Category Archives: Contemporary Life

The Torah Imperative

Posted on May 22, 2015 | 2 comments

On the festival of Shavuot, we saturate ourselves with Torah study, all very worthwhile and understandable. The Torah is “our life and the length of our days” (Devarim 30:20). But how is it our life, and how is “life” different from “length of days”?

We are living in remarkable times, and so we too often take for granted what we have today and what we have accomplished. In many ways, we are dwarves sitting on the shoulders of giants, benefiting from the greatness of prior generations.

At the turn of the last century, the situation was dire for Torah Jewry. Upwards of 90% of immigrants to the United States gave up the observance of mitzvot, and of their children an even greater percentage. Shabbat was lost, as people were forced to work on Saturdays. Kashrut was in many places a joke, a scandal and a source of corruption, with many people relying on anything that had Hebrew letters on it, if they cared at all. Jewish education was almost non-existent.

Harry Fischel, one of the great builders of Torah in America, wrote that when he came to America he was told to forget about G-d and religion, and especially about Shabbat and kashrut. “You must work every day including the Sabbath and eat what you can eat, for G-d has been left on the other side of the ocean.” He begged to differ.

So how did we get from that dire situation to today’s world, in which, for all our grievances and all our trepidation about the Jewish future, we are living in infinitely better circumstances with a flourishing Torah world ? What changed? What always changes Jews: Torah. From Yeshiva Etz Chaim to RIETS to Yeshiva College to Torah Vadaas and Torah U’Mesorah, and then high schools and elementary schools and Batei Midrash, the seeds of Torah were planted. The few Jews to whom it mattered were pioneers and revolutionaries – literally, “it was a tree of life to those who grasped it.” Because of their courage and self-sacrifice, we exist and thrive, overseeing Torah enterprises and enjoying a Torah renaissance that was unimaginable 100 years ago.

We are not accustomed to such self-sacrifice, indeed reluctant to rein in any impulse or desire just because we have accepted the Torah. Note the hoopla over the so-called “kosher switch,” because, you know, it is really too demanding to expect people to keep lights on or set a clock in advance. Ask people to dress modestly? That, today, is “kill but don’t transgress!” Embrace the traditional morality of the Torah? No, we do not encroach on people’s freedoms, desires and self-expression. That is too big a sacrifice, too much to ask. That is a major weakness of our generation.

But at the heart of any Jewish community, at the foundation of Jewish life generally, is Torah, and especially the study of Torah. It is the secret to our existence and to our survival. And the most evil and heinous of our enemies knew it.

Right after the Holocaust, Rav Yitzchak Herzog was presented by a senior British officer with a most remarkable discovery. The British recovered from Hitler’s bunker two Jewish books and Rav Herzog received a copy of a Talmudic tractate (Masechet Pesachim) and Chaim Weizmann was given one volume from the Rambam’s Mishneh Torah. Two sefarim! Hitler had two Jewish books on the shelf in the library in his bunker, where he killed himself seventy years ago. It is a true story that just sounds fabricated but his grandson (and namesake – Buji Herzog, leader of Israel’s’ Labor Party) has a picture of his grandfather with that sefer. But why did Hitler retain these two volumes?

Of course no one knows. Perhaps to remind himself every day of his life’s mission – to murder Jews? But then he would have kept sefarim elsewhere also, in his other lairs and retreats and residences. They were only found in the Fuhrerbunker. Perhaps it was something else: Hitler only lived in his bunker during the last three months of the war. Maybe he knew that the Torah was the secret to Jewish survival. Or maybe he saw that the end was near, that the Reich that was suppose to last for 1000 years was collapsing – and he knew he had lost out to the Jews of the Talmud, to those who were faithful to the Rambam – because those Jews are indestructible.

Just as remarkably, barely a block from the site of Hitler’s bunker – now destroyed and remembered only with a sign, a diagram and apartments above it – stands Berlin’s Memorial to the Murdered Jews of Europe, 2711 concrete slabs, looking like tombstones of different sizes, the number, said the artist, chosen at random. What is 2711? The number of pages in the Babylonian Talmud, in the Daf Yomi cycle. It is hard to believe, but it is true. Look it up.

The Torah is our life and the length of our days. It is our lives as individuals, but it is our eternity as a people. For an individual Jew, the study of Torah is the primary vehicle through which we eat the fruits thereof in this world but the principal is still stored for us in the world-to-come.

