Give an Example of the Fallacy of ‘Denying the Antecedent’: Disarmament

From Thomas Sowell in 2014:

Liberals advocate many wonderful things. In fact, I suspect that most conservatives would prefer to live in the kind of world envisioned by liberals, rather than in the kind of world envisioned by conservatives.

Unfortunately, the only kind of world that any of us can live in is the world that actually exists. Trying to live in the kind of world that liberals envision has costs that will not go away just because these costs are often ignored by liberals.

Ah, what an opening!

Liberals can be disarming. In fact, they are for gun control at home or international disarmament agreements.

Unfortunately, the people who are the easiest to disarm are the ones who are the most peaceful — and disarming them makes them vulnerable to those who are the least peaceful.

We are currently getting a painful demonstration of that in Ukraine. When Ukraine became an independent nation, it gave up all the nuclear missiles that were on its territory from the days when it had been part of the Soviet Union.

At that time, Ukraine had the third largest arsenal of nuclear weapons in the world. Do you think Putin would have attacked Ukraine if it still had those nuclear weapons? Or do you think it is just a coincidence that nations with nuclear weapons don’t get invaded?

Disarmament advocates are called “the peace movement.” Whether disarmament has in fact led to peace, more often than military deterrence has, is something that could be argued on the basis of the facts of history — but it seldom is.

International disarmament agreements flourished between the two World Wars. Just a few years after the end of the First World War there were the Washington Naval Agreements of 1921-1922 that led to the United States actually sinking some of its own warships.

Then there was the celebrated Kellogg-Briand Pact of 1928, in which nations renounced war, with France’s Foreign Minister Aristide Briand declaring, “Away with rifles, machine guns, and cannon!” The “international community” loved it.

In Britain, the Labour Party repeatedly voted against military armaments during most of the decade of the 1930s. A popular argument of the time was that Britain should disarm “as an example to others.”

Unfortunately, Hitler did not follow that example. He was busy building the most powerful military machine on the continent of Europe.

Nor did Germany or Japan allow the Washington Naval Agreements to cramp their style. The fact that Britain and America limited the size of their battleships simply meant that Germany and Japan had larger battleships when World War II began.

What is happening in Ukraine today is just a continuation of the old story about nations that disarm increasing the chances of being attacked by nations that do not disarm.

Any number of empirical studies about domestic gun control laws tell much the same story.

If in fact tighter gun control laws reduced the murder rate, that would be the liberals’ ace of trumps. Why then do the liberals not play their ace of trumps, by showing us such hard facts? Because they don’t have any such hard facts. So they give us lofty rhetoric and outraged indignation instead.

Read the rest here…

In other words:

“If we have a strong army, countries which fear our army might attack us. Disarming, we remove that risk.”

(Of course, there is much more to say about Ukraine\Russia.)

Of Lower East Side Jews

From “The Poor In Great Cities: The Problems And What Is Doing To Solve Them“, copyright 1892 by reformist journalist Jacob A. Riis (author of “How the Other Half Lives“):

The Italian who comes here gravitates naturally to the oldest and most dilapidated tenements in search of cheap rents, which he doesn’t find. The Jew has another plan, characteristic of the man. He seeks out the biggest ones and makes the rent come within his means by taking in boarders, “sweating” his flat to the point of police intervention. That that point is a long way beyond human decency, let alone comfort, an instance from Ludlow Street, that came to my notice while writing this, quite clearly demonstrates. The offender was a tailor, who lived with his wife, two children, and two boarders in two rooms on the top floor. [It is always the top floor; in fifteen years of active service as a police reporter I have had to climb to the top floor five times for every one my business was further down, irrespective of where the tenement was or what kind of people lived in it. Crime, suicide, and police business generally seem to bear the same relation to the stairs in a tenement that they bear to poverty itself. The more stairs the more trouble. The deepest poverty is at home in the attic.] But this tailor; with his immediate household, including the boarders, he occupied the larger of the two rooms. The other, a bedroom eight feet square, he sublet to a second tailor and his wife; which couple, following his example as their opportunities allowed, divided the bedroom in two by hanging a curtain in the middle, took one-half for themselves and let the other half to still another tailor with a wife and child. A midnight inspection by the sanitary police was followed by the arrest of the housekeeper and the original tailor, and they were fined or warned in the police-court, I forget which. It doesn’t much matter. That the real point was missed was shown by the appearance of the owner of the house, a woman, at Sanitary Headquarters, on the day following, with the charge against the policeman that he was robbing her of her tenants.

