The headline said "Being a left wing hareidi" - this guy is definitely NOT hareidi, as becomes very clear when you see his photo. What you write, Sir, might all be very well and good theoretically, but we are dealing here with a Nation (ie the Arabs) who do not think as we do; they want to kill us, our Fathers and our children. They want to push Israel into the middle of the Ocean and forget about us. The Torah clearly states that Esau hates Jacob until the end of days. We have a G-d given right to defend ourselves and our country, and in spite of people like you - we will continue to do so - both physically and spiritually.

conceptually one can be religious or secular, orthodox or liberal and be "left-wing", whatever the term may mean. When it comes to the practicality of certain views within the context of the Arab Israeli conflict - yes, it is a Muslim-Arab Israeli conflict of which the "Palestinian" component of it is only a part! - people who refer to themselves as "left-wing", be they religious or not, appear to approach the conflict from a position of naivete, divorsed of the reality of the Muslim-Arab partners who refuse to accept the fact that the Jews constitute a people with its own civilization; that Israel's is by right this people's national home and has been for nearly 4,000 years; thus, refuse to signed on the doted line saying "this is the end of the conflict", simply because the end, from their perspective will be the end of Israel. So, let us all be respectful of the other and the other's rights, but also of the other's obligations and first among them is to also be respectful towards us as individual Jews and towards the Jewish collective, towards the Jewish people and its nation-state. Shall we?

While admitting that the Israeli government is far from perfect as is the IDF, the problem with the European "BBC" human rights leftists you love is that while they are quick to point out flaws in the Israeli government, they seem quite oblivious to the excessive human rights abuses and/or horrific treatment of other faiths in most Arab countries, which makes something seem fishy, bias against Jews maybe? G-d forbid. In addition even in Europe they seem to care lots for the rights of prisoners but very little for the right of innocent people to defend themselves. In short if they care so much for human rights where is their care for other suffering minorities in the world.

Dan, how however do you equate being an Orthodox Jew with what appears to be the Homophobic attitudes which are based upon Leviticus along with the discrimination against women which seems more culturally based?

King Solomon already told us "Mr Haradi" that there is a time for everything. I guess you haven't read that part of the Torah yet... and he taught us that while the Torah says all those wonderful things you mentioned - we have to use our common sense, and that sometimes, fighting is the way towards peace. And so, you are not naive... you just don't have the common sense to understand the situation. The Arabs do not want (now) to live with us AT ALL - in peace. They want to fight. They want to control. They are re-telling the same message we heard from Nazi Germany and Japan: God told us we are better - thus, we must run the world - the way we see it. Hope I helped you... even though I really do doubt so....

What you expose so nicel, has some problems, since you see things just from an American Jewish liberal point of view. You state for example that enlightenment was not a bad thing, and it draw thousands of Jews to total assimilation that took the nazis to make them understand that a Jew is always a Jew. Jews who get into politics are finally enemies of Israel and their communities since the most important thing to them is that nobody would say they are biased in our favour (of course they don't really care what WE may think or feel) Finally, the social ideas and concepts in Judaism, come from HaShem, and you must start from believing in HaShem, it's not like socialism, it's not about worrying about the arabs, it's not about politics. It's about faith, faith in HaShem and in the Torah! All the social way of leaving is a natural consequence of being Jewish and living according to the Torah!

Why on earth did this article get the title "Being a left-wing haredi" on the front page link? Is it because of Ynet's connect-haredim-to-any-article-about-religion policy? or just simple ignorance about the spectrum of orthodox Jewry - anyone who knows anything about the orthodox communities will realise that this article has nothing to do with haredim - does the author look haredi????

to the enlightened comments of numbers 1, 3 and 4 but I also wanted to mention that this sentimental writer shows every sign of being from North America as opposed to Israel as his perspective is not enlightened by the exigencies of residing in Eretz Yisrael.

Because you support foreigners (Arabs) over your own people, work to demonize the country of your people in your homeland, and support those who want to give our land to the A rab enemy, DUH!

I am not sure the author is aware of the story of Jeuda Leib Magnes--who strongly advocated peace with the Arabs, only to have his his colleagues and subordinates massacred in the Hadassa Medical Convoy Massacre, after which he left the Hebrew University of Jerusalem a broken man. It is amusing that the naive author of this article chose this as an example of a positive left-wing blog/movement. The left makes me sad.

We "right-wing" observant Jews are perfectly capable of making up our own minds about political issues without some patronizing, condescending putz who thinks he is so much smarter than we are. There are "right-wing" and "left-wing" religious Jews, and also "centrist." Religious belief does not necessary translate directly to any one political position.