For the Jewish people as a whole, where there is Torah study, there is life, existence, vitality and vigor. Our enemies know it – but we know it as well. When Shavuot comes, we reinforce to ourselves this basic truth, with love and dedication, with renewed commitment and enthusiasm, not so much to defy our enemies as to reinvigorate ourselves, rejoice with the Giver of the Torah and all who love the Torah, and hasten the era of salvation.

2 Comments

Posted in Contemporary Life, Holidays, Jewish History, Machshava/Jewish Thought

In the Halls of Congress

Posted on May 15, 2015 | 16 comments

This year’s NORPAC mission to Washington was the largest ever, numbering some 1500 souls who descended on the nation’s capital to lobby for Israel, and at this stage, for the United States as well. NORPAC is the principal pro-Israel Political Action Committee (as opposed to AIPAC, which is a political affairs committee that does not offer financial support to politicians); NORPAC does, and so congressmen freely open their offices to Jewish visitors from the tri-state area. Well over 90% of Congress were personally visited by members of our group.

Actually, they open their offices to everyone. Capitol Hill teems with visitors, lobbyists, and tour groups with varying needs and young staffers with a desire to make an impact, make a difference, make connections or at least hobnob with the mighty and influential. Certainly, most lobbyists are seeking some pecuniary advantage – a bill that advances their interests, an exemption from some legislation that would hinder their causes or something that benefits them personally. NORPAC is unique in that no participant accrues any personal benefit. It’s all for Israel and to promote the US-Israel relationship, and Congress is overwhelmingly – but not uniformly – receptive.

To be sure, there is tension, even trepidation, on Capitol Hill regarding the negotiations with Iran and Iran’s quest for nuclear weapons capability. Few believe that President Obama is capable of effective negotiations, and many believe that he has little interest in preventing an Iranian bomb, as long as it doesn’t happen, as he says, “on my watch.” That is a sorry excuse for statecraft, as the global imperative to stop Iran does not end on January 20, 2017, which, in any event, can’t come soon enough. Republicans demonstrate unconcealed contempt for Obama, but that is largely matched by the Democrats’ ill-disguised contempt. Politicians being politicians, Democrats hitched their wagons to Obama when they thought the going was good, but now see a legacy of devastating electoral defeats, a diminished role for Democrats in Congress, and, not least, a reckless and amateurish foreign policy that endangers Israel, the United States, and other US allies in the region.

It is not easy being a Democrat in Congress these days. Most want to be on record as both opposing the Iranian bomb and doing everything in Congress’ power to stop it and simultaneously not antagonizing the President. These Democrats are playing hardball. As one Congressman reported, Democrats were threatened by their own caucus that if they didn’t oppose the Pacific trade bill earlier this week, they would be stripped of their committee assignments and none of the proposed legislation would thenceforth be entertained. In other words, defying Nancy Pelosi is an act of political courage and self-immolation, and few politicians have a genuine interest in the latter. The former is generally in short supply.

Parties being parties, this type of pressure always exists on some level but it is usually reserved for major issues – not every single piece of legislation. It is why the votes in Congress are so partisan. The notion of voting one’s conscience on issues has faded. Mr. Smith, call your office. And this reluctance will play a significant role in the deliberations on any Iranian treaty down the road.

It is clear that so much of the negotiations are hype that is attempting to obscure the dissembling and double talk. To date, no one knows what was agreed to in March, as the Obama administration and the Iranians continue to disagree on fundamental issues that were supposed to have been resolved. To wit: will sanctions be lifted immediately (Iran) or over time, based on compliance (US)? Will inspections be open, spontaneous and unfettered (US) or limited, planned, and not at all on military bases (Iran)? Will Iran have to reveal its research and development or not? Will Iran have to close certain facilities or not? Will Iran have to ship its already-enriched uranium to a neutral country or not?

If one wonders what exactly was agreed to with all the hoopla in Lausanne, it is a good question. No one knows for sure. No contract worth the paper it’s written on could possibly contain such fluid, ambiguous and contradictory terms. Some hold that the Iranians are dissembling for domestic reasons (Democrats) and Obama is telling the truth, and others opine that the Iranians are telling the truth and Obama is spinning once again (Republicans). Of course, if everything was worked out – even a framework – there would be no need for advanced negotiations and an agreement with a June deadline. But the fear is – how familiar does this sound? – a treaty will have to be ratified in order to know what’s in it.

