Bibliography of Rabbi Julius T. Loeb's Writings

Rabbi Julius T. Loeb (Yehuda Leib Tukachinsky) was a prolific writer. Despite his literary activity, he never published a book. Instead, he chose to write articles and letters to the editor of his local newspapers. Though he never published his lecture notes, many excerpts of his moving addresses were printed in local papers. 

I intend to include all articles and letters to the editor written directly by Rabbi Loeb, any subtantial reproductions of his sermons, and any translations that he was credited with.

At the moment, I only have access digitized newspapers that are available freely online or through public library subscriptions. I know that Rabbi Loeb definitely wrote more than I have been able to locate, since many of the papers he likely wrote in have not been digitized or were lost to time.

As I locate more of his writings, I will try to update this list. Of course let me know if any of the links are broken. 

Julius T. Loeb, “Jewish Sympathy: Prayer of the Israelites of Palestine for Success of American Arms,” Nashville Banner (Nashville, TN), Aug. 17, 1898. (See Original Hebrew Prayer.)

“Sorrowing People: Services Yesterday Afternoon and Evening in Memory of McKinley: At Adath Israel Synagogue,” Evening Star (Washington, DC), Sept. 20, 1901. 

“Synagogue of Adath Israel: Yom Kippur Celebrated with Solemn and Impressive Services,” Washington Times (Washington, DC), Sept. 26, 1901.  

“Suggests an Exception: Dr. Loeb Asks that Sunday Closing Law Shall Not be Universal,” Evening Star (Washington, DC), May 28, 1902. (See also Washington Times)  

Julius T. Loeb, “Attitude of the Hebrew on the Sunday Bill,” Evening Times (Washington, DC), May 29, 1902.  

Julius T. Loeb, “The Assimilation of the Jew: A Reply to Rabbi Joseph Silverman,” Washington Times (Washington, DC), Dec. 27, 1902. (Printing error in author’s name, says Louis T. Loeb, see Washington Times Dec. 28, 1902, for correction to Julius T. Loeb)

Julius T. Loeb, “Jewish Assimilation and the Ghetto,” Washington Times (Washington, DC), Jan. 4, 1903.  

Julius T. Loeb, “’The Truth at Funerals’ Once More: No Human Being So Vile That Something Good May Not Be Said of Him After Death,” Washington Times (Washington, DC), Jan. 25, 1903.  

Julius T. Loeb, “Anti-Jewish Outrages in Russia,” Evening Star (Washington, DC), May 4, 1903.  

Julius T. Loeb, “Guilt is With Russia: Government Accused of Inciting Murder of Jews,” Washington Post (Washington, DC), May 24, 1903.

“Another Page from Kishinev’s Story: Horrors of the Massacre Told by One of the Survivors,” Washington Times (Washington, DC), June 14, 1903.   

Julius T. Loeb, “Assimilation the Greatest Evil to Befall the Jew: A Reply to the Criticism of the Hon. Simon Wolf Upon the Zionist Movement,” Washington Times (Washington, DC), Sept. 20, 1903.  

“Theodore Herzl Head of Zionism: Memorial Services in Adath Israel Synagogue,” Washington Times (Washington, DC), July 18, 1904.  

“Hebrews at Worship: Adath Israel Synagogue,” Evening Star (Washington, DC), Sept. 10, 1904. (See Also Washington Times, St. Louis Republic, Pine Bluff Daily Graphic) 

Julius T. Loeb, “Menace to the Nation: Why Jews Oppose Teaching Religion in Schools,” Washington Post (Washington, DC), April 10, 1905.

“In Adath-Israel’s Aid: Contributions Toward the Building of the Synagogue,” Evening Star (Washington, DC), Oct. 10, 1905.  

Julius T. Loeb, “What is Religion?” Evening Star (Washington, DC), Nov. 19. 1905.  

Julius T. Loeb, “Relief for the Russian Jews,” Evening Star (Washington, DC), Dec. 16, 1905.  

“Let the Jews Colonize: Rabbi Loeb Suggests They Gather in Palestine,” Evening Star (Washington, DC), Jan. 21, 1906.  

Julius T. Loeb, “The Solution of the Problem,” Jewish Daily News (New York, NY), Jan. 26, 1906.  

Julius T. Loeb, “Anti-Semitism Must be Fought,” Jewish Daily News (New York, NY), Sept. 2, 1906. 

Julius T. Loeb, “Repentance,” Evening Star (Washington, DC), Oct. 14, 1906.  

“Hebrew Poem to Simon Wolf Commemorating His Birthday,” Washington Times (Washington, DC), Oct. 30, 1906.  

“Cornerstone Placed: Address by Rabbi J. T. Loeb,” Evening Star (Washington, DC), Nov. 22, 1906.  (See Also Washington Times)

“Advises His Brethren: Rev. H Masliansky, Famous Yiddish Lecturer, Delivers Remarkable Address in this City,” Evening Star (Washington, DC), Jan. 6, 1907.  

“His 70th Milestone: Honors to Representative Member of Washington Hebrew Congregation,” Evening Star (Washington, DC), Jan. 16, 1907.  

“Favor Army Canteen: Prominent Religious Workers are with Movement for its Restoration,” Evening Star (Washington, DC), Feb. 10, 1907.  

Julius T. Loeb, “Why the Jew of Today is Not a Prohibitionist,” Baltimore Sun (Baltimore, MD), April 28, 1907. 

"Need Markets for Atlanta: Rabbi J. T. Loeb Talks Interestingly of His Observations," Atlanta Constitution (Atlanta, GA), Aug. 24, 1907.

"Jewish New Year is Ushered In: Rabbi Julius T. Loeb Preaches An Eloquent Sermon," Atlanta Constitution (Atlanta, GA), Sept. 9, 1907. 

“Menace to Morals: Rabbi Loeb Tells Reason for Opposing Prohibition,” Washington Herald (Washington, DC), Oct. 20, 1907.  

Julius T. Loeb, “What is Zionism?” Birmingham Age-Herald (Birmingham, AL), July 4, 1909. Part 2 

Julius T. Loeb, “The Right of Jewish Renationalization,” Birmingham Age-Herald (Birmingham, AL), Aug. 22, 1909.  

Julius T. Loeb, “The Jew in the Turkish Revolution,” Birmingham Age-Herald (Birmingham, AL), Sept. 5, 1909.  

Julius T. Loeb, “The Jewish New Year,” Birmingham Age-Herald (Birmingham, AL), Sept. 11, 1909.  

Julius T. Loeb, “The Jew in the Turkish Revolution [Part 2],” Birmingham Age-Herald (Birmingham, AL), Sept. 12, 1909.  

Julius T. Loeb, “Borrowed from the Treasures of Judah,” Birmingham Age-Herald (Birmingham, AL), Nov. 7, 1909.  

