Segacs's World I Know

Archive for the ‘Jewish life’ Category

I can’t seem to find the words today to express my feelings reflecting on the 60th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz:

Horror at the atrocities that will be shocking no matter how many times we hear or read about them.

Pride that the Jewish people is today so strong and is standing at the gates of the former death camp, declaring with our presence that we are alive and that the Nazis failed.

Anger at the world that pays lip service to the anniversary and condones and promotes antisemitism the rest of the time.

Disgust that Jewish people are pitied by the world for being weak, but loathed by the world when we are strong.

Sadness at the thought that the generation bearing witness will soon be gone, outnumbered by the racists and deniers, and apprehension at what this will mean for “never forget”.

Fear for the future of Israel and for the future of freedom in the world.

Disappointment in the human race’s seeming inability to learn from the past.

As the world remembers and reacts, mostly I wonder about the lessons of the Holocaust. What has the world really learned? In the wake of horrors in Kosovo, Bosnia, the DRC, Sudan, North Korea… how can we claim that we’ve learned anything? Since the beginning of time, human beings have shown a cold genius in inventing new ways to cruelly murder one another. Was the Holocaust just another part of that?

Today the world remembers. But it does not learn.

The Liberal government’s hastily-retracted plan to increase subsidies to Jewish schools has sparked somewhat of a debate on private schools in the blogosphere. Paul lists his reasons for opposing government funding of private schools.

I disagree. And I’d like to explain why, by addressing his arguments:

A/ This isn’t the US, private schooling is not something that should involve getting a second mortgage. If you are absolutely hell-bent on sending your offspring to private school yet can’t afford it right off the bat, make a few sacrifices if you value your child’s education that much.

Private Jewish school tuition, last I checked, runs in the neighbourhood of $6,000 a year or thereabouts. Per child. That may not force most families to get a second mortgage, but it’s not pocket change either. And when you factor in the fact that many families are paying this for two, three, four kids at a time, you can see how it quickly spirals out of reach for parents quickly.

B/ Wouldn’t a reduction in our overall level of taxation provide people with more than enough spare money to do this, rather than providing selective credits, vouchers, etc. from which only taxpayers with children could profit? (To coin a phrase, wouldn’t that be democracy in taxation?) Moreover, how many new civil servants would have to be hired to administer the granting of vouchers, or other things along those lines?

Of course it would, and that argument can be made about pretty much any government subsidy program. In general I believe in less government spending and greater tax cuts.

But education is something that is government-funded, at least in the public sector. Everyone pays school tax, whether they send their children to public schools or not. So parents who opt for private schools are in essence double-taxed, as they pay both for the private school and for a spot in a public school that their kids aren’t using.

C/ If parents want to send their children to fully-subsidised schools that won’t cost them much of anything, they already have that option in the form of public schools. Sure, they may not be all that they’re cracked up to be, so maybe some sort of public education reform might be in order (and one may argue that the creation of a public school curriculum that actually teaches something and is available to all might be a more equitable and responsible use of our money).

I think there’s some confusion about the Reid plan here. The intention was never to fully subsidize private schools (i.e. no tuition), it was to fully subsidize the secular portion of the private schools’ education. The religious portion – which is not available or offered in the public system – is subsidized at 0% and would continue to be. So essentially, parents would be paying only for the part of the program that isn’t available in the public system.

Quebec used to have religious schoolboards – Catholic or Protestant. If you were neither, you could either send your kids to one or the other (usually Protestant), or you could fork over the dough for private school. Now, we have linguistic schoolboards, which is a step in the right direction, but the public schools still offer Catholic or Protestant religious education courses. The Jewish option doesn’t exist in the public sector, so the private schools fill a void. And parents who select them usually aren’t doing so because they’re snobby or find the schools posh (a laughable thought, considering the state of disrepair of my high school), but because they want their kids to learn something about their background and culture that they can’t get in the public system. Ditto with the Greek schools, which are fully government-subsidized in their secular programs – students can’t learn Greek language or culture in the public system, so these schools fill that void.

So sure, parents have a choice of where to send their kids to learn the 3 Rs. But they don’t have a choice if they want their kids to have some cultural or moral education as well.

D/ If private education becomes financed entirely (or mostly) by the Government and available to all, who’s going to be left to go to public schools? Considering that private schools are located mainly in large urban areas and their surroundings, I don’t see how inhabitants of rural areas are supposed to benefit from your position on democracy in education.

There would still be plenty of people left in the public system, out of choice or convenience. If the Quebec government increased secular funding to the Jewish schools to 100%, thousands of Catholic kids wouldn’t suddenly enroll. In fact, it’s doubtful if the schools’ admission would go up at all, considering that parents who can’t afford the tuition currently receive financial aid. Anyone who wants to send their kids to Jewish school is probably already doing so.