Even then, most sane people know that Iran cannot be trusted to adhere to any agreement, and the world’s security is bring entrusted to mad mullahs who easily manipulate an incompetent president, who, for whatever reason, is desperate to have as a legacy an agreement with Iran that allows them a nuclear weapon long after he is gone. In essence, Obama has taken the world from a better place to a bad place, negotiating from a starting point wherein Iran has no bomb and a weak economy suffering from the effects of crippling sanctions to an end point where Iran will have a thriving economy and a nuclear bomb. That is the art of negotiations as taught in the bizarro world. As the US is already providing Iran with billions of dollars in unfrozen assets – in order to “induce” them to negotiate – Iran has already begun subsidizing again the families of suicide bombers and stepping up its support for world terror. One would think that should matter but not to this President.

The good news is that congressmen on both sides of the aisle are skeptical. The bad news is that few see any way around Obama’s end run and the Republicans have little confidence that their Democratic colleagues will have the courage to defy their president. We can hope that Iran is so obstinate that no agreement results, but Obama’s yearning for an agreement is so intense that Obama will likely sign something, anything, and leave the fallout (literally?) to his successors. You can even play that interview now, from 2019. Obama: “When I left office, I had ensured that Iran will not have a bomb. If they have one now, it’s the fault of the current administration. Or George W. Bush.”

Congressman Joe Wilson (R-South Carolina) gave us the most time of any Representative. He has his head on straight, has no illusions about Obama, and is worried for the future. He sees a president who just has a different vision for America that almost anyone else in DC, who has no great sympathy for Israel or other American allies and he just hopes that the damage can be minimized. He has the refinement of a true Southerner and the comfortable patriotism of a veteran military man (which, he is, as were his four sons). He was voted the second friendliest congressman, which led me to wonder what he did to lose out to the “friendliest congressman,” in this case Congresswoman Lois Capps (D-Ca). As she is retiring, the title will soon be up for grabs. The competition must be a very subtle affair; you can’t shove your way to the title of friendliest member of Congress.

In truth, it is impossible to visit DC without having more sympathy for the politicians. They work long hours for relatively little pay, they are forced to balance hearings and votes with the avalanche of people who want to meet them, seek out their help or favors, and not to mention the different people who ask for incompatible things. And then at night they have to raise money to finance the permanent campaign to try to thwart those who wish to run against them and find fault with every decision that they make. It is hard to know why someone would want such a job, although I can guess.

In any event, Washington is always an inspiring place to visit, notwithstanding the occasional sordidness of the politics. The gleaming white marble, the impressive government buildings, the Mall and the very layout of the streets reflect power, grace, and the grandeur of a government chosen by free people, still a model for the world. It is still “We the People” who wield the ultimate power, and just showing up and reminding Congress of the importance of the State of Israel to us and to most Americans makes an immeasurable difference. It also safeguards the US-Israel relationship as it navigates the treacherous road past this administration into an uncertain future.

16 Comments

Posted in Contemporary Life, Current Events, Israel

Down to the Wire

Posted on May 6, 2015 | 9 comments

Here in Israel, the formation of the government has literally come down to the wire with no clear path in sight. The assumption is that PM Netanyahu will be able to accommodate the “Jewish Home,” his erstwhile “natural” partner. But as noted here right after the election, Netanyahu has often backtracked on pre-election promises, turned to parties with whom he shares no real symmetry of views, and spurned his natural allies. There are so many competing interests and personalities the process is soap-operatic.

Israeli society is split, not evenly down the middle, but with a leftist minority that is substantial enough that the right wing can never win an outright majority, even given its multiple parties. Once again, the mandates were distributed in such a way that the small parties were given disproportionate control over the formation of the government, and each is squeezing the largest party – Likud – for as much as it can get.

The surprise of the week was the resignation of FM Avigdor Lieberman, who took his shrunken party (down to six seats) into opposition. He was an unusual Foreign Minister, to say the least: not really fluent in English, not engaged in the “peace process” negotiations – what one might think is the natural domain of a foreign minister – and subjected to recurrent investigations for alleged misdeeds, most of which amount to nothing. His muted status enabled Netanyahu to serve as his own foreign minister. But Lieberman’s six seats are not indispensable to the formation of the government, his role would not have changed much, and he craves another opportunity: to present himself as the right-wing alternative to Likud. That, too, is odd given some of his past positions in the real world (population and territorial exchanges), but then politics is odd. So why participate in a nominally right-wing government from a weak position when you can carp from the outside that the government is not strong, forceful or right-wing enough? That lays the groundwork for the next campaign, which looks like it will come within a year or two anyway.