Julius T. Loeb, “The Burning Question,” Birmingham Age-Herald (Birmingham, AL), Nov. 21, 1909.  

Julius T. Loeb, “The Burning Question — No. 2,” Birmingham Age-Herald (Birmingham, AL), Nov. 28, 1909.  

Julius T. Loeb, “Halley’s Comet: Its Orbit Calculated and Described in Talmud Nineteen Hundred Years Ago,” American Israelite (Cincinnati, OH), Dec. 2, 1909. (See Also Jewish Voice, Pacific Commercial Advertiser)  

Julius T. Loeb, “Passover Feast to Begin at Sundown,” Birmingham Age-Herald (Birmingham, AL), April 23, 1910.  

Julius T. Loeb, “Letters to the Editor: Explains Jewish Editorial,” Birmingham Age-Herald (Birmingham, AL), May 27, 1911.  

Julius T. Loeb, “Russian Priest’s Confession,” Birmingham News (Birmingham, AL), Jan. 12, 1913.

Julius T. Loeb, “Rabbi Loeb Tells Additional Historical Facts Concerning American History on Race,” Birminham News (Birmingham, AL), April 6, 1913.

Julius T. Loeb, "Brandeis and Zionism," Atlanta Constitution (Atlanta, GA), Sept. 23, 1913.

Julius T. Loeb, "Passover and World's Freedom," Atlanta Constitution (Atlanta, GA), April 12, 1914. 

“The Hebrew Faith and the Quart-a-Month Law: Interesting Correspondence Between Rabbi Julius T. Loeb and Attorney General Thomas H. Peeples,” Herald And News (Newberry, SC), June 5, 1917.  

“Plea for Support of Zionist Cause: Rabbi Loeb Presents Ten Reasons for Consideration by Americans,” Evening Star (Washington, DC), April 5, 1922.  

Julius T. Loeb, “Washington Rabbi Reports Dream Visitation from Dead Mother of Boy He Buried,” Washington Times (Washington, DC), Feb. 18, 1923. Continued

“Offers Tribute to Dead in Wars,” Evening Star (Washington, DC), May 29, 1923.  

Julius T. Loeb, "Jewish Community Center Essential to Meet Need Synagogue Does Not Fill, Says Rabbi Loeb," Washington Herald (Washington, DC), Nov. 11, 1923.

Julius T. Loeb, “Religion and Americanism as Seen by a Rabbi,” Washington Daily News (Washington, DC), Oct. 7, 1924.

“Rabbi Pays Tribute to Heroes in Radio Address to G.A.R.,” Washington Post (Washington, DC), June 7, 1925.

Julius T. Loeb, “Rabbi Makes Argument Against Enforced Sunday Observance,” Washington Post (Washington, DC), March 28, 1926.

“Rabbi Holds Flag Emblems of Peace Rather Than War: Dr. Julius T. Loeb Urges Patriotism Free From Chauvinism,” Washington Post (Washington, DC), June 6, 1926.

Julius T. Loeb, “Jewish New Year Time of Rejoicing: Rabbi Tells Story,” Washington Post (Washington, DC), Sept. 5, 1926.

Julius T. Loeb, “Quake in Holy Land Killed 886, But Not One Jew, Says Rabbi,” Washington Post (Washington, DC), Sept. 25, 1927.

Julius T. Loeb, “Dr. Chaim Weizmann, Head of Zionist Organization Praised by Rabbi Loeb for His Activities and Leadership in Rebuilding Palestine for ‘Scattered Nation,’” Washington Post (Washington, DC), May 20, 1928.

"Rabbi Urges Modification," Omaha Sunday Bee-News (Omaha, NE), March 3, 1929.

“Death is Blow to Jews, Rabbi J. T. Loeb Asserts,” Washington Post (Washington, DC), Sept. 12, 1929.

“Keynote of Rosh Hashana is Justice, Rabbi Explains,” Washington Post (Washington, DC), Sept. 11, 1931.

Julius T. Loeb, "Mussolini and the Jews in Italy," Washington Post (Washington, DC), May 31, 1937.

"Loeb Demands Jerusalem Be Given to Jews," Washington Post (Washington, DC), July 19, 1937.

Julius T. Loeb, "Jews in Palestine: Rabbi Replies to Letter in Post Criticizing Zionists," Washington Post (Washington, DC), Aug. 8, 1937.

“Religion Motivates History, Loeb Says,” Washington Post (Washington, DC), June 14, 1938.

Julius T. Loeb, “Jews in Spain: Assurance New State is Not Anti-Semitic Gratifies Rabbi,” Washington Post (Washington, DC), March 26, 1939.

Julius T. Loeb, “Preparedness for Peace: Greatest Boon to Mankind is Highest Ideal in Judaism,” Reform Advocate (Chicago, IL), Feb. 23, 1940.  

Julius T. Loeb, “The World’s Crying Need,” Washington Post (Washington, DC), Sept. 21, 1941.

Anti-Zionist Discourse

With the current surge of support for Palestinian liberation, people are looking for an ideological framework to understand why everything has been happening. As always, it is easier to formulate an oversimplified model of ideologies, than to examine the current and historical events at face value. Accordingly, arguments that seek to delegitimize Zionism have resurged in popularity. 

Ideas such as the Khazar theory of Jewish origin are making the rounds again. The Khazar theory posits that Ashkenazi Jews are primarily descendent from Khazar converts to Judaism. The Khazar Khaganate was an early medieval central Asian state that converted to Judaism in the 8th century CE. There are many problems with this theory. Primarily, the historical evidence for the conversion of the Khazars is extremely limited. The singular primary source for this event, namely a letter that was supposedly sent by a "King Joseph" of the Khazars to Hasdai ibn Shaprut, the Jewish foreign minister of Abd ar-Rahman III, Kalif of Andalusia. Though it is certain that Hasdai believed there to be a Jewish Khazar state, and he most likely tried to send them a letter, the letter that is traditionally considered to be the response is very suspect. Forgeries of this kind abounded during the Middle Ages.

Jews during this era were stateless in a moment when the Christian and Muslim worlds seemed to united against each other. There was a general idea that a secret Jewish kingdom would arise to retake Jerusalem and usher in the Messianic era. A Jewish traveler who went by Eldad ha-Dani famously claimed that there was a hidden kingdom of the 10 lost tribes in East Africa. The letter from King Joseph of the Khazars fits right into this era of global travelers claiming to have found Jewish kingdoms. Some archeological evidence suggests that there were some Jew in the Caucuses during this era. It is possible that some of the Khazar nobility converted to Judaism as a middle-ground monotheistic religion that allowed them to stay neutral in the global dichotomy of Christianity and Islam. There is not nearly enough evidence to suggest that there were enough Khazar converts to be the primary ancestor population of Ashkenazi Jews. 