The story of inhuman packing of human swarms, of bitter poverty, of landlord greed, of sweater slavery, of darkness and squalor and misery, which these tenements have to tell, is equalled, I suppose, nowhere in a civilized land. Despite the prevalence of the boarder, who is usually a married man, come over alone the better to be able to prepare the way for the family, the census shows that fifty-four per cent of the entire population of immigrant Jews were children, or under age. Every steamer has added to their number since, and judging from the sights one sees daily in the office of the United Hebrew Charities, and from the general appearance of Ludlow Street, the proportion of children has suffered no decrease. Let the reader who would know for himself what they are like, and what their chances are, take that street some evening from Hester Street down and observe what he sees going on there. Not that it is the only place where he can find them. The census I spoke of embraced forty-five streets in the Seventh, Tenth, and Thirteenth Wards. But at that end of Ludlow Street the tenements are taller and the crowds always denser than anywhere else. Let him watch the little pedlars hawking their shoe-strings, their matches, and their penny paper-pads, with the restless energy that seems so strangely out of proportion to the reward it reaps; the half-grown children staggering under heavy bundles of clothes from the sweater’s shop; the ragamuffins at their fretful play, play yet, discouraged though it be by the nasty surroundings—thank goodness, every year brings its Passover with the scrubbing brigade to Ludlow Street, and the dirt is shifted from the houses to the streets once anyhow; if it does find its way back, something may be lost on the way—the crowding, the pushing for elbow-room, the wails of bruised babies that keep falling down-stairs, or rolling off the stoop, and the raids of angry mothers swooping down upon their offspring and distributing thumps right and left to pay for the bruises, an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth. Whose eye, whose tooth, is of less account in Jewtown than that the capital put out bears lawful interest in kind. What kind of interest may society some day expect to reap from Ghettos like these, where even the sunny temper of childhood is soured by want and woe, or smothered in filth? It is a long time since I have heard a good honest laugh, a child’s gleeful shout, in Ludlow Street. Angry cries, jeers, enough. They are as much part of the place as the dirty pavements; but joyous, honest laughs, like soap and water, are at a premium there.

But children laugh because they are happy. They are not happy in Ludlow Street. Nobody is except the landlord. Why should they be? Born to toil and trouble, they claim their heritage early and part with it late. There is even less time than there is room for play in Jewtown, good reason why the quality of the play is poor. There is work for the weakest hands, a step for the smallest feet in the vast tread-mill of these East Side homes. A thing is worth there what it will bring. All other considerations, ambitions, desires, yield to that. Education pays as an investment, and therefore the child is sent to school. The moment his immediate value as a worker overbalances the gain in prospect by keeping him at his books, he goes to the shop. The testimony of Jewish observers, who have had quite unusual opportunities for judging, is that the average age at which these children leave school for good is rather below twelve than beyond it, by which time their work at home, helping their parents, has qualified them to earn wages that will more than pay for their keep. They are certainly on the safe side in their reckoning, if the children are not. The legal age for shop employment is fourteen. On my visits among the homes workshops, and evening schools of Jewtown, I was always struck by the number of diminutive wage-earners who were invariably “just fourteen.” It was clearly not the child which the tenement had dwarfed in their case, but the memory or the moral sense of the parents.

If, indeed, the shop were an exchange for the home; if the child quit the one upon entering the other, there might be little objection to make; but too often they are two names for the same thing; where they are not, the shop is probably preferable, bad as that may be. When, in the midnight hour, the noise of the sewing-machine was stilled at last, I have gone the rounds of Ludlow and Hester and Essex Streets among the poorest of the Russian Jews, with the sanitary police, and counted often four, five, and even six of the little ones in a single bed, sometimes a shake-down on the hard floor, often a pile of half-finished clothing brought home from the sweater, in the stuffy rooms of their tenements. In one I visited very lately, the only bed was occupied by the entire family lying lengthwise and crosswise, literally in layers, three children at the feet, all except a boy of ten or twelve, for whom there was no room. He slept with his clothes on to keep him warm, in a pile of rags just inside the door. It seemed to me impossible that families of children could be raised at all in such dens as I had my daily and nightly walks in. And yet the vital statistics and all close observation agree in allotting to these Jews even an unusual degree of good health. The records of the Sanitary Bureau show that while the Italians have the highest death-rate, the mortality in the lower part of the Tenth Ward, of which Ludlow Street is the heart and type, is the lowest in the city. Even the baby death-rate is very low. But for the fact that the ravages of diphtheria, croup, and measles run up the record in the houses occupied entirely by tailors—in other words, in the sweater district, where contagion always runs riot — the Tenth Ward would seem to be the healthiest spot in the city, as well as the dirtiest and the most crowded. The temperate habits of the Jew and his freedom from enfeebling vices generally must account for this, along with his marvellous vitality. I cannot now recall ever having known a Jewish drunkard. On the other hand, I have never come across a Prohibitionist among them. The absence of the one renders the other superfluous

