Am I the only person who just thought that his essay said little worth repeating, let alone worth arguing?
He spoke vapidly about mesorah with little to nothing to back it up or even explain its relevance.
If Friedlander has even read Moster’s mission statement, he would know that (at least Moster claims) that he has parents on his side who are frightened that their community standing will be ruined and their children kicked out of school if they say anything- in direct contrast to his argument.
In fact, according to this argument, the only logical course of action for him personally is to rise up and start a grassroots movement to change the secular studies quality in the schools, isn’t it? He’s the one whose entire argument is based on the fact that Moster is the wrong person to tackle the issue and not that the issue is invalid.
Does he really think more funding will help? I and most people I know attended Jewish schools across many parts of the spectrum with adequate (at the very least) secular studies who have probably less funding than these schools have. Other schools manage it- if these schools want to, they can too.
He also shows himself to know little about the closing of the Volozhin yeshiva (as a poster on the article mentioned)- Volozhin was a yeshiva with students who were well educated and the particular restrictions posed by the Czarist government were far more draconian than simply adding secular studies- it would essentially turn the school into a college with practically no Jewish studies allowed at all. (Yes, I read My Uncle The Netziv.)
Look, blame the messenger, I really don’t care. But if you do, then come up with your own better solution instead of writing a beige article which says nothing but quoting old meaningless talking points.