Anyone who has studied the historical record knows that there were already large Jewish population centers in Europe when the Khazars were supposed to have converted. This theory has to ignore so much of established historical fact that it feels ridiculous to have to refute. Despite this, most people have little idea of how history is studied and just assume that if this idea is written about, it must be true. 

The Khazar theory is helpful for people who seek to delegitimize Zionism. It allows them to form a category of illegitimate nationalisms that have no good reason to exist. Accepting the Khazar theory as a good model of Jewish heritage, the Jews have no reason to live in Palestine, since they are actually from central Asia. This is unlike the indigenous Palestinians, who have lived in Palestine since time immemorial. The Khazar theory itself fails to account for anyone who isn't a descendent of Eastern Ashkenazi Jews. Part of the original impetus for the Khazar theory was that the pre-WWII Eastern European Jewish population had grown so fast during the early modern period that some anthropologists were skeptical that they were really fully descendent of the western European Jewish migrants. Instead, the large population increase was due to the assimilation of many unknown central Asian Jews who they imagined migrated to the Kingdom of Poland en-masse. This theory was, and remains, fully European centric. In its origin context, it allowed western Europeans to respect the emancipation and integration of western European Jews, as they were true "Semites" and civilized, whereas the Eastern European Jews were fit to hate because they were primarily uncivilized barbarians of the central Asian Steppe. This also likely formed an associated with "invading" Eastern European Jewish migrants with the medieval Mongol hordes. Much in the same way that in the US, people like to label the Latin American immigrants as criminals and rapists. 

The Khazar theory does not account for the ancestry of Mediterranean, West, Central, and South Asian Jewish populations that participated in Zionism. 

It is legitimate to differentiate between the Jewish Zionists and the indigenous Palestinians. The vast, vast majority of the Jews who live in Israel are descendants of immigrants who came in the last century through Zionism. Many immigrants choose to change their names. In Israel, where modern-Hebrew was imposed as the national Jewish language, many families from all over the diaspora chose to change their last names to Hebrew equivalents under this cultural pressure. You find Eastern European Jews changing their names from Greun to ben-Gurion, or west Asian Jews changing their name from Abdullah to Ovadiah. You can find people online referring to Bibi by his ancestors' Polish last name, in an effort to highlight his immigrant Jewish heritage.  

The implication is that the immigration reflects an illegitimate nationalism or illegitimate existence in the land. I want to address each of these thoughts independently. 

Nationalism is always fabricated and made up. Political historians generally look to the French revolution for the origins of modern political thought, since that revolution really had it all. The idea of nationalism was expressed for the first time during this revolution. Previously, the leaders of a country imagined that they themselves embodied the government. The French revolutionaries adapted the ideas of social contract theory to mean that the French people, the nation, together held the power of French governance. In many ways the "French nation" was a fiction. The people who lived in France were determined by the borders drawn during the Monarchical period. The borders during the revolution had been drawn at the peace of Westphalia. In order to argue for the reality of the French people, the government began to impose of Parisian French as the true French language in order to create a common language for the people of France. Similarly, a national culture for France had to be developed. This manufactured unity of the French people was a powerful narrative that sought to unite them under a democratic political system. 

Not everyone who lived in the borders of France was immediately considered part of the French nation. The Jews of Alsace had to fight pretty hard to get nominally equal French citizenship, since it was not immediately granted when the revolutionary government formed. On one hand, nationalism can be used to liberate a people from an oppressive government that does not represent them, but it also necessarily excludes people and provides a new medium for discrimination. The Jews of Alsace were seen as foreigners who did not belong in the already complete French nation. Already built nation states tend to be stable enough to critique themselves and tolerate immigrants. This generally manifests in people arguing that immigrants can assimilate in the national culture or the nation can be multi-cultural. Generally, the prevalence of these ideas lead to more tolerance of immigrants, which is a good thing. 

Palestinian nationalism is foundationally as false as any other nationalism. I hope that people understand that when they critique Zionism in the same way. However, Palestinian nationalism is rightly deserving of our favor, since it is in the "fighting oppressive government" stage. Palestinian nationalism also has an "other," a group that is definitely not part of it. Those are the Zionist Jews. Though in theory, many claim they happily embrace non-Zionist Jews, in practice anti-Zionist regimes have ended up just discriminating against Jews in general. To be fair, there is much to hate about what Zionism does to a Jewish community. The transformation of religion into nationalism is not pretty. Unfortunately, most religious community in the world today possess elements of religious nationalism. We still live in the era of Ethno-Nationalism, and its popularity shows no signs of waning. Any discrimination against religious-Nationalism will lead to increased government oversight of the religious community, which if not distributed equally, will manifest as religious discrimination. Also it is almost impossible to destroy ideas directly, they generally need to be superseded by more popular ideas. 

Regarding immigration. Most of the Jews who live in Israel today are descendants of immigrants who came in the last century. Under Zionist direction, many of them have participated in the Zionist settler colonial process. Small amounts of Jewish immigration to the region has existed for centuries. Following the first crusade, when the historic Palestinian Jewish community was mostly wiped out, diaspora Jews began constituting the majority of Palestine's Jewish community. By the early modern period, there were sizable Jewish populations in the Jerusalem, Safed, Tiberias, and Hebron. In 19th century, the majority of the Jews living in these areas were of Spanish Jewish descent, most of them were settled in the region by the Ottoman empire after they were expelled from Spain the 1492. A minority of them were immigrants from eastern Europe, and an even smaller minority were descendants of the indigenous Jewish population. 

With the increasing popularity of Zionism at the turn of the 20th century, more Jews began to immigrate to Palestine with the intention of colonizing it. In Palestine, at the time, the majority of the people living there were peasant farmers who rented from large landowners, in a feudal system of farming. The Zionists bought land from these large landowners and then evicted the native Palestinian peasants. This was effectively the start of tensions between indigenous Palestinians and Jewish immigrants. Indigenous Palestinian violence against the Zionist settlers was stoked by preachers like Izz ad-Din al-Qassam, who framed the Jewish immigrants within an Islamic context, weaponizing Islamic antisemitism against the Jewish colonizers. 

Anti-colonial resistance is a legitimate cause, but the anti-colonial activity of the area, took on an antisemitic character which threatened even the Jews who were not participating the in the colonial activity. Continuously increasing tensions. 

Foreign supporters of Palestinian liberation, who don't consider themselves antisemites, cannot be in favor of expelling the "foreign Jewish population" of Palestine. It is difficult to determine if people who believe in a liberated Palestinian state will be tolerant of a large Jewish population in the territory. The militant Palestinian liberation groups like Hamas and Hezbollah tend to believe that the Jews will emigrate out of fear once they achieve enough regional power. This mass emigration is unlikely to happen. The idea is based on the narrative of the wandering Jew who flees danger. Even though some Jews may leave, I find it unlikely that it will happen on the scale that they imagine. Other Arab states, like Yemen and Iraq have undergone processes like this, but they were only successful because Israel was willing to absorb so many Jewish immigrants. All the countries that attempted this before the state of Israel was created generally failed to induce a mass emigration of their Jewish populations.   