But the broader issue is the underlying claim that if private schools are more accessible, they’ll steal students from the public system. But by creating a sort of “protectionism” for the public schools, it gives them a disincentive to improve or to hold themselves to higher standards. Give parents a choice and schools will have to shape up to compete. Many already have. It’s doable.

E/ Government funding of private schools only makes some sort of sense if public schools are privatised and forced to live up to the same standards as other private schools. I can’t quite see that happening, though. No matter what, it sort of negates the point of private schools, i.e., that they’re not public.

There’s no need to privatise public schools. There is a need to fund public schools better. And the one argument against the Reid plan that I think is valid is that of opportunity cost: the money going to the Jewish schools is needed more by the public schools. There’s something to be said for that. But that’s a problem of chronic underfunding, not one of an ideological impasse. In theory, the public school system should be able to meet the needs of most people to the greatest degree possible, with the private system filling in the holes where needed.

For the record, I’m not exactly a cheerleader for the Jewish school system. Grade school was fine, but by high school it was a bit much. But I do think that parents ought to have the option, which is why I was in favour of the Liberal plan.

Those asking me for clarifications ought to be satisfied now… hopefully.

Charest is angrily denying allegations that his government’s decision to increase funding to Jewish day schools was motivated by fundraising for the Liberals by the Jewish community:

Far from a last-minute decision made behind closed doors, Charest said, allowing Jewish day schools to form an association with public school boards and boost their secular funding is an idea that has been in the works for more than 10 years.

The premier angrily denied reports the decision was related to financial contributions to the Quebec Liberal Party by members of the Jewish community.

“There is absolutely no link between political financing and the decision taken by the government,” Charest said at a late- afternoon news conference. “If some people want to piece together events to say there is an appearance, they can always try to do that, but I am here to say clearly that’s not the case.”

Sounds liek a standard-issue denial. But there’s much more than simple political criticizing going on here.

First of all, the decision had initially been approved by two public schoolboards, who signed on:

And Reid was acting with the approval of the two school boards involved, the Lester B. Pearson School Board and the Commission Scolaire Marguerite Bourgeoys, which voted in favour of the deals at their own meetings and passed the requests up the line, Charest said.

Both schoolboards would also get additional funding for participating. But little attention is being paid to that.

Also, there’s a clear double-standard at play, since Greek schools in Montreal are already 100% funded:

Charest said that despite criticism the government is creating a precedent, the Greek community already has associations with school boards that entitle its schools to more funding. The Liberals had decided to give private Jewish schools associated status as early as 1994 but lost power to the PQ, which did not implement it.

[ . . . ]

[Former PQ education minister Pauline] Marois added that in the nine years the PQ was in power, the government refused just such a request from Jewish leaders for reasons of fairness and because the government wanted to get away from the religious aspects of education as part of the transformation from religious school boards to linguistic ones.

“My biggest fear is that this has the reverse effect sought by the Jewish community and by the minister, that it raises the objections we see today and it leads to intolerance between one group and another,” Marois said.

“The minister is creating a climate of tension, insecurity, and is not acting in the interests of all.”

Marois admitted, however, that despite her criticism of the deal with Jewish private schools, the PQ did nothing to reverse the same associated status the Greek schools enjoyed when the PQ was in power.

So funding Greek schools does not create a “climate of tension”, but funding Jewish schools does. That’s crystal clear, I suppose.

Marois even went so far as to suggest that the Jewish schools should refuse to sign on for the plan, ostensibly to avoid being criticized by the likes of her party.

Anyone notice a pattern here? When people “suspect” the Jews, it’s beacuse we brought it on ourselves by doing things that “create a climate of tension”. Marois’ comments were a bit more subtle than Parizeau’s infamous “money and the ethnic vote” speech… but not much.

I knew when I heard about this that it was bound to blow up in someone’s face. And of course, it has: Jean Charest’s plan to boost subsidies to private Jewish day schools – like the ones I attended – has become the latest political controversy seemingly overnight.

The plan is simple, on the face of it. Jewish schools, previously getting 60% of their funding from the government, will now get 100%. In exchange, they sign a deal promising “cultural exchanges” with public schools, in order to foster better community relations and understanding.

But Charest’s government would never escape scrutiny for this move. Any sympathy for the Jewish community’s added financial burden of providing security for schools in the wake of the UTT firebombing has long faded. Reverting to type, the Quebec public sees a potential scandal involving Liberals, Jews, and money… and smells blood.

This from the Gazette’s Don Macpherson:

But, as everyone but apparently the government could have predicted, the increase is likely to worsen relations between Jews and non-Jews.