The real drama is over the inclusion of the Jewish Home, and here the situation is much murkier. The Bayit Hayehudi is the successor to the parties of the Religious Zionist movement but rightly aspires to national, rather than sectoral, leadership. But it lost ground in the last election after Netanyahu blatantly appealed for the Jewish Home’s voters, asserting that the Jewish Home will definitely be part of his coalition but that he would have no coalition at all if Likud did not win more seats. This appeal worked, and it is clear that Likud picked up 4-5 seats that would have gone to Naphtali Bennett’s party.

What is equally clear is that, as noted here in March, Netanyahu has been known for playing post-election games, that nothing is guaranteed in politics, and that a weakened Bayit Hayehudi is less attractive to Netanyahu. That is indeed what happened, and despite all of his protestations, Netanyahu offered the Jewish Home the rough equivalent of cabinet scraps, construing it as a minor party. Bennett, who had been promised the Defense Ministry and rejected so far for the Foreign Ministry, was appalled. And rightly so: in urging Israelis to vote for the Bayit Hayehudi, I noted that people should vote their dreams and not their fears, and that the added seats for the Jewish Home would strengthen Likud with whom it could unite right after the election. That did not happen.

Worse, the Shas party was given control over the Religious Affairs ministry and the Rabbinical Courts, which would likely result in restorations of policies and practices that were widely panned by the public, both secular and religious, before they were reversed in the last administration. It is further inexcusable that Shas leader Aryeh Deri, a convicted felon, has been returned to government service after serving substantial prison time for taking bribes, as the sentencing judge noted, “in every government position in which he has served.”

What is even worse than the practical dimensions of the loss of the Religious Affairs ministry are the political dimensions. The Jewish Home is still, at its core, a religious party – the Religious Zionist party. Deprived of the opportunity to make a difference in the spiritual lives of the public, it becomes a shell without a core. That is one reason for the Bennett discontent and his persistent threats to go into opposition even if that results in a national unity government or new elections (both of which are likely to occur anyway in due course).

The better reason is that the Jewish Home has suffered in recent years because of the accusation that it is nothing but “Likud B.” In truth, both Likud and Bayut Hayehudi are parallel parties but they are not identical. Likud is a secular party, notwithstanding the presence in its ranks of some religious Zionists. It is a secular party and toes a secular, though traditional-leaning, line. The Jewish Home is a religious party, presumably capable of infusing the public debate with the wisdom of Torah. It would not be the worst thing to have some daylight between the Likud and the Jewish Home so the differences between them are underscored, something which would induce the latter’s voters to stay “Home” come the next election.

If Bennett is offered substantial ministries – Foreign, Education, Justice, for example, in which his party can shape Israeli society, then it is worthwhile to be part of the government. If not, not. What happens if the Jewish Home does not join the government? That is impossible to predict. The Labor party would not remain intact if it joined a national unity government, nor would Likud remain intact. As high-sounding as is the concept of “national unity,” little good comes from it, and governments that have enjoyed great legislative majorities in Israel in the last two decades have made disastrous mistakes. The configurations of parties and personalities are too abstruse to calculate. But to form a new government by bringing in current opposition figures who served in the last government and were fired, precipitating these elections, does not seem to be a very logical approach.

Of course, Bennett will be blamed for entering the government in some reduced capacity, and blamed for not entering the government and engendering either new elections or a center-left government. It seems to me that his best move is either being in opposition if he is offered little or being in the coalition if he is offered something substantial. Either way, he will be able to present his party as a credible alternative to leadership looking forward.

The other interesting phenomenon is the antipathy towards the Charedi party, Yahadut Hatorah. They make few demands, and most of their demands can be met by something the leading party can always trade: money from the public treasury. They unabashedly believe in the welfare state, income redistribution and the rest, and would feel much at home in today’s Democratic Party. Politics does make some strange bedfellows.

They may not be my cup of tea but Netanyahu is being widely lambasted for “caving in to the Charedim” and the Charedim for “blackmailing” the leading party. Which begs the question: why is it that when Netanyahu reaches an agreement with, say, Moshe Kachlon’s Kulanu party, that is perceived as fair negotiations and reasonable compromises but when he reaches an agreement with Yahadut Hatorah that outcome must be attributed to blackmail, pandering and bad faith? The only logical answer is anti-Charedi bias, which is outrageous. They have their voters and their right to be represented. And give them credit – they know how to negotiate and they know how to keep their agreements.

