NP,
if looking at big picture, I think we live in unprecedented times for last 300 years, and we did not yet learn how to live with the society that changed so much. We know how many opinions existed at previous crises – Bavel, destruction of 2nd BM, encounters with Greeks, Romans, Christianity and Islam …
Looking at last 80 years: we have chareidi yesshiva or chasidic, RZ, “modern O”, Chabad approaches, each having their own achievements and downsides. We need to look honestly at that. Charedi approach achieved tremendous successes in creating and keeping large communities from remnants of what existed in Eastern Europe. I very much understand R Kotler’s approach confronted with American Jews who were so excited with material success that their children would join “American dream” with many of those assimilating. On the other hand, I see several issues that charedi approach does not address:
1) there are multitudes of Jews outside of their area of influence. They are not evil just because they are not wearing black hats. They are same type of Jews that we had in other communities over centuries. The difference is that they now can exist outside of Jewish communities. It is a big challenge of modernity. They need to be cared of. Chabad does a lot here. This was immediate goal of R Soloveitchik in 1930s – create serious observant Rabbis who can run shuls for these people (many of whom lived in small towns at the time).
2) how do we address modernity in a long term? do we pretend it did not happen and live like before? do we address those issues? On one hand, I find R Soloveitchik compelling when he writes (in 1950s): if we claim to have Truth from Hashem, then we should be addressing the world with our solutions, not hiding in the caves. At some point, if we refuse to live in the world Hashem gave us _today_, then we are not witnesses of Hashem’s Torah to the world… On the other hand, at what speed? It does seem legitimate to proceed slowly. As R Steinsaltz used to say, ask us in 50 years about halochos of electricity, ask us in 100 years about what was the meaning of Shoah, we are an old religion that takes time to come to conclusions.
3) when you understand that there are multiple legitimate approaches, and we might not know yet which one is right, and most likely each one is partially right, then there is a way to see who is reasonable – the one who appreciate at least some value in other movements, when they are doing it l’shem shamayim. There are many who do, and there are many who just advocate for their own movement.