Other than the government, Jews and other religious groups using it as a precedent, nobody supports the decision. As the chief editorialist for the usually Liberal-friendly La Presse, Andre Pratte wrote yesterday the government managed to fan not one controversy but three: public funding of private schools, public funding of ethnic schools and the place of religion in publicly funded schools. And it awoke “the old demon” of anti-Semitism. The title of the editorial was an incredulous single word:”Incomprehensible!”

In other words, it’s bad policy because it gives fodder to the antisemites.

Now, Charest’s government is being attacked by the PQ for supposedly granting this extra money as a payout for the Jewish community’s support of his party:

Quebec Opposition leader Bernard Landry demanded Tuesday that Premier Jean Charest reconsider his decision to increase the funding of private Jewish schools from 60 to 100 per cent, which is the same as public schools.

Landry and Parti Québécois education critic, Pauline Marois, also called for Education Minister Pierre Reid to step down from cabinet because of his poor management of the education portfolio.

Landry said that Charest must make public his reasoning behind the decision in order to eliminate any appearance of a conflict of interest linking major contributions from the Jewish community to the Quebec Liberal Party.

Bernard Landry went on camera and called for Pierre Ried’s resignation. Never mind that there’s zero foundation. Never mind that the PQ has a long history of taking care of its friends (metro to Laval, anyone?) or that the Jewish community has its own reasons for supporting the Liberals and doesn’t require a cash incentive. Never mind that there are no ways to prove the allegations.

The Societe St Jean Baptiste is calling for an inquiry into the matter because it may have been “politically motivated”. Anyone who knows the SSJB knows how ridiculous that is.

Personally, I think an increase in public education funding should have been a higher priority. But I also know from experience that most of the Jewish day schools are desperately cash-strapped. Far from the stereotypical “posh” private schools, most of the buildings are falling apart, the facilities are in urgent need of replacement, and the textbooks are so old that my grade 10 history book had only 9 provinces listed in Canada. Ok, maybe I’m exaggerating… but not by much.

Many families who send their kids to Jewish school can’t afford the tuition, and the schools work out financial aid for any family who needs it. Given all that, I can’t imagine any of the Jewish schools turning up their nose at more money.

The problem isn’t the added cash. It’s the fact that the government can pour money into union coffers, other ethnic communities, rural communties and just about anyone else’s pockets without people batting an eyelash. After all, we’re the most heavily-taxed province in Canada and there’s no shortage of people getting handouts. But the minute a dime goes to the Jewish community, it’s an “appearance of conflict”.

Tonight was the first candle of Chanukah. It may not be that big a deal, and it certainly gets ridiculously commercialized and blown out of proportion because of its proximity to Christmas. But I still like Chanukah. Eight days of yummy unhealthy greasy food and presents… what could be bad?

I won’t wax poetic about the deeper meaning of the holiday, or the victory of freedom over tyranny or the political implications of celebrating revolutionaries or even the random thought that this may have been the first war in which oil was a big deal. I’m sure you can find all that and more elsewhere in the blogosphere.

Instead, I’ll talk about latkes. Because Chanukah, like all Jewish holidays, fits the common theme: They tried to kill us, we won, let’s eat.

My mom makes potato latkes grated in the processor, with a bit of onion and flour mixed in with the potatoes. And they’re fried small and nice and greasy and crisp, allowed to soak on paper towel so that they’re just slightly oozing with oil. With a little applesauce, they’re irresistible.

To all my Jewish readers, happy Chanukah!

Despite the conspiracy theorists’ claims, the Jewish vote is rarely an election factor, and certainly wasn’t this time. Concentrated in locked up states like New York, and not enough to do the job in swing states like Florida, who Jews were voting for wasn’t a top story for most media networks who were too busy covering the story-that-wasn’t-in-Ohio to notice.

But the big question going into this election was, would they or wouldn’t they?

The Jewish vote has been heavily Democratic since time immortal. But in light of 9/11, the war on terror, the situation in Israel and the alignment of the far left with Israel’s enemies, would some lifelong Jewish Democrats shift their allegiance to Bush? Would committed Democrats react like Meryl and Lynn and vote for Bush because of international issues? Or would they act more like Allison, putting these issues aside to vote for the candidate who they still feel is best on domestic issues?

Ha’aretz is reporting that Bush picked up 22% of the Jewish vote this election. That’s up 3 percentage points from the 19% he got in 2000. So it seems that there were at least some Jewish voters who switched allegiances.