As this is disseminated, the Jewish Home is very close to entering the government with control of the Education, Justice and Agriculture ministries. All three promote basic interests of the party: the spread of Torah education, the reform of the leftist legal system to include more right-leaning, Torah-educated justices (as well having the values of Torah play a more explicit role in Israeli jurisprudence; the left will scream themselves hoarse) and support for the right of Jewish settlement.

That sounds like good negotiations and a good outcome. Assuming, though, that a 61-seat bare majority government is not long for this world, the Jewish Home is well-positioned to make a positive difference in Israeli life and lay the groundwork for the next stage of leadership.

And the merry-go-round continues…

9 Comments

Posted in Contemporary Life, Current Events, Israel

The Moral Deficit

Posted on May 1, 2015 | 21 comments

The Mayor of Baltimore, who graciously “gave those who wished to destroy space to do that as well,” was heeding Talmudic advice in giving the green light to her citizen-rioters to loot, burn, terrorize and perform other acts of violence. The Talmud (Yoma 78b) suggests that an older child should be given “clay vessels” to break, so as to have an outlet for his aggressions or anger. Rabba even bought damaged clay vessels and provided them to his children to break when they felt like it. (Of course, Rabba gave them his own vessels; he didn’t tell his offspring to go break someone else’s vessels or burn down someone else’s store…)

One would assume the Mayor misspoke and meant to say “protest,” not “destroy,” but some mistakes are so unfortunate that they are irreparable. That is not to say she will take responsibility and resign – that is not the ethos of modern America – but her words were, unintentionally or not, grounds for the mayhem that ensued, abetted by the passive response of the police obviously under orders to let the “protesters” vent. The President, whom we have been told repeatedly is a “role model” for young black men, waited a day to casually condemn the violence. It was a desultory commentary; Obama summons more passion in condemning Israelis for adding rooms to their homes in Ofra or Efrat that he did in criticizing young blacks for burning down their own neighborhoods.

Needless to say (actually, quite needful to say), the frustration of many blacks is real, and not necessarily the frustration over the police actions herein. The death of Freddy Grey remains a mystery, and even presuming his innocence, bad things do generally happen even to the innocent when one runs from the police, assaults a police officer, is arrested by the police or finds oneself in police custody. It is best not to get arrested, and even better not to commit crimes (or be in arrears on child support) or do anything that might result in an arrest. There are several recent cases – this is just the latest – in which it does not seem that anyone should have died at all, and those responsible should be brought to account. Of course, non-blacks have also died in confrontations with the police when the police tactics might have been overly aggressive. Rarely, though, have the aggrieved taken to the streets and burned down homes and businesses.

The real frustration of the black community should be over the persistent lawlessness, endemic poverty and social dysfunction that, for some reason, cannot be overcome. The narrative that there is open season on blacks by police officers across the country is patently false, and the statistics bear this out so blatantly that it needs no real analysis. The WSJ reported that twice as many blacks were killed in Chicago alone in one recent year as were killed by the authorities in the rest of the entire country – and 90% of blacks are killed by other blacks. That is the real scandal and the real cause of outrage, or should be. Good black parents – and the lingering tragedy is that most black children are raised by single mothers because of the disappearance of their fathers – must be petrified of sending their children to schools, friends, and even to play ball in the street because gang violence is common, illegal guns rampant and premature death a sad fact of life. The reality is that the young black has more to fear from other young blacks than from any white police officer, but no one seems to internalize that fact.

This is not a “white” police problem, although – without rationalizing any of the recent incidents of death in police custody – it is understandable why the police would be a little edgier in high crime environments than they would be when patrolling in tonier neighborhoods. The police also have families and children, and also want to get through the day alive and in one piece. Some have suggested that the police should just look away and stop ticketing for quality-of-life crimes, stop arresting for outstanding warrants on “minor” matters like failure to pay child support or driving without insurance or a valid license – in other words, look away in order to calm tensions.

The image of Baltimore in flames is exactly what happens when the police look away and decide not to enforce the law. Our Sages (Avot 3:2) taught that we should always “pray for the welfare of the government; but for fear [of government], a person would swallow his friend alive.” Alive! It is what enables people to break into a business and loot the assets, whether liquor, sneakers or bars of soap.