Those who fantasize about a mass emigration of their perceived enemies tend to be supportive of those enemies' extermination if they won't leave. We are seeing this right now with Israel. The most fascistic Zionists within Israel, especially the followers of Meir Kahane, fantasized about a mass emigration of Arabs from Israel. Kahane proposed bribing them all to leave, but they really wanted to them to leave out of fear. This fear tactic was first implemented with some success during the 1948 war, when about 800,000 Palestinian Arabs fled their homes in Israel out of fear and were never allowed to return. 

The fact of the matter is, 7 million Jews live in Israel today. Though the land they live upon was acquired in bloodshed, getting rid of them will required even more bloodshed. The best peace solution is not to return to the fantasy of a pre-Zionist independent Palestine. It's as impossible as the Zionist fantasy to return to a pre-Roman independent mono-cultural Judea. Decades of immigration, expulsion, and blood has irrevocably scarred the region. 

My own fantasy is for a singular secular state that recognizes the religious and national identities that it contains. This state would also offer reparations to victims of the violence. Even though these reparations will be offered to Israelis who lost family and property in the violence, the vast majority of the recipients will be Palestinians who live both domestically and abroad, since they make up the vast majority of victims of the violence over the past century. I fear that such a state will be far too unstable to maintain itself. Maybe it could create a unifying peace narrative, but there will be significant pockets of Zionists who would want to maintain Jewish supremacy and the "right to return" for Jews globally. On the other side, there will be Palestinian Islamic nationalists who would want to start forcing Jews out of the country. The history of violence would encourage people to take up arms once again. 

Another possible solution, which is supported by the international community, is the two state solution. This is an old idea that dates back to the British mandate period. It has always been a messy solution, since the population distributions within historic Palestine do not lend well to simple divisions. In spite of the border drawing difficulties, two states would allow for the national expression of both groups. The very small territory would require them to cooperate very closely with each other, though there remains the great worry of violence re-erupting should extremists come to power on either side. 

I don't know which solution would ultimately work the best. I do know that we must be thinking pragmatically about how to accommodate a peaceful coexistence of both groups in the land without fantasizing about the extermination of one or the other. As long as our discourse tolerates such ideologies, it will be very difficult to reach a lasting peace agreement.     

A History of Student Government at Yeshiva University

At many educational institutions in the United States, there is some kind of school sponsored student government. Each school has its own policies for the powers and responsibilities afforded to this student government, but overall all schools have the same main goals in mind. The student government affords the students the opportunity to practice civic engagement in a low stakes environment and the school can benefit from some kind of student input to potentially improve some of their policies. 

Yeshiva University has had a student government since long before it was a University. The earliest recorded student government was formed for the Talmudical Academy high school in 1918 it was referred to as the Students' Organization of the Talmudical Academy High School (S.O.T.A.H.S.) and alternatively as the General Organization (G.O.). The Talmudical Academy High School itself was formed out of the merger of Yeshivas Etz Chaim and Yeshivas Rabbeinu Yitzchak Elchanan in 1915. 

Though both of these schools offered some secular education, they existed outside of the educational framework of the American school system at the time. Yeshivas Etz Chaim educated elementary through middle school aged students, preparing them to attend a more advanced Yeshiva. Yeshivas Rabbeinu Yitzchak Elchanan taught high school aged students, providing them with the opportunity to test for Semicha. Semicha candidates at the time would be around 18 to 20 years old. 

Along with the merger of the two Yeshivas, there was an emphasis on professionalizing the whole educational system. Yeshivas Etz Chaim would become an accredited college preparatory high school, now called the Talmudical Academy. Yeshivas Rabbeinu Yitzchak Elchanan would begin to only accept high school graduates, making Semicha into a professional degree. Later additions to the Yeshiva curriculum such as Yeshiva College and later the graduate schools would increase the professional education required for a RIETS Semicha making it into a graduate degree. 

S.O.T.A.H.S. produced the Talmudical Academy yearbook, the Elchanite which records many of their activities. They arranged various clubs, athletics, and even basic medical services for themselves. 

Buried within the oldest surviving Elchanite Yearbook is a reference to the S.O.Y.. During Lag Ba'omer of 1923, the students of the Talmudical Academy and the Yeshivas Rabbeinu Yitzchak Elchanan set out from their crowded building at 301 East Broadway and boarded the Broadway line of the Interborough Rapid Transit company. They traveled all the way up to Van Cortland Park to play their annual game of Baseball. The high school, as usual, beat the S.O.Y. 11-3. 

S.O.Y. at the time likely stood for the Students' Organization of the Yeshiva. This reading is based upon its name in 1926, as recorded in Hedenu (our echo) the S.O.Y.'s oldest surviving publication. Hedenu was a bilingual, Hebrew and English newspaper that gradually became a literary magazine over the course of its life. Hedenu never discusses much about the origins of the S.O.Y., though S.O.Y. leadership often used it as a mouthpiece to publish their general communications. An essay written by Solomon Wind, the President of the S.O.Y. in Hedenu's first issue reflects the perception that the S.O.Y. is already old and has peaked in the past. This may be a rhetorical construction on the part of Solomon Wind, however it is much more insecure narrative of student government activity than what can be found in the Elchanite Yearbooks. The December 1928 issue of Hedenu includes a S.O.Y. page that generally discusses what the S.O.Y. has been up to. There is a list of all the people involved with the organization and the committees they serve on, and there are some articles describing the athletic activities of the S.O.Y.. The number of committees and the roles of the positions on the executive board are useful for understanding the abstract constitution and function of the organization in 1928. There were 16 councilmen, and 7 members of the executive committee. There was a president, vice-president, secretary, editor (of Hedenu), Gabai, Dining Room Manager, and Athletic Manager. The S.O.Y. seems to have assisted in running the prayer services, providing extra-curricular programing like guest speakers and athletics, stocking the library, managing some dormitory functions including the mail. 

All the issues of Hedenu from 1926 to 1928 were digitized by Otzar Hachochma. 

There was a third school operating out of RIETS during the 1920s. That the Teachers' Institute or Beit Midrash Le'Morim. This school had its own student government. The Teachers' Institute was formed in 1917 and merged with RIETS in 1921. Its first yearbook Nir was published in 1925 by the students of the Teacher's Insitute. It was only in the 1925-1926 academic year that the faculty of the school assisted the students in organizing a student government, the Histadrut Talmidei Beit Midrash Le'Morim, or if it had a name in English, the Students Organization of the Teachers' Institute. 

This young Students' Organization managed the publication of Nir, the Teachers' Institute Library, and potentially some athletic activities (since there was an athletic manager on the board). It is worth noting that there was no record of athletic activities in the Nir yearbook, so it is unlikely that this position was as active as his counterpart in the S.O.Y. and the S.O.T.A.H.S.. 