Whatever the effect upon the physical health of the children, it cannot be otherwise, of course, than that such conditions should corrupt their morals. I have the authority of a distinguished rabbi, whose field and daily walk are among the poorest of his people, to support me in the statement that the moral tone of the young girls is distinctly lower than it was. The entire absence of privacy in their homes and the foul contact of the sweaters’ shops, where men and women work side by side from morning till night, scarcely half clad in the hot summer weather, does for the girls what the street completes in the boy. But for the patriarchal family life of the Jew that is his strongest virtue, their ruin would long since have been complete. It is that which pilots him safely through shoals upon which the Gentile would have been inevitably wrecked. It is that which keeps the almshouse from casting its shadow over Ludlow Street to add to its gloom. It is the one quality which redeems, and on the Sabbath eve when he gathers his household about his board, scant though the fare be, dignifies the darkest slum of Jewtown.

How strong is this attachment to home and kindred that makes the Jew cling to the humblest hearth and gather his children and his children’s children about it, though grinding poverty leave them only a bare crust to share, I saw in the case of little Jette Brodsky, who strayed away from her own door, looking for her papa. They were strangers and ignorant and poor, so that weeks went by before they could make their loss known and get a hearing, and meanwhile Jette, who had been picked up and taken to Police Headquarters, had been hidden away in an asylum, given another name when nobody came to claim her, and had been quite forgotten. But in the two years that passed before she was found at last, her empty chair stood ever by her father’s, at the family board, and no Sabbath eve but heard his prayer for the restoration of their lost one. It happened once that I came in on a Friday evening at the breaking of bread, just as the four candles upon the table had been lit with the Sabbath blessing upon the home and all it sheltered. Their light fell on little else than empty plates and anxious faces; but in the patriarchal host who arose and bade the guest welcome with a dignity a king might have envied I recognized with difficulty the humble pedlar I had known only from the street and from the police office, where he hardly ventured beyond the door.

But the tenement that has power to turn purest gold to dross digs a pit for the Jew even through this virtue that has been his shield against its power for evil. In its atmosphere it turns too often to a curse by helping to crowd his lodgings, already overflowing, beyond the point of official forbearance. Then follow orders to “reduce” the number of tenants that mean increased rent, which the family cannot pay, or the breaking up of the home. An appeal to avert such a calamity came to the Board of Health recently from one of the refugee tenements. The tenant was a man with a houseful of children, too full for the official scale as applied to the flat, and his plea was backed by the influence of his only friend in need—the family undertaker. There was something so cruelly suggestive in the idea that the laugh it raised died without an echo.

Here, then, are conditions as unfavorable to the satisfactory, even safe, development of child life in the chief American city, as could well be imagined, more unfavorable even than with the Bohemians, who have at least their faith in common with us, if safety lies in the merging through the rising generation of the discordant elements into a common harmony. A community set apart, set sharply against the rest in every clashing interest, social and industrial; foreign in language, in faith, and in tradition; repaying dislike with distrust; expanding under the new relief from oppression in the unpopular qualities of greed and contentiousness fostered by ages of tyranny unresistingly borne. But what says the record of this? That of the sixty thousand children, including the fifteen thousand young men and women over fourteen who earn a large share of the money that pays for rent and food, and the twenty-three thousand toddlers under six years, fully one-third go to school. Deducting the two extremes, little more than a thousand children of between six and fourteen years, that is, of school age, were put down as receiving no instruction at the time the census was taken; nor is it at all likely that this condition was permanent in the case of the greater number of these. The poorest Hebrew knows — the poorer he is, the better he knows it — that knowledge is power, and power as the means of getting on in the world that has spurned him so long, is what his soul yearns for. He lets no opportunity slip to obtain it. Day and night-schools are crowded with his children, who learn rapidly and with ease. Every synagogue, every second rear tenement or dark back-yard, has its school and its school-master, with his scourge to intercept those who might otherwise escape. In the census there are put down 251 Jewish teachers as living in these tenements, nearly all of whom probably conduct such schools, so that, as the children form always more than one-half of the population in the Jewish quarter, the evidence is, after all, that even here, with the tremendous inpour of a destitute, ignorant people, the cause of progress along the safe line is holding its own.

See the rest here (especially the comparison to the non-Jews)…

(Of course, there is much to criticize in the economic understanding of the author. Thomas Sowell hinted at this. And I left out some of the bad bits.)

