person who invented it starts to believe it.

For many years now, whenever I hear a Haredi spokesperson in a media debate about the Haredim, I recall the joke about Nixon (later applied to Ariel Sharon). In Nixon’s merry days, people in America would ask: What’s the sign that tells us Nixon is lying? Answer: when he moves his lips. A Haredi spokesperson in the media is always an explainer, and as such he is a liar by definition. It’s hard to find a word of truth in what they say—and that’s exceptional even by the lax truth standards of the media. They can tell you with deep conviction that they are persecuted (sometimes that’s even true), that budgets owed to them by right are withheld, that they all enlist except for a handful who study in yeshiva (and if someone shirks, please enlist him and don’t generalize), that their budgets are the lowest of all sectors, and that their contribution to GDP is about that of Bill Gates. Of course they don’t oppose Zionism at all, and certainly don’t look down on anyone else. They constantly pray for IDF soldiers and for all of us. They “mark” Memorial Day in their own way (and anyway, why should we mark it if you don’t mark Tisha B’Av?!) and on and on. These spokesmen manufacture the foolish arguments that are then adopted by the Haredi masses “in the fields” (i.e., in the beit midrash—the Haredi translation of “field,” like David’s cistern of Bethlehem in Bava Kamma 60b).

Here we reach the question of conscience, and allow me to end with a psychological note. I have no doubt that any honest Haredi feels distress, since it is clear that as a community they behave parasitically, immorally, and perversely. Therefore any pretext, however flimsy, may help him make peace with his conscience (at least among those who still have one). In fact, I think the conscience-less (the spokesmen) are the ones who supply these foolish pretexts for the use of the conscientious, so that the latter can live with themselves and look in the mirror only through “the pure hashkafa,” i.e., the one-way mirror that filters what they see. The learned psychologists call this phenomenon “cognitive dissonance.” You see—even in psychology you can sometimes find words of wisdom.

Generally speaking, I strongly recommend not engaging in meet-and-greet “understanding” sessions between groups. They usually don’t help. But meetings with Haredim are a real waste of time. They come to deliver a message and are usually represented by professional spokesmen (try arranging a meeting with Haredi children or youth), and they recite the scripts that were put in their mouths (true, this is not unique to the Haredim, but it is especially conspicuous among them). Therefore, it’s not worth listening to their arguments, because you won’t hear anything straight or authentic. In my experience, these meetings are grinding already-ground flour. They may have some value if they manage to arouse pangs of conscience among those Haredim whose conscience still exists. But among Haredi spokesmen, that is a rather rare phenomenon. If you succeed in creating dialogue with ordinary folks from the street, that could indeed be useful. But fear not: if you do more of this—and especially if it turns out to be useful—it will immediately be forbidden, and bans will be issued against the participants. They’d be better off enlisting. In the army, at least, there is a cadre of political commissars whose job is to preserve Haredi identity from any foreign influence, heaven forbid. You know what? Maybe that’s the way to get them to enlist…

[1] See also his remarks here.