mentalblog.com comments:
The monopoly should be limited geographically to an area that the shliach can adequately service, and is interested in servicing. How far away is Karpov's shul from Lazars?
This post is not about Karpov. Everyone including Lazar himself knows that he is very wrong. But we are talking about general issues here, not particulars.
Halevai that by exposing the activities, tactics etc of head shluchim and their cronies it would make a difference. If it would, I would be the first one to put it in writing. Unfortunately most of these power-hungry people have built up a following of supporters who will defend them no matter what. These supporters will remain supporters as long as their egos are stroked (which is often as long as those supporters are giving money to the institution) or as long as they remain in positions of importance in the organisation.
Another argument to support the head-shaliach's abusive tactics etc. is to point out that the head-shaliach in another town is much more corrupt and therefore we should be happy to have our (only partially corrupt) head shaliach!!
Unfortunately the only way to counter the bad behaviour of head shluchim and their families is to start your own shul. This has been done in many places already and I can see this trend continuing. A great example is the Tzemach Tzedek community in Sydney which broke away from Feldman and is now a flourishing, supportive community -- this is a new innovation for the Chabad community in Sydney.
I don't know how effective your writing has been or will be prompting change for the better in various Chabad groups, but you must feel at least a little good to shine the light of day on some of these people and watch them scurrying around. After all: if they aren't doing anything wrong, if the things they do are a tribute to your former Rebbe z''t and are a kiddush HaShem, what's the problem writing about their activities?
The question isn't why you've been denied an aliya. The question is, as we all know, why haven't they? As for you my brave friend, I suspect you can grab an aliah in every other shule in town. With Hashem's blessings, we'll have the honor of offering you one someday.
what else will these bochurim, who happen to be shliach's children or son in law, do after they get married? be a truck driver? they only learned the shlichus (fundraising)job, so their fathers give them 'positions' in state. why would the shliach give it to someone else son?
i think it's a legit family business.
in my state - head shliach, his brother, his son, his son in law are shluchim. other shluchim are shemtov, deitch who got in because of money and power (blat).
let them make a living and have parnoso. while doing some outreach.
if you don't like it - you have a right to write about it.
people should have choices- you are right.
NafOz, in response to all the shenanigans here we are thinking of opening a new Shule. As a mater of fact there is a meeting today at 11:00 am (in 3 hours) to discuss this. Could you share your experience in Australia in that regard? We would like to learn from you.
Tzemach
It is truly outrageous. Does your shul read the same parshas in the same order as the rest of the world. This week's parsha had some line like "Lo Tikom" in it, I think. Maybe that is expunged or "retranslated" from your shul's chumashim?
As for Glasnost and undoing nepostism, he only answer is mass rebellion, just as it was in its source state. When the poeple of a community say that it is just "the way things are" or as NafOz elegantly puts it above taht we should just be glad we don't have more nepotism and corruption and malevolence, the oligarchy laughs their diabolical laugh, may even mockingly agree with the sentiment, and then moves on to its next outrage. But, the community is afraid to act for fear of personal reprisals, which can be very subtle, like the kid who bullies by sereptitiously poking another child and that child finally lashes out. Who usually gets punished?
We live in the wild west of Judaism. No Beis Din will dispense justice in these matters (Don't even TRY to dispute that!). No AUTHORITY truly exists except those pushing their own agenda. The answer to your question is that, in each community, every member must be intolerant of ALL injustices to any other members, without fear of reprisals. When the inevitable reprisals come, every member must be as outraged as the targets tehmselves. In short, it takes courage, steadfastness and impressing upon the "spoiled brat" potentates that there is a cost to gratuitously or vindictively harming someone in your community. Creating that cost and exacting it on a consistent basis is the key to breaking their backs. I fear that the nepotism is so institutionalized though, that people are so resigned and numb, that this can never happen in practical terms.
I'm not convinced until I hear a direct quote from the Lazar side. If they refuse to comment, in my opinion more power to them for not fueling the public discussion of this issue, if it is one.
That being said, good luck on handling your personal boycott. I don't quite think they don't have the right to do that, but informing you of it personally beforehand, with a chance for Teshuvah of some sort, seems to be more proper.
guravitzer, Lazar's side made a public comment in the JTA article:
http://www.mentalblog.com/2005/
0...talblogcom.html
I also do not feel boycotted. As a matter of fact there many here who had enough of these clowns independent of my incident and I feel surrounded by friends in the community more than in any other time. As I said there is a meeting to open a new shule in a couple of hours.
guravitzer
Thank you. You have clearly shown the problem, exactly as I described it. Your attitude assures that the lovely totalitarianism and nepostism will continue forever. You say that the other side refuses to comment and imply that it is a good thing. If you were the victim, and the other side refused to comment, would you feel the same. Think about that logic. Tshuva is definitely order, but the people who need to do it will never see the their own need for it, until they are sitting there looking at each other, wondering where everyone else went and why no one will play with them any more.
Tzemach, they are resigned and numb. I am happy to hear that in your particular situation, at least some people are taking action. That is the exception.
you actually seem like a mentsch and I wish you hatzlacha in the resolution of your situation. There'll always be an aliyah for you in our shul in Springfield.
(...deleted by TA)
shmuel monkes, no personal attacks please
http://www.mentalblog.com/2005/0...eing-or-
in.html
In the late 1950's Lubavitch started to go public by opening up Lubavitch News Service (LNS). Yudel Krinsky because of his vast erudition and the knowledge of the English language was put in charge of this branch.
