WZO elections 2025

Some jew, you are right in theory, that is why I am asking based on reported cases. Apparently r Eliashev relied on what his trusted assistants told him without double checking that required picking up the phone. I understand why this might happen, but I would have to presume that it is unlikely that this happened only once. In the other case, RJBS presumably didn’t disclose to the students his confidential sources in the Israeli government, just related the conclusion that it is best for soviet jews to continue being quiet. Interestingly, you are right that the students who didn’t follow this psak, as well as R Moshe, L Rebbe and r Teitz presumably reevaluated the explanations (other rabonim had a different explanation: personal risk to students from soviet agents)

If you lived in Germany in the 1930s, would you vote in the Nazi party elections, since the Nazis are the party in power and the Nazi primaries determine the German government leadership?

If you had the opportunity to vote out Hitler ym”s, you wouldn’t?

(I’m not expressing an opinion about WZO elections, just that your analogy is inapt)

If you had the opportunity to vote out Hitler ym”s, you wouldn’t?

(I’m not expressing an opinion about WZO elections, just that your analogy is inapt)

DaasYochid: The analogy is apt, even if I’m not necessarily going to disagree now with your above point, because when you register yourself as a member of the Nazi party, in order to qualify for voting in the Nazi party primary, with the intention (as you make the case for) of voting out Hitler ym’s, you know that Nazism is evil and murderous. You’re doing what you’re doing in hoping to make some lemonade out of the terrible lemons. And you are always very conscious that this is the only point of that endeavor.

So too here, even if you buy into the argument of voting in the Zionist Organization elections, the analogy is ultimately meant to implore you to always keep in mind what a evil murderous regime they are, even as you hold your nose and vote in the ostensible dream of cashing in a little gelt to squeeze out of them.

German elections, while they were fair, give us a good lesson – 1/3 of the country was voting for nazis because they were afraid of commies
and 1/3 – for commies because they were afraid of nazis. And the more they were voting this way, the more they were scared, etc
and german democracy was not built with enough strength to survive through such two-sided attack.

We still have this effect – with a crazy on one side saying something inflammatory, the other side gleefully sends those quotes around to fundraise.

So, try not to vote for someone just because they are opposite of something, find someone who cares for population in general.

Wonder whether ujm has a rebuttal.

Sounded more like backtracking than a rebuttal…

It looks like there are 2 issues in elections:
(1) political decisions, such as recognizing Reform in Israel in some form. There it seems that all religious groups are united
(2) money distribution – not sure whether significant sums go to non-O/antu-O groups – are they? And then, presumably every O group champions their own groups. Maybe even those who will be calling not to participate in the elections.

if someone is going to reject the Gedolim who pasken that it is forbidden to participate in the Zionist Organization voting
Similarly, if you don’t vote in the WZO elections, you are rejecting the Gedolim who pasken that it is a chiyuv to.

ujm > Everyone was opposed to participating in the Synagogue Council of America. Even Rabbi J.B. Soloveitchik was explicitly opposed. Certainly the WZO isn’t any better than the SCA.

RJBS position on such issues (including other religions) was usually – no to cooperation or even discussion on religious issues, but yes to cooperation on social issues, such as solving world hunger, dividing NY abandoned orphans (he wanted Jewish community to take a portion of those proportional to their share in the town), and such.

I presume SCA was a religious organization. Does WZO discuss how we should all daven together? So, there might be a difference.

It looks like there are 2 issues in elections:
Daas> Your missing what some consider more important: joining an organization which is anti Torah

of course, I presumed past making that decision.

@always_ask_questions

why don’t you guys politely invite both sides to a in-person or on-zoom meeting so that their chassidim could here them discussing this issue? I’m interested in buying a ticket.

BMG just had an asifa against participating in the “Jews for Z” vote.

serious question:
who are the “rabunim” you would want at such a meeting that are pushing Jews to vote, chalila, in WZO?

SCA explicitly was chartered to *not* deal with any religious issues. And, still, RJBS opposed it.

ujm, I don’t have the primary source right now, quoting from secondary sources. It appears that your assertion is not correct and RJBS continued in SCA despite all opposition and his own reservations.

RJBS sees two expressions of Jewish unity – (1) as covenantal community “You shall be unto me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.” and
(2) based on joint historical fate “, it is a people that shall live alone”. This second one unites all Jews, religious or not, including in the eyes of our enemies. From this, it follows, as we mentioned above, (1) a need to be separate from non-religious groups/non-O groups in issues of religion and (2) a need for joint action/unity in communal issues.