Before Zionism was Judaism. Amongst the 19th century's more profound early thinkers and writers were Alkalai son of the Rabbi of Sarajevo, Rabbi Zvi Kalischer, and Moses Hess, trained by his Rabbi grandfather. The 20th century emergence of Zionism was profoundly drawn on Judaism and its values, and the so-called secular leaders of Zionism Ben Gurion and Weizmann reflected a deep saturation in those values, and the language and precepts of the Torah with which they were as familiar as with breathing. In the middle were then and are now many "modern orthodox" Jews, reflecting different political streams. These are people who are fundamentally tolerant and moderate, because that is what Judaism has taught them. The displacement of both their tolerance and their moderation is the consequence of those blinkered by the power plays of individual rabbinic leaders who wield the power of their self-appointed status and wave their own keys to ultimate knowledge and their claimed better version of Judaism. Some of those who support such men are to be found here in these Talkbacks. They are narrowed by their adherence to someone else's peculiar translation of Judaism and thence of Zionism. They lash out in arrogance at any perceived enemy. They perpetuate versions of Judaism far removed from precepts such as Gemilat Hasadim, and they hold back authentic Judaism to a time gone by. The accusations made at the writer of this piece are really pointed at his accusers. What a shame for them, and for the faith they claim to represent.

"What is it about a commitment to left-wing politics which provokes responses such as 'naïve' and 'self-hating'?" It's the results.

BUT HIS FAR '' LEFT IS ACCEPTABLE.....? this is a slanted opinion his views are not social justice as this author puts it. judaism is dictatorship. GD gives the rules and we follow ...or not...but not change the rules. this writer talks aboout discriminate non jews.... I see Israel discriminating AGAINST Jews.....it wasnt the *nonJews* that were kicked out of their homes in gaza or peacehouse in hebron....IT WAS THIS AUTHORS FRIENDS AND ASSOCIATES THAT KICKED THEM OUT...

1) G-d gave all of Etetz Israel to the Jews (Torah says others can live here as long as they are peaceful, but that does not give them the right to a separate state). 2) All of Israel was our, remained ours and will continue to be ours, regardless of temporary expusions by war or terrorists. If you deny the validity of Torah you stop being a Jew. 3) Being kind to others should not come at the expense of our own security or heritage. 4) Non-Jews have a responsibility too. It starts with teaching respect, love and the TRUTH to their children also.

left wing politics is the politically correct way to go and right wingers are considered naive and unintelligent. So I don't know where the question comes from, perhaps a small group in Israel feel this way. Personally why can't one be neither left or right? And what actually does it mean, right or left of what???? I can pick some issues in the left I agree with and some in the right, and a great many in the middle. About time we redefined politics in this area, there are too many sterotypes.

Rickman doesn't suggest concessions to Arabs, doesn't propose land give-backs and only suggests dialogue and respect between those of different ideologies. So of course,he's accused of being a naive American Jewish liberal. Newsflash to you all: he's not even American,he's British. Do some critical reading and research before you attack someone.

First, to Dan, yasher koah. Number 12, where did you get the crazy idea that Judah Magnes left the Hebrew University a broken man? He traveled to the US on a fundraising mission for his Ichud Organization, and up until the day of his death he promoted his idea of a federation of Israel, Palestine, and other Arab states, a United States of Palestine. He, Hannah Arendt, and others, were involved with this. Not a well man, he had a stroke in the US and died. After the establishment of the Jewish state, Magnes -- always the realist -- dropped the call for a binationalist state and began to speak of a federation. Read a book on Magnes -- such as Dissenter in Zion of Judah Magnes from Brit Shalom to Ichud -- and you will stand corrected. The only "broken men" are those who believed that the physical safety of Jews would be assured by a Jewish state. Since the vast majority of Jews killed since WWII have died in deaths directly related to the state...well, so much for that idea.

How about being orthodox - but not Sabbath-observant?

thanks for the reactions to date which are appreciated both positive and negative - just wanted to provide replies to some points, can't address every point raised just now first, I am not haredi though I went to a "haredi" school, I am "centrist" orthodox a position which doesn't really translate precisely into MO or haredi terms (NB: I don't much care for these divisions either which are incoherent and unhelpful in my view, but that is another issue) Shalom - the Torah doesn't say that about Esau it is a rabbinic midrash cited in the name of R Shimon b Yochai. I'd suggest that it isn't the only rabbinic statement about our relations with non-Jews, nor should it be the most important one in our understanding of the world Beitz - good questions, require longer explanations than can provide here! Aviva - I amn't telling anyone to do anything, I was trying to explain my views, you are welcome to disagree. However, instead you demonstrate the issues with even saying something, as do the "Liberators of Israel"! Ricardo - thanks, you may be aware that there are 70 faces to the Torah. Which face does one listen to? There are choices to be made, some of these are influenced by their politics, though I acknowledge that religion and politics are distinct, religious choices have political implications (and vice-versa) To those who say that God giving us the Land of Israel is the most important consideration, in purely religious terms it is clearly given al tenai on various conditions regarding moral behaviour. That is just an observation regarding the sources, not a prescription as to how one maintains such behaviour under what are certainly difficult circumstances. Jay hits the nail on the head when he observes that I avoided trying to provide any specifics, this article calls for dialogue where possible and a rethink of categories - if we end up not being able to talk even when we disagree strongly then this is worrying. Also, when we end up with people on the far right of politics as perceived "friends" and liberal leaning groups as perceived "enemies" then something in these perceptions has gone wrong.

