Benjamim ✡︎

The Haredi question is, in my opinion, one of the greatest domestic challenges Israel will face in the coming decades. Although often portrayed as a conflict between religious and secular Jews, I believe the problem is primarily institutional. First, Haredim are not a homogeneous group. Their communities differ considerably in their relationship with the State of Israel, military service, and participation in the labor market. Nevertheless, a system has developed in which a portion of Haredi men can devote themselves entirely to religious studies while receiving public benefits and remaining outside both the military and the workforce. As this population grows, the consequences become increasingly difficult to sustain. Let’s begin with military service. I find it unjustifiable that, in a country whose existence depends on its ability to defend itself, an entire segment of the population should enjoy collective exemptions. While some Israelis spend years serving in the IDF, others are exempted because they belong to certain religious communities. This doesn’t mean disregarding Jewish religious observance. On the contrary, I support expanding military frameworks that allow Haredim to serve while maintaining their religious obligations. Observing Halakha and serving in the military should not be treated as inherently incompatible. Alternative national service may be justified in certain circumstances, but it should not indiscriminately replace military service. National defense must remain the priority for citizens fit to serve. Education presents another challenge. I support educational freedom and oppose imposing an entirely secular educational model on religious communities. Parents should be free to choose religious schools for their children. However, educational freedom does not imply an unconditional right to taxpayer funding. Schools receiving public resources can legitimately be required to provide basic general education, including mathematics and languages. Communities wishing to maintain exclusively religious schools should be free to do so. What I reject is expecting taxpayers to finance an educational system that, in some cases, limits students’ opportunities for economic independence. The same applies to social benefits and yeshiva funding. I am not opposed to full-time Torah study, nor do I believe everyone must pursue a conventional career. What I oppose is transforming that choice into a system of economic dependency sustained by other taxpayers. Non-essential benefits and certain public subsidies should therefore be conditional on fulfilling civic obligations and meeting objective criteria. This obviously does not mean denying essential services to vulnerable individuals or their families. There is also a demographic dimension. The growth of the Haredi population is not inherently problematic. What concerns me is the expansion of a system in which an increasing proportion of the population depends economically on a relatively smaller proportion of workers and taxpayers. The solution is not to fight religion, but to reform the institutional incentives that sustain this imbalance. Israel is the nation-state of the Jewish people, and preserving Jewish religious life is part of its very reason for existing. But religious freedom should not be confused with the preservation of political and economic privileges. Haredim must remain free to live according to their convictions, educate their children according to their traditions, and dedicate themselves to Torah study. However, that freedom should not entail permanently transferring their national and economic responsibilities to the rest of society. A society cannot indefinitely demand that some citizens bear the costs of its defense and economic sustainability while collectively exempting others from those same responsibilities.