The environment of the student governments of RIETS would change with the formation of Yeshiva College in 1928. Initially the students worked with the faculty to publish an annual journal called Masmid. Both the Masmid 1929 and 1930 were published under this arrangement. It was only in the 1930-1931 academic year that a broader student government organization was formed. This organization was initially called the Students' Organization of Yeshiva College, or S.O.Y.C. They quickly changed the name to the Yeshiva College Students Council, Y.C.S.C., probably because it was so similar to S.O.Y.

As Yeshiva College and the broader school of Yeshiva University grew, the role of the Yeshiva College Student Council transformed over time. I will try to cover some of the more notable policy shifts in future posts. 

A Brief Encounter Between Chaim Yaakov Widrewitz and RIETS

As an amateur researcher of the early history of YU, I am deeply indebted to the writings of Gilbert Klaperman. For his doctoral research that accompanied his rabbinic degree, he produced a critical history of Yeshiva University. Lacking any archival records from before 1915, Klaperman turned to newspapers and oral history to construct a grounded narrative. Like any pioneer in a particular field, Klaperman got a lot right, but also made many errors. 

I am fortunate to have the luxury of the National Library of Israel's digital newspaper collection to exponentially increase my ability to find relevant information in the collection. Klaperman had to manually search through tens of thousands of pages of newspaper material to find his many sources. His imperfect method of search meant that he missed some information that challenges the facts that form the basis of his historical narrative. Though on the whole, his historical narrative is generally reliable as an approximation of the historical events. 

Klaperman (page 131) of his doctoral thesis, states that RIETS first sent out someone to fundraise out of state in 1900, a sign that it had grown too large to be supported locally. I found that RIETS actually sent out a fundraiser to travel across the country from July 1, 1898.

https://www.nli.org.il/he/newspapers/dth/1898/07/01/01/article/12 

The fundraising advertisement begins with a basic description of Yeshiva. 

"Here in New York there is exists a Yeshiva, already in its second year, where one studies Gemara with Poskim, and for two hours a day a teacher teaches the English language, and the boys get board, clothing, and all expenses."

Then follows with an appeal for funds.

"Therefore we sent out a fundraiser, the great rabbi and speaker Yisrael Yosef Litvik [sic] and we request that all rabbis, slaughterers, and presidents receive him with honor wherever he goes. And support the elevated matter, to elevate the horn of Torah in America, the money from each city should be sent to the treasurer M. A. Germansky, and they will get receipts from New York."

And ends with the following signatures.

"Yaakov Yosef, Rav ha-Kollel

Hillel Katz who is called Klein

Shlomo Natan Kotler Judge of the Kollel"

Chaim Yaakov Widrewitz moved to America in 1892 to lead the Lubavitch community in New York. The Adas Lubavitch and Niezhin published a letter in Hapisgah on August 12, 1892, announcing that he would be their spiritual leader.

Initially it seems that Widrewitz worked with Yaakov Yosef and the established orthodox rabbinate of New York to police Kashrut. A public letter reprinted from March to April 1896, declaring a slaughterhouse on Governor Street to be not Kosher, was signed by both Yaakov Yosef and Chaim Yaakov Widrewitz. They were also jointly signed on another letter that ran from May to August 1896 declaring a rival rabbinic organization, bearing the name Kollel America v'Tiferet Yerushalayim to be illegitimate. 

The two rabbis seem to have developed beef in October of the same year. On October 2, Yaakov Yosef and his assistant Hillel Klein declared the United Dress Beef Company to no longer be under their supervision. Following a summons of shochetim from this slaughterhouse to a Din Torah in late September. 

On October 12 Chaim Yaakov Widerwitz endorsed the Kashrut of shochetim of the United Dress Beef Company. 

This seems to have been the start of Widerwitz and Yosef's feud over Kashrut in New York City. 

The feud played out in some interesting ways. Shortly after RIETS announced that it was sending out a fundraiser, Chaim Yaakov Widrewitz protested this development. On July 7, 1898, about a week after the announcement was made, Widrewitz published a letter in the Jewish Daily Herald. Widrewitz argued that it was embarrassing for the New York Jewish community to have to fundraise from outside the city for its Yeshiva. He claimed to have consulted with Yehuda David Bernstein and Asher Lemel Germansky, the treasurer, who agreed with his perspective. It seems as if Widrewitz was blaming the Rav Hakollel for the idea of sending out fundraiser for the Yeshiva, and inflicting shame upon the New York Jewish community. 

Its difficult to know exactly what happened then, but my gut feeling is that Widrewitz was trying to use this small issue of the Yeshiva fundraising outside of the city against his local rabbinic rival. Claiming that Yaakov Yosef was bringing shame upon the New York Jewish community with the intention of swaying public opinion. 

At some point I should look more into the United Dress Beef Company affair, but for the moment I must let it sit because I don't really have time to investigate further.

An Early Washington DC connection to RIETS

As an amateur researcher of both Yeshiva University history and the history of the Washington, DC Jewish community, it is rare for these two subjects to directly intertwine. The Jewish community has always been a small world and in my ongoing project to catalog as many historic newspaper articles as I can find that relate to the early history of Yeshiva University, I found a direct intersection between my two main historical interests. 

To explain this intersection, I must give a little bit of background. 

In 1871, a 16 year old Yitzchak Levy landed in the port of New York. He left behind his young wife Sarah back in the Russian Empire. By 1873, Yitzchak had built a stable enough livelihood in New York to bring his wife over. They built a life form themselves in America. Yitzchak went by Isaac, and Sarah started going by Cecilia. They raised a large family of 12 children who all lived to adulthood. Looking to advance their prospects in the retail clothing industry, Isaac and Cecilia moved their family to Washington, DC in 1887 or so. 

In 1890, Isaac joined with his small but growing number of Jewish neighbors in Southwest Washington, DC to form the Talmud Torah Congregation¹. In Hebrew they called it חברה תלמוד תורה. He continued to serve in leadership at his Synagogue and operate his store in Southwest Washington until he passed away in 1926, when he was about 70 years old². 

In February 1897, a small group of ambitious Orthodox Jewish rabbis and layman filed a charter to form a traditional Orthodox Yeshiva in New York City, which they called the Rabbi Isaac Elchanan Theological Seminary. Though they initially pitched their vision as a school that would teach Talmud and Halacha for young men who were interested in the rabbinate, by late January 1897, they began advertising that their prospective school would teach Chochma (scholarship/science) and Derech Eretz (local national culture) in addition to the traditional Talmud and Halacha. Until 1915, the school was not able to offer more than middle school level English for secular studies and did not offer any academic Jewish studies to augment its Talmud and Halacha curriculum. 

