Government Funding vs. Torah Ideals

Is this really how we're supposed to respond to funding cuts?

Lately, I’ve received multiple requests by email, phone, and text message to donate to Keren Olam HaTorah. The fund apparently seeks to cover the deficit in kollel and yeshiva budgets created by Israeli government cuts.

The numbers are interesting:

“With approximately 30% of their funding cut, they’re facing a staggering $107,000,000 deficit.”

That would mean the existing government support was in the $350 million range annually. And that’s besides all the regular direct welfare payments for which kollel families are legally eligible.

I think a case can be made that the threats and accusations issued from inside the Charedi community in response the cuts are a manifestation of something both dark and ugly.

“There is a war in Eretz Yisroel. It is a war against the Torah and Yahadus. We must fight back.”

Instead of any expressions of gratitude for the billions of dollars of support they’ve received over the years, we’re seeing what, from a distance at least, sound like incoherent and irrational tantrums. Exactly how is a government that still spends more than $200 million a year on charedi yeshivas and still fully supports Hesder yeshivas “at war against the Torah and Yahadus”?

Sure, as with all political initiatives, various government factions only went along with the program because they were coerced into it. But who coerced them? Wasn’t it the Charedi parties who made the funding the primary condition of their Knesset cooperation? And aren’t the people who voted for those parties ultimately responsible for the coercion? Is this the kind of behavior our Torah teaches?

I guess you could reasonably disagree with all that. But there’s something else going on here that’s irrefutable.

Over the course of just a generation or two, a long-standing traditional way of thinking has been all but lost from Jewish life. It wasn’t something we had to consciously learn, it was obvious. But regular exposure to nusach ha’tefila and Torah sources certainly helped reinforce the mindset.

I’m talking about financial responsibility which, ultimately, means believing that I am the only person who’s responsible for my financial well being. Once I grow to adulthood, I have no right to expect or demand my parents, school, community, or government support me. If I want a nice place to live, clothes to wear, and the comforts of life, I’m the only one obliged to make sure it happens.

How universal and obvious was this thinking?

Well just visualize a world in which there was nothing wrong with demanding our parents, schools, communities, and governments provide our needs. In such a world would the words שונא מתנות יחיה (from משלי טו) make any sense? Could a rational person saying birkas hamazon (לא לידי מתנת בשר ודם ולא לידי הלואתם) in such a world beg God to support us Himself so we shouldn’t have to seek the support of flesh and blood?

While I’m sure there have always been individuals whose selfish shortsightedness led them to seek dependence on others, they would have been the exception. And I’d bet they experienced more failure than success. But an entire generation that spends half their lives looking to others for material support can’t expect a happy outcome.

Of course, it’s not just the Jewish community that’s seen such changes. Western society in general has experienced a similar attitude shift. We’re just coming along for the ride.

Within living memory - certainly until the Second World War - it was common for poor people to endure great hardship rather than accept welfare. The humiliation experienced by those who fell that low was overwhelming. After achieving wealth as a professional boxer, James J. Braddock famously returned all the welfare payments he’d been forced to accept from the government during the depression.

Why does the Torah prefer self reliance? Perhaps partly because a gift, while technically free, comes at a cost. You now “owe one” to your benefactor (עבד לוה לאיש מלוה - משלי כב ז), and might later have trouble making objective moral decisions if they conflict with that benefactor’s needs.

Perhaps worse, having come to rely on handouts, you will now find it that much more difficult to live “gift free,” leading to moral compromise. It’s not hard to visualize a young family receiving payments from a government program who can’t bring themselves to report a bit of extra income that disqualifies them. At that moment, they’re crossing the line between dependence and corruption - and the other side of that line gets very dark, very quickly.

Despite your best efforts there might well be times when you’re forced to take a handout. If that time does come, accept the help with grace and gratitude and not as something for which you’re entitled.

Some will argue that times have changed and modern government benefits are somehow not really considered “ידי בשר בדם”. I have to admit that I don’t see any logic behind that argument. But even if I’m wrong, building your life on a foundation of dependence can hardly be a healthy choice.

There’s something else about free money. When resources come without an associated cost (meaning: work), there’s less incentive to limit consumption. And when consumption isn’t limited, it tends to expand until it can’t be satisfied from normal sources. And when the expanding needs of a consumption-driven lifestyle can’t be satisfied through normal sources, criminal sources are considered.

Sound unlikely? See the Chofetz Chaim (בבאור הלכה סוף הל' יום טוב).