Advertising Kiryat Shmuel, Chaifa

Living the Dream

Yisroel Perlowitz, Kiryat Shmuel, Chaifa (Haifa)

I grew up in Lakewood, New Jersey.

My parents moved to Lakewood in the mid 80’s after they got married, and my siblings and I were raised in Lakewood as a part of the BMG yeshiva. My parents both worked, yet my father was (and still is) always with a sefer in his hand. We were the typical Lakewood Charedi working family.

My mother always had the dream of living in Eretz Yisroel, and instilled in us a true love for it, inspiring us to move there when we would have the ability to do so. Ever since I came to Eretz Yisroel as a bochur to learn in yeshiva, it became my dream, too. The idea of being surrounded by Yidden everywhere and feeling that I am among brothers (even the taxi drivers!) really appealed to me.

After getting married and living for seven years in Lakewood, it was time to realize the dream. We knew we wanted something different than the usual Yerushalayim or Ramat Beit Shemesh. Nefesh B’Nefesh’s Go North program, designed to encourage immigration directly to the northern part of the country, prompted us to explore possible options there. We did a bit of online research and found some information about Kiryat Shmuel; we saw that it could be relevant to us. After further research, which included contacting local residents, we decided on our move from Lakewood to Kiryat Shmuel.

We moved in November 2016, shortly after our oldest child had just started first grade. She went straight into first grade here too, and within four weeks was already speaking Hebrew! Our second child had a bit more difficulty with the language, so she was kept back an extra year at gan just to give her more time, so that she would be better equipped to succeed in first grade. The schools here are very warm and welcoming, and the teachers treated our kids a bit easier to ease their transition.

Kiryat Shmuel is one of the neighborhoods and cities that make up what is commonly known as the Krayot (lit. boroughs). Though it is a relatively small and self-contained community, it is under the municipal jurisdiction of the large northern coastal city of Haifa, and therefore enjoys amenities that may come with a large city such as municipal garbage cleanup, upkeep of the streets and other “city” advantages.

Within the neighborhood, there are several different schools serving the different segments of the population. There is a kosher mehadrin supermarket, walkable from most areas of the neighborhood, that caters to all the frum people with mehadrin hechsherim, and there’s a mehadrin pizza and ice-cream store in the neighborhood as well. There are also branches of the Osher Ad and Rami Levy supermarkets about a ten- to fifteen-minute drive away. It takes just a twenty-five-minute walk or a five-minute drive to get to the kosher separate beach.

The neighborhood is by and large Torah-observant, and as such is closed to traffic on Shabbos. The rav of Kiryat Shmuel for over six decades was Rav Akiva Hacarmi zt”l, a brother-in-law of Rav Mordechai Gifter zt”l (their wives were sisters). After his passing, two of his sons continue his legacy. One son heads the kollel and yeshiva, and another heads the Merkazi (Central) shul, with several hundred members and a dozen minyanim daily.

The neighborhood is made up of about sixty percent Dati (i.e., non-Chareidi religious), twenty percent Charedi – most of whom are Sephardic, ten percent Chabad and ten percent nominally observant. There are about thirty English-speaking families in the area (including an English-speaking doctor who immigrated from Brooklyn a few years ago), but they are all integrated into the larger community.

There are about thirty shuls that cater to the various groups; however, in all honesty, they are all mixed. It is really beautiful to see how everyone davens with everyone else. On Simchas Torah, the main Ashkenazi shul meets up with the Sephardic shul to dance together.

When our infant son was diagnosed with Menkes disease not long after we arrived (a story in and of itself), we personally felt the spirit of achdus that pervades Kiryat Shmuel. The community immediately sprang into action with an immense outpouring of heartful help. I got a phone call from one young adult community member that they would be available at all times to help us, with night-time hospital shifts and the like, and that we shouldn’t even think of financial remuneration.

Another thing we came to appreciate during the short life of our son a”h, is the high level of medical and social services offered here, on a par with anything we’d find back in the U.S. Within relative proximity to our community there is a frum educational facility for special-needs children which he was able to attend. The devotion of the staff is exceptional; a short time before he was niftar, the staff and their families basically fought over who would be privileged to host him while we went on a much-needed vacation.

With its universities and medical centers, the general Haifa area attracts many students, and is home to many medical students and professionals. Hi-tech is also very popular here. If you know Hebrew and have some type of tech background, you have quite a good chance of finding a job here. In my area there are some full-time kollel learners as well. I myself do computer work for an American company.