The students at the Yeshiva were frustrated by the school's inability to expand beyond the traditional Yeshiva curriculum. Many of them were immigrants themselves who likely sought out RIETS under the assumption that they would be able to pursue academic Jewish and secular studies while still participating in a Yeshiva environment. Much of the Jewish public sided with the demands of the students and resulting ugliness of the dispute damaged the Yeshiva's reputation. This eventually led it into financial difficulties forcing it to close its doors in August 1908.    

These two stories intersect on August 26, 1908, about a week after the Yeshiva's closure went public. The Jewish Morning Journal, printed a letter that Isaac Levy sent them³. I have prepared a transcription and translation of it below. 

שטיצט ישיבת ר' יצחק אלחנן

א בעל הבית פון וואשינגטאָן ווערט א מעמבער מיט 10 דאָלאר א יאָהר — שיקט פיר א האלב יאָהר דיוס.

מר. יצחק ליוויי, א ביזנעסמאן, פון 922 פאור-ענד-איי-העף סטריט, וואשינגטאָן, די. סי. האָט אין "מאָרגען זשורנאל" אריינגעשיקט 5 דאָלאר פיר ישיבת רבינו יצחק אלחנן מיט פאָלגענדע בריעף:

הערר רעדאקטאָר:—

אזוי וויא איך האָב געלעזען אין "מאָרגען זשורנאל" אז עס איז געשלאָסען געוואָרען דיא ישיבה דורך מאנגעל אין געלד און איך ווייס אז אייער צייטונג האָט זעהר פיעל געטהאָן פיר דער ישיבה האָף איך אז איהר וועט יעצט אויך אלעס טהאָן דיא ישיבה זאָל ניט געשלאָסען ווערען. דאָס וואָלט ווירקליך געווען דיא גרעסטע שאנדע פיר אלע אידען אין אמעריקא.

איך בין א מיטגליעד פון דער ישיבה זייט זיא איז געגרינדעט געוואָרען און איך האָב ביז יעצט געצאָהלט 3 דאָלאר א יאָהר. יעצט בין איך ווילינג צו צאָהלען 10 דאָלאר יעהרליך און איך שיק דיערמיט 5 דאָלאר פיר א האלב יאָהר דיוס.

איך האָף אז עס וועלען זיך געפינען פיעלע אידען וואָס וועלען דאָסזעלבע טהאָן און דיא הייליגע ישיבה וואָס טראָגט אזא שטאָלצען נאָמען וועט עקזיסטירען און ארויסגעבען רבנים מיט תורה און חכמה וואָס וועלען זיין א שטאָלץ פיר דעם אמעריקאנער יודענטהום. יעצט איז דיא צייט ווען אלע אָרטאָדאָקסישע אידען דארפען זיך פעראייניגען און אויפהאלטען דיעזען ריכטיגען אנשטאלט.

אכטונגספאָל

יצחק ליוויי

Support the Rabbi Isaac Elchanan Theological Seminary.

A gentleman from Washington will be a member for 10 dollars a year — Sends a half year’s dues. 

Mr. Isaac Levy, a businessman, from 922 four-and-a-half street, Washington, D. C. sent to the “Morning Journal” 5 dollars for the Rabbi Isaac Elchanan Theological Seminary with the following letter:

Mister Editor:—

As I read in the “Morning Journal” that the Yeshiva was closed through a lack of money and I know that your newspaper has done a lot for the Yeshiva, I hope that now you will also do anything so that the Yeshiva should not remain closed. This would actually be the biggest disgrace for all Jews in America. 

I have been a supporter of the Yeshiva since it was founded and until now, I have paid three dollars a year. Now, I am willing to pay 10 dollars yearly and presently I am sending 5 dollars for a half year’s dues. 

I hope that it will find many Jews who will do the same thing and the holy Yeshiva who carries such a proud name will exist and generate Rabbis with Torah and scholarship (chochma) who will be a pride for American Judaism. Now is the time when all Orthodox Jews need to unite and support this righteous institution.

Respectfully,

Isaac Levy

---

1. ^"Certificates of Incorporation," Evening Star (Washington, DC), May 27, 1890. https://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/sn83045462/1890-05-27/ed-1/seq-5/
2. ^"Isaac Levy, Merchant, Dies of Heartstroke: Proprietor of Southwest Store was Prominent in Talmud Torah Synagogue," Evening Star (Washington, DC), July 22, 1926. https://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/sn83045462/1926-07-22/ed-1/seq-44/
3. ^"Support the Rabbi Isaac Elchanan Theological Seminary," Jewish Morning Journal (New York, NY), Aug. 26, 1908. [Yiddish] https://www.nli.org.il/he/newspapers/tjm/1908/08/26/01/article/64

Our Organization - A Glimpse of Student Life at 1920s RIETS

In May 1926, the students of the Rabbi Elchanan Theological Seminary, yeshivas rabbeinu yitzchok elchonon as they would have known it, published their first newspaper named hedenu or Our Echo. It ran for over a decade, printing infrequently, but aiming for an issue for each month. Hedenu was bilingual, Hebrew and English, and was intended to provide an opportunity for the yeshiva students to practice their Hebrew and English composition. In the first few years, the paper was mostly in Hebrew, but by the 1930s the English section had grown to be about half of each issue. The publication of this paper was facilitated by the Students' Organization of the Yeshiva or histadrus talmidei yeshivas rabbeinu yitzchok elchonon as they called it in Hebrew. 

With hedenu, the S.O.Y. had a mouthpiece to encourage students at the yeshiva to participate in its activities and administration. In the first issue of hedenu, published on May 18, 1926, the president of the S.O.Y., Shlomo Wind, wrote an essay to encourage his peers to participate in the activities of the S.O.Y. I found his commentary on the nature of student life shockingly relevant to my own experience at the same school almost a century later. 

As a fun fact, Shlomo Wind went on to teach at the Teachers Institute, The Hebrew Teachers Training School for Girls (before it was transformed into Stern College for Women), and Stern College for Women during its first decade. 

I transcribed the original Hebrew text of the article and wrote an English translation below. 

הסתדרותנו

ש[למה] ווינד

 

חברים, בני הישיבה!

הגיעה השעה שנכּנס בשיחה גלויה בדברים הנוגעים לחיינו החברתיים. נסיר את המחיצות המבדילות בינינו ונבוא לידי התענינות כּללית — ליצור סביבה יפה ומתוקנה בתוכנו.

לכו נא ונוכחה! אם בּקרב לבּנו שוֺרה איזו דאגה המכאיבה אותנו, אם בּקרב נפשנו הומות הרגשות המבקשות בּטוי, נודיע איש לרעהו את הדבר המעיק אותנו, וגם את הדברים שלפי דעתו יובילונו להתרוממות הנפש ולמצב כלכלי נכון.