And that, for me, is the heart of the problem. It’s not “racism,” a tedious contention especially given that Baltimore (like many other big cities) has been governed by blacks for years. It has a black mayor, black police commissioner, large black population, and a police force with black representation that is proportionate to the population. That allegation is so clichéd that it is an attempt – usually successful – to avoid dealing with the major problem. And the problem is not education, jobs, police, income inequality, etc.

The problem is a moral deficit that cannot seem to be surmounted and is getting worse as time goes on. The Baltimore riots were typified by one particular act of anarchy: someone broke into stranger’s car, apparently hotwired it, and drove it right into a fire. He then emerged with hands raised in exultation (Touchdown!!) as the car caught flames because he had now succeeded… in what exactly? Stealing a neighbor’s car and destroying it, thereby inconveniencing him, perhaps depriving him of his means of getting to work in the morning? One who can do that and be proud of himself suffers from a deficit of morality that is not easily reversed. It is worse than lawlessness; it is moral emptiness, an obtuse ignorance and blithe rejection of the fundamental rights of another human being.

That moral deficit is manifested in the welfare culture that has created multi-generational families of dependence on others; in black men who routinely procreate and then evaporate, leaving their progeny fatherless; in disparaging the importance of education; in nurturing feelings of entitlement and fostering an industry of grievance; and in cultivating an environment in which crime and immorality are justified or excusable because of past wrongs done to blacks.

Obviously, all blacks are not subject to these harmful forces and probably not even most blacks. Many have rightly lauded the black mother who smacked her teenage son’s face and ordered him off the streets. Good for her! May there be many more like her. But there is another factor that underscores the dysfunction in the black community and the difficulty is shifting gears: the clergy.

Many black clergymen – think the Sharpton’s, the Jackson’s, the Wright’s, et al – stoke the flames (sometimes literally) of violence, grievance and anger at others. Blaming others, especially white people generally and sometimes Jews specifically, is a traditional sermon topic. They never call for introspection, for owning up to their mistakes, for taking responsibility for their own lives; it’s always someone else’s fault. And they disproportionately receive media attention and even White House accolades.

Jews – and their clergy – are the exact opposite. Whenever any Jew stumbles –and we have our own share of miscreants – they routinely blame the entire community, lament where we have all gone wrong, demand soul-searching on the part of the innocent and sometimes the victims. We always blame ourselves first, not others; indeed, we usually go overboard in our self-flagellation for Jewish misdeeds are rightly perceived as desecrations of G-d’s name.

For sure, there are black clergy who do the same. They exist throughout the country – some of them are known to me in New Jersey. They want blacks to take responsibility for their lives, they themselves are exemplars of morality and goodness, they realize the problems are internal and not external – and they are largely ignored by the media. And that is a media that still harp on the evils of slavery exactly 150 years after the Civil War ended – in a country in which slavery not only existed but also was the only country on earth in which other white people went to war with hundreds of thousands getting killed in order to bring about the abolition of slavery.

Can these conundrums be resolved? Not easily. The sale of illegal narcotics in the inner city is out of control and ravaging lives, gang violence is pervasive and there are only two ways to stop it. One is to have an increased police presence, but now the community has been primed to see the police as enemies and uniformly hostile. Any arrest of a black – especially one who resists and is subdued – will be met with suspicion and enmity regardless of its justification. It might work but in the short term can only exacerbate tensions.

The other way is from the ground up – to rebuild the black family with mothers and fathers and children, something that was the norm until the 1960’s; to halt the teenage out-of-wedlock births that demeans the young mothers and is occasionally simply a means to receive additional government assistance; for parents to encourage, monitor and promote their children’s education so the resort to gangs, violence and criminality is unnecessary, not to mention immoral and self-defeating; to raise the profile of true black leaders of vision and decency who recognize the dysfunction and yet are often silenced by the shrill voices of others and a media that knows now to inflame; and above all to preach and embody eternal values and objective morality so children are raised with a clear sense of right and wrong and do not look for day jobs in the grievance industry.

The irony is that most blacks already know this and most live it as well. The collapse of the black community in the inner cities after decades of black, liberal rule does not reflect the broader black community. The liberal paternalism that subtly encourages helplessness and “the soft bigotry of low expectations” (in President Bush’s elegant phrase) has devastated black life and needs to be upended; instead, it just goes on and on in a classic money for votes transaction.

But the dangers still abound and need to be checked or “The Burning of Baltimore” will soon be playing at a theater near you.

21 Comments

Posted in Contemporary Life, Current Events