On the other hand, that’s still 78% of Jewish voters casting their ballots for Kerry. And the “why” isn’t exactly a mystery:

They predicted “anticipated conflicts” between the Republican majority on Capitol Hill and the Jewish community on issues such as separation of church and state, abortion, gay rights, and same-sex marriage – issues, one Jewish leader said Wednesday, on which “the vast majority of the Jewish community disapproves of the Republicans’ positions and views.”

The voting broke down similarly for Jews as it did for Christians, with the more secular voting for Kerry and the ultra-Orthodox religious allying more closely with Bush:

According to unconfirmed results, Bush won 75 percent of Jewish votes in two large Brooklyn voting precincts that have a substantial concentration of Orthodox Jews, compared to a 25 percent turnout for Kerry.

Ultra-Orthodox activists predicted Wednesday that the final results will prove that other voting precincts in Brooklyn with an ultra-Orthodox populace overwhelmingly supported Bush.

[ . . . ]

“In the current elections, Orthodox Jews played within the community the role of evangelicals in the general electorate,” Furst said. The difference is that evangelicals make up about 40 percent of America’s population, while the percentage of Orthodox members in the Jewish community does not exceed 10 percent.

That may be so, but it’s telling that the division line in the sand seems to be religious versus secular, not one religion versus another. (The Muslim vote, of course, is an exception. An estimated 93% of Muslims voted for Kerry.)

At any rate, the big story here hasn’t materialized the way some people thought it might. The Jewish population did not become conservative overnight, abandoning decades of liberal values in order to vote for a president whose support for Israel is – at least in part – due to his evangelical Christian beliefs. Considering that there was no Joseph Lieberman on the Democratic ticket this time around, getting only 3% less of the Jewish vote than four years ago can hardly be called a defeat for Kerry.

A non-Jewish friend asked me why it was that we don’t really celebrate Thanksgiving. After all, it’s not a religious holiday.

I had to answer that I wasn’t really sure. Thanksgiving isn’t all that big a deal here – it’s not like it is in the US, for example – but most people still get together for a family meal or something. And yes, plenty of Jewish people do so as well. But upon reflection I realized she was right; the vast majority of my Jewish friends and relatives just treat Thanksgiving like a convenient legal holiday.

The best I can figure, it’s because we’re all holidayed out. After Rosh Hashanah, Yom Kippur, Succot… by the time Thanksgiving rolls around, we’ve had more than enough of big family meals and holidays for a while.

However you spent your Thanksgiving weekend, hope it was a good one.

10. Pick a long song, like “American Pie”, and try to remember all the words.

9. Play anagrams with the English side of the Machzor text.

8. Start a rumour that a high school classmate is engaged to a political figure… but refuse to say which one.

7. Insert random words into the songs where everyone sings along, and see who notices.

6. Make eye contact with a relative on the other side of the mechitza and try to communicate using rudimentary sign language.

5. Say hello to all the people who you haven’t seen since last year and have no intention of seeing again till next year, and score them on a scale of 1 to 10 based on how convincing their fake conversation is.

4. Debate what would be more appropriate for the the President of the congregation who deems it necessary to bore everyone to tears with his 45-minute speech during Kol Nidre services – a hook, a band, or a slow clap.

3. Start a chorus of boos when the same president stands up the next night at ne’ila to give yet another speech 5 minutes after the shofar was supposed to be blown.

2. Sleep. Especially effective during the Rabbi’s sermon.

1. First row of the men’s balcony section method: Start a betting pool as to how long the Rabbi’s sermon will be, and buy the winner a steak dinner at a popular “kosher-style” restaurant after the holidays.

With Yom Kippur beginning at sundown, everyone’s walking around today wishing each other an “easy fast”.

I’m not sure why we do this. Maybe it’s because, unlike happy holidays, there isn’t really an appropriate greeting for Yom Kippur (in English, anyway). It doesn’t seem appropriate to wish someone a “happy” Yom Kippur – it’s not a happy holiday. So really, what most people think of when they think Yom Kippur is the fasting.

Of course, that’s not how it’s supposed to be. We refrain from food and drink on Yom Kippur so we won’t be distracted by it… in theory, anyway. In practice, the lack of food and drink has become the focal point of the day. We discuss it endlessly, rather than focusing on the real meaning of the day. We make a much bigger deal of it than it really is, talking about it the same way Canadians spend half of every winter complaining about the weather. The lack of food is such a distraction, in fact, that I can’t help but think that permitting food on Yom Kippur would direct more people’s attention towards prayer.

Perhaps instead of “have an easy fast”, we should say “have a meaningful fast” or something along those lines. Or use a greeting that has nothing to do with fasting.

G’mar chatima tova.

L’Shana Tova u’Metuka to my fellow MOTs. Best wishes for a happy and healthy new year. See you all in 5765.