הלא כולנו יחדו בּני-ישיבה, וגורל משותּף לכולנו, ולמה נהיה כזרים איש לרעהו בחיינו החברתיים? שמעתּן קובלנא רגילה בפי כמה תלמידים: הלא זה מאָז ומעולם שהיתה לנו הסתדרות, האם הצליחה אַף פּעם לעורר את לבנו לרעיון של התאַחדות, לרגש של אַחוה ואַהבה?

לענות על השאלה הזאת קשה באמת עד מאד. היחס בינינו לא היה כיחס אברי הגוף הניזונים מלב אחד. כּל תּלמיד התרכּז בּעולמו הוא — למצוא תנאים נוחים רק בּשבילו, קרובים אָנו, אבל רחוקים היינו. אחדים הצליחו המגמתם שבּחרו להם, ואחדים מבּלי עזרה, נכזבה תוחלתּם. התּוצאה: אי-התענינות בּחיינו החברתיים, קפאון הנפש ושפלות הרוח.

כּמו כן, אין ההסתּדרות אחראית בּעד מצב של פּירוד כּזה. כּי מה היא הסתּדרות ולשם מה היא באה? הסתּדרות היא בטוי-כּח של לבּות השואפים לאידיאל אחד, למחשבה עקרית המכילה מגמות שונות. הסתּדרות הנוצרת מאיחוד-כחות מדרכת את נטיות חבריה להצלחת כּולם. ואם אין כּחות מאוחדים, אם כּל אחד עושה בשלו ולעצמו — מאיזה חומר תּוצר הסתּדרות נשגבה ומוצלחת, וכח השפּעתה מאַין יבוא?

למה לא תהיה התאַחדות לבבית בּינינו שתּפיח בּנו רוח של חיים ומרץ, התלהבות נאותה ונשגבה למען נוכל התקדם בּחיינו באופן הכי נעלה? "או חברותא או מיתותא" אָמרו חז"ל. כּמה רעיונות נשגבים בּפתגם זה! נבוכי-רוח אָנו בחיי בדידות. חיים כאלה אינם שוים כלום.

כּולנו צריכים חזוק בּעבודתנו. ולמען הלהיב ועורר מרצנו, צריכים אָנו לחלופי רעיונות, לרוח שיחדש בּנו את כּחותינו. גם העולם לא היה יכול להתקיים אלמלא נתחדשו מעשי בראשית בּכל יום ויום. עבודתנו הבּלתּי נעימה בחיי בּדידות יכולה להשנות לעבודה הכי נעימה בחיים חברתיים. בּחיי אחוה ורעות, בּחיים המושפּעים מאידיאל נעלה ונשגב.

ועוד זאת, חברים, הסתּדרות כּשהיא חזקה ומבוססה, ושיש לה הכּחות המשותּפים של כּל התלמידים, יכולה לשכלל את המצב הרוחני והכּלכּלי של חבריה. כּחות משותּפים מולידים כחות אחרים. כּחות טמירים ונעלמים מוצאים את בּטויים בּנקל על-ידי עזרה הדדית. עבודה משותּפת תּוסיף לנו אומץ והתאוששות להרחיב ולהגדיל את חוג השפּעתנו לטובתנו במדה שלא שערנו מאז.

בטוח אני, שבּקרב נפשנו אָנו קובלים על פּזור-נפש כּזה במעלה חלודה על כּחותינו הנפשיים. בּטוח אני, שעומק עמוק בּלבּנו מפכּים גלי חיים. אלא מפּני סבּה אחת או אחרת, אָנו מונעים אותם מעבור את גבולם.

ובכן, חברים, אליכם אקרא: "למה נוסיף סרה?" הבה נגול את האבן המעמסה מעל לבּנו, ויקלח הזרם של אחוה ורעות. יעשה הזרם הזה למעין מים חיים ואי-מפסיקים. יצא כל אחד מחוג הצר של עולמו הוא. נעבוד בּכחות מאוחדים ומרץ משותּף. ניצור חבורות שונות: חובבי פּלפּול, זמיר, שירה וספרות. ניצור סביבה יפה, שתּחת השפּעתה נחיה כחברים גמורים, ולבּותינו הקפואים מקור יחמו, ונרגיש את האחריות הנעימה של חיים צבוריים ונעלים, ואז נבין איש את שפת לבו ונמלא את דרישתו.

ואל כּל זה נוכל להגיע אַך ורק על-ידי הסתּדרות מוצקה המאחדת את כּלנו לשם שאיפה ומטרה אחת. זהו האמצעי היותר בּדוק בּחיים החברתיים והמעשיים. ארגון כּחותינו הוא עיקר גדול. נרכז אותם לנקודה אחת, נחזק ההסתּדרות ותקווֺתינו בע"ה תּתגשמנה.

Our Organization

Sh[lomo] Wind

Friends, members of the Yeshiva!

The time has come for us to enter in open dialogue on matters that affect our social life. Let us remove the barriers that divide us and join in the general interest to create a pleasant and improved environment among us.

Come and let us consider! If some anxiety that pains us dwells in our hearts, if there are strong emotions demanding expression in our souls, each one should tell his friend that issues oppressing him, and also the things that he believes will bring us an elevated spirit and general well-being.

Are we not all members of the Yeshiva, there is a shared lot for all of us, so why must we be like strangers to each other in our social life? I have heard a common saying among many students: Was it not a while ago that we had an Organization, if only we could succeed to awaken our hearts to the idea of unity, the feeling of brotherhood and love?

Answering this question is truly very difficult. The connection between us is not like the connection between limbs of a body that are sustained by one heart. Every student is centered in his own world — finding conditions that are pleasant only for him, we are close, but we have been distant. A few have succeeded in the direction they chose for themselves, and a few, lacking aid, have had their expectations disappointed. The result: No interest in social life, a frozen soul and a depressed spirit.

The Organization is not responsible for this situation of separation. For what is the Organization and for what purpose did it come into being? The Organization is the expression of power of hearts that desire a unified ideal, for a root philosophy that includes different directions. An Organization created from a union of powers directs its diversity of members to a collective success. But if there are not united powers, if everyone does his own thing — from what material can a successful Organization be created, and where will its power to influence come from?

 Why will there not be unity of heart between us that express in us a spirit of life and vigor, proper and elevated enthusiasm so that we can proceed with our lives in the move elevated way? “Friendship or death,” said our sages. How many great ideas in this message! We are depressed in this lonely life. Life like this is not worth anything.

We all need strengthening in our work. In order to ignite and awaken our vigor, we must exchange ideas, for the spirit that will renew our strengths. Even the entire world would not be able to continue existing without the renewal of the act of creation every day. Our unpleasant work in our lonely lives can transform to become pleasant work in social life, in a life of brotherhood and friendship, in a life that is influenced by an elevated and sublime ideal.

Friends, the Organization when it is strong and established, and it has the united powers of all the students, it can perfect the spiritual and material state of its members. Powers of union birth other powers. Powers hidden and obscured present their expression with ease through mutual aid. Shared work will increase our strength and recovery to widen and grow the sphere of our influence to our benefit to an extent never measured before.