now secondary analysis:
The Synagogue Council of America had been organized in 1926 by the six organizations comprising the three mainstream Reform, Conservative, and Orthodox rabbinical and congregational associations, including the RCA and Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America…SCA often found itself crippled by differences among its member organizations, and survived as long as it did on the strength of a one-organizational veto, which allowed the Orthodox groups to reject any joint action (particularly one that might be perceived as straying into the “spiritual” realm) they disagreed with.
…
In 1956, the Rav’s support for the SCA came under attack both from within his community (the RCA) and from without (the Lithuanian yeshivah world). Just days before the RCA’s Halakha Commission, of which the Rav was the chair, was to meet to address a petition from the RCA’s leadership to require withdrawal from the SCA, the ultra-Orthodox Rabbinical Alliance issued a public ban on all Orthodox participation in the SCA as well as other joint rabbinical boards. Neither the Rav nor the Halakhic Commission ever formally ruled on the question, despite repeated efforts by the RCA leadership to force the issue.[11] Indeed, the issue continued to simmer, but despite a widening of the gap between the “two camps,” the RCA and UOJCA remained members of the SCA until the Rav’s death in 1993…dissolution of the SCA in 1994 simply put a punctuation mark on a completed era. With the Rav gone, it was as if the last remaining force (within the Orthodox world) trying to maintain the tension between unity and separation, to restrain the deep separatist forces at work within Orthodoxy, within the larger Jewish world, and in the wider society, was released. It was in fact a watershed. [16] What the Rav’s death marked was not so much the end of the Rav’s influence, but the end of the milieu in which Conservative as well as Orthodox rabbis (and to some extent even Reform rabbis) came from (and in some cases adhered to) traditional roots and perspectives that made debates among them still possible.
[9] Rabbi Walter Wurtzburger, in an essay on the Rav’s life and writings, writes unequivocally that the Rav strongly supported continuation of RCA and UOJCA participation in the SCA, recounting that he and the Rav, along with Rabbi Klavan had strategized how to keep the SCA status quo from falling apart. See, “Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik as Posek of Post-Modern Orthodoxy,” in Angel, Marc D., Exploring the Thought of Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik, at 14 (1997).

@somejew

serious question [from somejew to aaq]
who are the “rabunim” you would want at such a meeting that are pushing Jews to vote, chalila, in WZO?
————-
Hrav SHMUEL KAMINETSKY shlita
Hrav AVRAHAM GURWITS shlita
Hrav SHMUEL FORST shlita

and impossible untill thiyat hametim

Hrav CHAIM KANIEVSKY zatsal

——————-
methinks that those people should be good enough “rabunim” even for someone on your level .

.

I voted, as should you. Your vote should be based on svaros, logic. The 2 main svaros are as follows:
1) Preventing billions of dollars from reaching anti-Torah factions that use these funds to fight against frum interests. Even if our only goal were to burn the money so it doesn’t reach reform and liberal groups, dayeinu.
2) Strengthening Torah influence with money that will support kollelim, kindegartens, and supporting litigation in the courts.
Disagree? Please tell me the svaros against. Why do you want money funneled towards fighting AGAINST frumkeit and AWAY from frum causes in E”Y. Do you hate Yidden living in E”Y? Do you think Yidden should not be living in E”Y? Maybe those are youre reasons. I’m not putting words in your mouth.
As for the Roshei Yeshivas who say not to vote for EHK, I can find you 10 times more who say to vote. Rav Chaim Kanievsky, Rav Gershon Edelstein, Rav Dovid Feinstein, Rav Shmuel Kamenetsky, Rav Avrohom Gurwicz, Rav Shmuel Fuerst, Rav Ginzburg, Rav Asher Weiss., all support/supported EHK. So put the rabbonim issue aside.

There is a very similar letter in igrot hazon ish re appointing and accepting rabanut in the pre war vaad haklali of the tziyonim in erets yisrael.

Remember Chason Ish himself was an ardent supporter of withdrawing from the Tzioni vaad Haklali as soon as the British Mandate gave the option to do so.

But when confronted with the choice of having real talmidei hahamim appointed as rabanim within vaad haklali he supported membership within the vaad with all his might.

Read his eloquent defense/explanation for his shitah . Beautiful.

Seems that our case of EH is very similar.
.
Chazon Ish himself likened some kanna’im to the heroism of a soldier in the second world war , not abandoning his post , defending the positions of the first world war.

Heroism , yes. Self sacrifice , yes.

But usefulness ??? Thats already another matter.

As long as they do not bother the soldiers manning their positions in the current war, we can afford to keep quiet ….
.

@ujm
If you lived in Germany in the 1930s, would you vote in the Nazi party elections, since the Nazis are the party in power and the Nazi primaries determine the German government leadership?

For sure I would.
.

WATCH: HaRav Malkiel Kotler Denounces WZO Voting: “How Could an Ehrliche Yid Even Think About It?”

KOL KOREH: Moetzes Gedolei Hatorah Of America: It Is Assur To Vote In WZO Election

I am very puzzled by the enigma of whether R Chaim allowed WZO voting. I did not watch the video, but apparently the question was repeated to him in Hebrew omitting the word “world” (olami) and he responded with one word.

What I am puzzled about is – so many people had this question. Was it just one who asked and got it on video? Others did not care about R’ Chaim’s opinion or presumed they know his position? R Chaim answered the question without fully understanding it? People did not understand his answer as yes or no, and did not ask again? If you could not figure out his answer in this case, how about 1000 of other times when R Chaim replied yes or no?

If an esteemed Rav holds that R Chaim’s answer is misinterpreted or is unclear, then what does it mean about all people who went to R Chaim with their questions? Were they all dupes? Then, why esteemed Rav did not warn people not to go to R Chaim after he reached certain age? Or did he?

@always_ask_questions

all of this is nonsense. there is a system of Torah and Halacha, and what you are describing is not it. A Rav, any Rav, has to understand the sugya he is paskining and be able to explain himself in the Gemara (or at least in established foundational poskim). You can’t paskin off a video nor can your rav.

I don’t mean to imply anything about Rav Chaim ztz”l. But, if the video is not a fake (did it only get released this past year? long after his death?) and he did indeed understand the question and gave an answer like the Eretz Hakodesh group is claiming, that would simply place Reb Chaim deep in the middle of the sugya of Zuken Mamre (or Nuvi Sheker for those who like to go that route).

We Jews are obligated to keep to Torah not rebel against it like the zionists.