AAQ – 1) you claim that Mizrahi affected those jews that were not affected by the non religious movements. Prob true, but it is a crime in your eyes because you are viewing any cooperation with zionists as a crime.
I specifically spelled out that I am not getting into the issue of Zionism per se, only its results in the Ruchniyus department. There are others here who take a different approach, please do not automatically assume I speak on their behalf.
2) that Mizrahi made their children non religious. This is a serious claim. Is it really true?
I did not claim that Mizrachi ITSELF made their children non-religious. It facilitated contact between virulently anti-religious people on one hand, who the secular Zionists undeniably were, and people who were basically ehrlicher Yidden who they could never reach on their own. The results of that shidduch were disastrous, if not for the first generation, then for their children.
It probably was true early on, but so was with other jews, in Palestine andin Europe. It was everywhere.
You are going back to your previous line of reasoning, that ‘everyone everywhere was going off, so why get on Mizrachi?’ To that I responded, that those Jews who joined openly secularist movements knew THEY were going OUT. Mizrachi brought the secularists IN to reach Jews who, at the time, were not interested in going OUT. BTW, if you noticed, I am actually giving Mizrachi credit for the success of Zionism as a popular movement… You might like that…
At the end, children of those who moved to EY did better than of those who stayed in Europe listening to r Wasserman and others.
No, they did not. Seeing as almost all of those children are anyway no longer alive, due to 90 or so years passing, which group is in a better matzav now? The ones who listened and (many of them) died על קידוש השם, or the ones who didn’t listen, and lived (many of them were also killed) as מחללי שבת and בעלי עברה? If you truly believe that גדול המחטיאו יותר מההורגו. and what Rashi said in last weeks Parsha וחי בהם לעולם הבא then your statement doesn’t make sense. BTW, most of the pre-WWII ‘Zionists’ didn’t actually move to British Palestine, and many who tried were prevented from doing so by the British. Many Chareidim attempted to go to Eretz Yisroel, even before it became obvious that war was brewing (Zionism never held a monopoly on love for the real Eretz HaKodesh…), but the Zionists controlled the limited supply of ‘certificates’ issued by the British… All of this is well documented. This leaves aside the issue of Zionist sabotage of rescue efforts during the war, a subject that was censored and suppressed in Israel for decades.
By the way, in the long run, those who listen to Gedolim have more children and grandchildren… I don’t know if anyone did a rigorous study, but I suspect that the descendants of the Chareidim who did survive the Holocaust are more numerous than the descendants of the secular and even Mizrachist settlers of that era… So who did better even בגשמיות?
The way you present history after that is somewhat colored by your opinion. Who started, who joined later…
There is a concept in Torah outlook that who starts something is indicative of what that something is all about… Zionism in general was started by people who were very far from loving the special Kedushah of Eretz Yisroel… The Rabbanut was started by people who didn’t exactly want or need real Rabbinic guidance… Mizrachi was all about FOLLOWING, and following the WRONG people.
bottom line, Mizrahi Cooperated more and had influence on what the state was doing.
Cooperating is not the same as influencing, and may be the opposite… The early leaders of the State granted many concessions to the Chareidim in order to keep them quiet… They were sure that within a decade or two they would complete their work of shmad with both the new immigrants from Sephardic countries, and even the children of the Chareidim themselves. The Ra-Banim of Mizrachi were sent to convince the Olim parents to sent their children to the ‘Yeshiva’ in Deganya… I know personally three people who experienced this (as children, their parents are no longer alive) themselves. So what ‘influence’ are you referring to? What can Mizrachi show in the רוחניות department for almost 130 years of existence?
I agree that both groups tried their best in unprecedented circumstances and had both good and bad Decisions.
I agree that there were well meaning people on both sides. (I hinted to Rav Kook z”l being of a different type than the others.), but in hindsight there is no question who was right. My main point is that Mizrachi was born mostly of דעת בעלי בתים and people doing their own thing, good intentions notwithstanding.
Even r Yochanan Ben Zakkai was not sure whether his negotiations with Romans were done correctly.
Mizrachi was more Josephus and less Rabban Yochanan Ben Zakkai… Actually, it is very relevant to bring up רבן יוחנן בן זכאי, because תן לי יבנה וחכמיה is the precedent for Jewish survival, not political maneuvering…