yes the torah and judaism promote peace and tolerance, but not with enemies such as the Arabs who seek to kill us. Siding with the arab/muslime enemy and being what you call "orthodox/hareidi" is really called NETUREI KARTA

As Ibn Warraq demonstrates in his masterful "Defending the West", western civilization is built on three values: rationalism, universalism, and self-criticism. The left goes overboard on the "universal" side - to the point of denigrating the particular and the parochial. But where it goes off the rails is in their preference for ideology over reason, and the refusal to see things for what they are, or to learn from experience. The left believes, for example, that man is perfectible through government action, that all are "entitled", that all cultures are equally valid, that "we all want the same things", that inequality of outcomes is somehow unjust, etc. There's nothing "rational" about any of this. Nor are leftists inclined to learn from history or even personal experience. Is there *anything* that would finally convince Beilin or Peres that Oslo was a mistake? Will the Labour Party ever acknowledge that its socialist policies held Israel back? Nor can the "left" be deemed free of its own "sinat hinam". Just watch how they sneer "settler" or "Zionist", or mouth "amen" after every libel of the IDF. Rickman may find "deeply disturbing" Phillip reference to Jews seeking to gain acceptance from the surrounding society, but that's exactly what Jay Michelson personally manifest in a recent article in the Forward.

It does not mean "progressive politics". Most of the regulations that the Sages referred to as Tikkun Olam have to do with reducing barriers to commerce, not the social programming (and often downright immorality) that the non-Orthodox demoninations use it to mean. And what on earth is moral or just about using the power of the government to take money and property from those who have worked for it and distribute it in ways that will benefit the party in power? Tzedakah means giving your own money, not taxing everyone else and giving their tax money away.

What a sweeping and stereotypical generalization about leftist thinkers. There are a number of significant, verified and peer-reviewed studies that indicate liberals are more likely to modify an opinion or belief on the basis of new data. That's why so many democrats in the USA were slandered by Republicans- accusing them of flip-flopping. How do you know what Peres or Beilin would say or think? Didn't another well-known liberal,Benny Morris, modify his opinion of the peace process? Didn't Clinton himself modify his opinion and ultimately blame the Oslo failure on Ararat? The left most certainly has its own "sinat chinam" As your discourse proves- so does the right.

who took the time to critique us Talkbackers including me because I wrote that Mr. Rickman showed every sign that he was a North American Jew and did not understand the problems of living in Eretz Yisrael. Jay pointed out that had we/I done our/my homework, we/I would have realized that he (Mr. Rickman) abided in Great Britain. Jay fairly remonstrated us/me for not doing our research properly. It is to our/my benefit that we/I have such an intrepid editor/commentator to look after us/me and our/my most minute mistakes. Can anyone imagine having Jay as an instructor in, say, a highschool history or English class and what benefit would be achieved from such a prince of details who would remonstrate his class when even a scintilla of false information were vocalized or written? I would like to make the (hopefully sane) point that the intent of my own comment was to point out that Mr. Rickman did not reside in Israel and appeared not to comprehend the exigencies of living in a land constantly threatened. I think I been proven correct. The second point, the fact that Mr. Rickman appeared to be a North American Jew, was meant to suggest that Mr. Rickman was undoubtedly an Ashkenazi Jew at a (safe) distance from even those western roots roots and so his (emotional) knowledge about life in the country of Israel would be compromised. That Mr. Rickman resides in Great Britain still suggests that he is an Ashkenazi residing at a safe distance from his original roots and from the imperatives of an Israeli lifestyle. As a result, Mr. Rickman's commentary falls short as I think does Jay's from New York State. However, I'd still like to thank Jay for correcting our/my grievous errors while hoping, in return, that the next time he might view commentary not only as a compilation of facts but as an opportunity to establish a network of intentions, principles and themes. In this way, any theoretical highschool class which he (Jay) were to instruct might possess significantly increased value. In spite of my poor exercise in self-defence, I thank you, Jay, for exposing our/my ignorance. We/I all owe you a ral debt!

not address your argument. He is too orthodox in his thinking to appreciate the fact that "left wing orthodox Jews" who live abroad are not quite in touch with reality.