The Rebbe had decided that Public relations would be THE forum by which Lubavitch would either be made or broken in the eyes of the general US public specifically the Jewish public. Jurnalists like Irv Spiegel of the NY Times and authors like Reform rabbi Theodore Weiner were wined and dined by Lubavitch and they came through with ground breaking posative fluff pieces about Lubavitch in places like the NY Times, Commentary and Time magazine amongst other media outlets.
All was "hunky dory" until about 1986 when various "enemies" of Lubavitch decided to use the media against Lubavitch. Barry Gourary fought back anti Gourary piecs , by cultivating reporters for NEWSDAY and other papers who came through. In the 1990's rabbi Saul Simon Deutsch had even greater success in planting anti Chabad stories in all sorts of media outlets in the US, israel and canada.In general our Jewish media especially papers like the FORWARD and the NY Jewish WEEK became more mature and dared print objective articles about Lubavitch and their activities.
So the sword of the media was now 2 sided, something Lubavitch could not abide , because the movement like many institutions slid into a state where PR and fund raising became the chief goals of the movement by the early 1990's.
Hence Lubavitch became very upset over any objective articles about the movement its strange Messiainism , its pockets of finacial corruption, its internal strife etc that was reported chiefly in the Israeli daily papers , but made its way into the American media as well. What they needed is a fluff piece like Sue Fishkoff's book , thats what Lubavitch wants. Anything more objective is to be fought like the case of the book by Rigg (whatever its merits).
So chazak ve Ametz Reb Zemach and do'nt worry about the aliyoth.
I'm glad to hear you are opening a place in which you will feel comfortable.
rebel, you're wrong. If I was a victim and had no recourse I would feel hurt. The fact that the opposite side won't respond in the press is to me a symbol of respect, not the lack thereof.
R' Karpov was bitten by the same problem that bit R' Krinsky on Vilna - lack of ownership of the building that he used to build a Jewish community.
rebel, the underdog isn't always right. And not always wrong either.
R' Karpov does not have a right to tell the owners of the building what to do. He can ask, plead beg, whatever. He can buy a building and move his congregation into it. But his case has instead highlighted why in part the nepotism (or full authority granted the Rabbi) is helpful - it ensures that the Rabbi can't have his institution taken away after years of work.
On this particular issue, I'm not sure I agree with Tzemach. I understand that he is supporting a friend.
guravitzer, as I said I can't say everything I heard. But you are very wrong that I am "supporting a friend". I am looking at this objectively. The stance unfamiliar to you.
guravitzer
I do not even consider Tzemach an "underdog" in this case. He seems to have at least a minyan of people who support him. I thought my post was perfectly clear on why I thought that this was outrageous. There is no clearer case of Nekama. Shneur, in his post above, clearly understands the situation. (Shneur for president!)
It is those like you who hide in your cacoons and pretend to yourselves that the "leaders" have some point more than mere strongarm tactics that sustains these failed practices. If a "leader" makes a radical decision, like excluding or restricting a kehila member in some public way, as in this case, one would think that he would bolster his opinion in the public eye by explaining his reasons to gain the support of the membership for the rule of law. The action of restricting someone from public inclusion in getting aliyahs is a very public action. To argue, as you do, that it should be kept private misses the fact that it is too late for that. Now the "leadership" must justify its already public punitive action. The most plausible thing in my mind is that their only reason is "because we say so, and we are who we are."
I hope you join the rest of us over here in America someday. I hear new shuls are opening every day.
Atlas,
Reacting to a disagreeable shul situation by starting a new shul with a bunch of like-minded friends is a healthy, life-affirming and laudable act. It is "good for the Jews". Good luck with it!
rebel,
While I do not share guravitzer's view on the Karpov saga, please note that his "underdog" comment was made specifically in reference to that case, it was not directed at Tzemach. All guravitzer said about Temach's shul story was: "I'm glad to hear you are opening a place in which you will feel comfortable"...
Schneur,
The Rebbe had decided that Public relations would be THE forum by which Lubavitch would either be made or broken in the eyes of the general US public specifically the Jewish public.
you would think that if Rebbe actually "decided" to do it he would put in charge better people? If it was really "make or brake"?
Also there is an interesting interview with Sue Fishkoff by Luke Ford:
http://lukeford.net/profiles/
pro...ue_fishkoff.htm
Luke: "How did the subjects of your book react to it?"
Sue: "With shock and awe? Not with shrapnel bombs at least. Clearly the emissaries, the shlichim, were happy to be in the book and the ones that I heard from were generally happy. Their whole life is about promoting their message. And if there's no publicity, they haven't promoted their message. That there's a book explaining what they do and people are reading it validates their entire mission."
Krinsky knew English as well as anyone else there and he was loyal and organized.Remember LNS was organized in the late 1950's before hundreds of BTs joined up for the ride to destiny.
Clearly the media became the playing field ie the arena in which Lubavitch competed.
No other chasidic group mde use of the general media . As a matter of fact the Satmarer rebbe rav Joel Teitelbaum said the week or day the Yiddish press stops criticizing me is the day I know I am doing something wrong. Bobov, Ger , Belz etc could care less if Time magazine had an article about a little Moses in Brooklyn.
No other Chasiidc group at that time saw the media as worthy of consideration certainly not the secular and non-Jewish media.
Unfortunetely even though Krinsky and his nephew Rabbi Shmotkin (nepotism or just chance) who run LNS knew how to cultivate journalists and plant stories and issue press releases. They knew little about damage control in terms of dealing with negative press and it took them time to learnhow to spin a story thir way.
But the rebbe clearly was aware of the crucial role the media played in the sprading of ideas in the US.
berl, thank you for pointing out the obvious.
Tzemach, although you're wrong about my objectivity, I still enjoy reading you :-).
Commenting by HaloScan
