|
 he weekly Torah
portion read in synagogues has an uncanny way of commenting on the
events the week has
brought.
Take this past week when the reading, from Exodus, warned the leaders
of Moses's day not to be swayed by gifts from defendants in legal
proceedings: "And thou shalt take no bribe; for the bribe blinds
the wise, and perverts the words of the righteous" (23:8). Listening
on Saturday, February 24, as this was chanted, many of us reflected
sadly on the state of modern Jewish leadership.
By traditional reckoning, the week began on February 18. That Sunday,
Mr. Clinton published an Op-Ed article in the New York Times
defending his pardon of the accused $48-million tax-cheat Marc Rich.
Among his rationales was a statement that, in effect, the Jews made
him do it.
The Forward has published a list of some of the Jewish worthies
who contributed letters of commendation for Mr. Rich — political,
cultural, and religious leaders — not all of whom knew that
their letters would appear on Mr. Clinton's desk. Many of these
individuals represented groups that over the past 20 years had benefited
from Mr. Rich's $100 million in largesse. Not "bribes," exactly,
but too close to that for comfort.
There was, for instance, a letter to the President by Rabbi Irving
Greenberg of the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Council asserting that
to pardon Mr. Rich would be "one of the most Godlike actions that
anyone could ever do." A philanthropic interest linked with Rabbi
Greenberg had received from Mr. Rich some $5 million. Such sums
can indeed "blind the wise" and "pervert the words of the righteous."
Now the New York Jewish Week has noted the eerie silence
of the typically voluble Jewish-defense organizations, like the
American Jewish Committee and the American Jewish
| “In
Jewish-American organizational life, the culture of fundraising
has undermined the wisdom and righteousness of Jewish
leaders.” |
|
Congress.
Normally the Anti-Defamation League itself would be the first to
loudly denounce a politician, at least a conservative politician,
who said anything that might be construed as portraying Jewish people
in a negative light. Yet the week went by without a peep from the
ADL.
Presumably this was because the ADL's Abraham Foxman himself had
contributed a letter on behalf of Mr. Rich, citing "humanitarian"
concerns. Mr. Foxman declines to say whether the ADL received money
from Mr. Rich, explaining that, "It's absurd to say [Clinton] is
pointing a finger at the American Jewish community." Oh really?
This was the week that began with an ABC News headline, on the news
zipper above Times Square, that crystallized the story: "Clinton
Cites Jewish Pressure for Rich Pardon." Rarely in modern America
does one come across a clearer incitement to anti-Semitism.
What are the lessons to be drawn here? Alas, the episode underlines
how enthralled the Jewish establishment has become to a pair of
dangerous addictions: money, and liberalism.
Marc Rich never offered money to the national educational organization
I direct, Toward Tradition. Had he done so, I would have turned
it down. For there is the strong appearance that some part of his
fortune was unlawfully withheld from the U.S. Treasury, and Jewish
tradition severely instructs us that the law of the land is the
Law. In Jewish-American organizational life, the culture of fundraising
has undermined the wisdom and righteousness of Jewish leaders.
Our usually ferocious Jewish-defense groups were silenced also by
their allegiance to the political philosophy of Bill Clinton. Toward
Tradition was founded to counter the orthodox liberalism of the
Jewish establishment, which constitutes the circumcised wing of
the Democratic party. This orthodoxy has done our community little
good in the past, and now it has given comfort to anti-Semites.
Loyalty to a patron — whether Liberalism, Money, or Marc Rich
— can be tricky. I think of another news story. The New
York Times reported on the loyalty of Mr. Rich's lieutenant,
the similarly fugitive Pincus "Pinky" Green, who was willing to
let Mr. Rich abandon him if that would help the latter's attempt
to get himself pardoned. Mr. Rich wrote that he would have the petition
submitted "principally in my name," that he hoped including Mr.
Green "will not detract significantly from the main objective."
Some patron.
From now on may our righteous leaders, in deciding where to cast
their loyalty, and by implications ours, show more wisdom than did
Pinky Green.
|