The wide range of housing that exists here – apartments, duplexes, and single-family homes, from 500K to two million shekels – is significantly cheaper than in the center of the country, and you also get much more for your money.

Yes – there are areas to live in outside of Ramat Beit Shemesh! It is a very beautiful country out here!

Connected

Kiryat Shmuel is located on the main train line with access to direct trains to Tel Aviv (under 90 minutes with the express trains), Beer Sheva, the airport, Modiin, Karmiel, and Nahariya. There is only one transfer needed to get to Yerushalayim.

In the pre-Corona days, there were trains at all hours of the day and night. They are now still very frequent, from the early morning hours until very late at night.

If We’re Tossing Out C. Walder’s Books, Why Not S. Carlebach’s ‘Inspirational’ Material, AS WELL?!

I see no difference

By the way, I regard it as a terrible sign many Breslovers still mention S.C., and with the respectful “Reb” (all because he helped popularize Rabbi Nachman of Breslov at the time). And I mean the old-style, Meah Shearim Breslovers, too!

(I am unaware of what Amshinov does.)

Again, we refer here to preserving the hypocritical “religious inspiration” of a child molester and lecher, not necessarily the melodies.

My Grand Theory of Nittel Nacht (Unproven, but It’s the Internet, So That’s OK)

To be blunt, Nittel Nacht (today almost universally ignored) is “a riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma”.

First and foremost, not learning Torah that night is mentioned offhand by (or true of) true scholars and Achronim, including the Mekor Chaim and Chavos Yair (according to Wikipedia), not just Chassidim who sought to ex post facto “justify” Nittel. Their pop-mystical “explanations” shed mostly darkness (not much better than apostate informants’ reports about Jews eating lots of garlic and avoiding the restroom on Nittel — although maybe there is something to that as well).

We cannot attribute the whole matter to ignorance. So… Why no Torah?!

Worse, who permits actively playing games on a specific day for no reason?! (I recall the Poskim only criticize card-playing\gambling on Purim or Chanukah.)

Why not use the time constructively some other way (although some did use the time in kosher ways)? And what did Chatzos have to do with anything?

And why the different dates? The Goyish calendar\s bear no significance or truth or line up with True Time. (Reminds me of the ever-moving target of the Israeli state’s “Independence Day” by the Chief Rabbinate…)

Chasam Sofer (קובץ תשובות סימן ל”א): 

ממנהג העולם שאוסרים גם תשמיש וסוגרים שערי טבילה כי לדעתי מנהג שטות הוא ויש למחות ביד הנוהגים כן.

But how did this ever arise?

Now, the common explanation is that by forbidding Jews from studying Torah in the Beis Medrash, the Jews would be less visible, and not in their usual habitat, thereby escaping marauding mobs of revelers who had just heard sermons against “[Their-deity]-Killers“. And most Jews didn’t own their own Torah books, so they simply didn’t learn Torah at all.

So it is said.

Problem is, Nittel Nacht was “observed” for many centuries, presumably even when and where there was no such risk. And by Torah scholars, who should know better. And Nittel continued well after the popularization of the printing press. Nor was Tefillah Betzibbur suspended, Corona-style, so why is staying in the Beis Medrash any worse?

Some hypothesize Jews wished to “avoid experiencing any pleasure” at this time. This notion, at least, needs no rebuttal…

Other reasons given appear contrived or forced.

Here is Hyehudi’s unproven, unexamined theory, based on little research:

Nittel Nacht was a time for either family bonding or staying out of sight (or both).

Mima nafshach:

  • If it was physically dangerous, best stay home, without a chavrusa.
  • And if there was a religious danger of one’s children or oneself becoming jealous of the non-Jews’ hollelus, indecencies and inglories, good food and song, best to stay home, keep everyone home, and employ distractions (but without copying them!). (And saying the unexpurgated Aleinu and reading “Toldos Yeshu” adds a nice touch.)

Similar to what we wrote about Shabbos meals, sometimes ביטולה של תורה זהו קיומה!

(This explanation of avoiding jealousy has the added advantage of being somewhat embarrassing to concede. Which is why you won’t find it anywhere else [unless it’s just false]…)

Proof even Jews could stumble in improper joy, Yevamos 63b:

גזרו על ג’ מפני ג’ גזרו על הבשר מפני המתנות גזרו על המרחצאות מפני הטבילה קא מחטטי שכבי מפני ששמחים ביום אידם.

Needless to add, the custom became corrupted with the passage of time, as the Chasam Sofer says generally elsewhere (and regarding this, too). Especially by some Chassidim who don’t know when to stop.

My dear readers, what do you think?