I am certain, that within our souls we are accepting this scattering of souls to degree that rusts our emotional strength. I am certain that deep down in our hearts we are resisting the waves of life for one reason or another, we are preventing them from passing over their boundaries.

So, friends, to you I call: “Why do we continue to stray?” Let us roll the burdensome stone off our hearts, and the flow of brotherhood and friendship will spray. It will make this flow into a constant spring of water that never stops. Everyone will leave the narrow sphere of his world. We will work in united power and with shared vigor. We will create different clubs: Lovers of pilpul, song, poetry and literature. We will create a beautiful environment, which beneath its influence we will be complete friends, and our frozen hearts will thaw, and we will feel the pleasant responsibility of social life and we will ascend. Then we will understand our own individual hearts and fulfil their desires.

We can only achieve all of this through a grounded Organization that unites all of us with the same desire and goal. That is the central concept in social life and activity. Organization of our powers is a large foundation. We will centralize them to one point. We will strengthen the Organization and our hopes, God willing, will materialize.

On the Matter of Student Governance

I began to be interested in the mechanisms of student government at Yeshiva University my Fall 2022 semester as I tried to learn more about what various positions did and the role student government played in the Pride Alliance litigation. I wrote an article for the Observer back then arguing that Student Government needed to be more transparent and take an active role in doing its own PR.

After carefully reading through the constitution that we used back then, I initiated a lawsuit against the General Assembly (which if you know, you know, I can't even begin to explain it here) the "legislative body" of the Wilf Campus Student Government apparatus. The GA has the power to do open meetings to allow students to be aware of what they are planning. There hasn't really been a true open meeting since 2006, which was the last such meeting that the Commentator reported on. 

I first thought I could force them to do it by trying them in Student Court. I was naive, but I prepared my case and tried to initiate a case. Unfortunately, my grandmother died while I was in the middle of the whole thing, and I really didn't want to keep up the fight while I was trying to mourn her, so I dropped the case. Which, in retrospect was probably for the better.

I was not the only person frustrated with the situation. Baruch Lerman, one of the rare students who spends four years at YU, a career politician in student government wanted to completely restructure the whole enterprise. 

So he assembled a constitutional committee to make a new constitution. I was invited to join, and I happily participated in the discussions. I read up on Roberts Rules of Order and offered my research abilities to analyze how student government behaved in the past. 

Our whole committee was rather unprofessionally run. We didn't actually produce a document for people to look at until the very last second, and in order for any legislation to pass it needs to go through a review process for the constituents to read it. Of course the document didn't even get a majority of votes cast. 

Internally, within the committee, we entered into a state of group think, where we just assumed that all the problems of student government were caused by the vague, unclear, and powerless rules that filled the existing constitution. If we could only make a constitution that clearly outlined a better organization that was filled with competent students, we could actually improve things. We could return autonomy to the students. There was discussion of returning students to the calendar committee so that we could have a say in the calendar so that it wouldn't be so inconvenient for us. We could present a united front of student advocacy and really make change. We could restore student control over the Student Union space in the Schottenstein Center and bring about a renaissance of student activities that people would actually attend. 

We were all living in a fantasy that these rules could somehow fix all of our problems. Now, I had some doubts that I would occasionally bring up in meetings. Will these rules really fix everything? Do we need to do an overhaul of this system to fix many of these problems? Even if we do get this whole thing passed, how will people know how to use it properly? Our ideas were not new. An older and more professionally run constitutional committee in 2001 successfully overhauled their constitution and it didn't really solve any problems. 

When our vote failed, some members of the group were angry that the students didn't listen to us. But I tried to talk sense into them, that it would make us all look like pieces of shit of we didn't take this lose graciously. The loss sent down a path of introspection. I reread some of the historical sources on student government. I tried to get a better understanding of the theory behind why it exists and how it exists. The more a rethought, outside of the eco-chamber of the constitutional committee, the more I was convinced that we students don't currently have the power and crucially never had the power to independently run student government. 

A much more lengthy treatment of this subject is necessary to hammer down all the details of the issue of student government at YU, but I want to summarize it as best as I can here.

Though we do find instances of students independently advocating for themselves in 1905 through 1908 during the years of turmoil in the early yeshiva, I find it unlikely that those primitive strike organizations formed the foundation of the school's oldest student council, the Student Organization of Yeshiva, or SOY. 

The earliest written record I have been able to find of it comes from the 1923 Talmudical Academy yearbook, which mentions the lag ba'Omer baseball game between the Yeshiva and the Talmudical Academy. The Students' Organization of the Yeshiva (SOY) and the Students' Organization of the Talmudical Academy High School (SOTAHS) arranged the annual baseball game. 

From then on we have the Hedenu newspaper that SOY published. Here we see their Hebrew name, הסתדרות תלמידי ישיבת ר׳ יצחק אלחנן. In the fact the first issue of the paper from May 1926 has an editorial from the president of SOY, Shlomo Wind (who would go on to teach at TI and Stern for many years) begging students to get more involved in the organization and to support it. Sounds a little familiar. It becomes immediately apparent that students at YU have never been entirely enthusiastic about student government type activities. We don't know exactly how this institution of SOY came to be. 

In addition to these early records of the SOY we also have writing from the Students' Organization of the Teachers Institute, הסתדרות תלמידי בית מדרש למורים. They published a yearbook called Nir, entirely in Hebrew. Once again we don't know exactly when the organization was formed, but both for SOY and SOTI, they needed to have been around for a bit to become established enough to publish their own magazines. There's no mention in these publications of the founding of the Students' Organization, everyone who's around just seems to assume it exists and doesn't feel the need to question it or be proud of its growth since its founding. 

I suspect that these organizations were created in shortly after 1915, when RIETS started to professionalize into an American seminary. It maintained its Yeshiva elements with Sedarim and Shiur on Talmud and Halacha, but it also incorporated classes on academic Jewish studies, language, and homiletics. Once the Teachers Institute was added in 1917, they started teaching pedagogy. The school was working to being professional. There is a longstanding practice of American schools having student governments to organize activities to keep up the spirits of the students while they engage in their studies. 

These institutions are intended to benefit the school, by ensuring there will be such activities to entertain the students and build comradery between then, and the students get to practice leadership skills in a controlled environment before they enter the real world.

It seems fairly likely that the school actively decided to adopt such a policy around 1915 to 1917ish, maybe a little later. That policy has not changed. The students are given a little funding from the school to arrange activities. They have to abide by the guidelines of the school's administration. 

When Yeshiva College was created in 1928, the school was quick to form its own Students' Organization of Yeshiva College or SOYC. Its similarity to SOY made then change the title after a year to be the Yeshiva College Student Council or YCSC. The student council answered to the dean of Yeshiva College. This arrangement was similar to how the SOTI worked with the dean of TI. These deans were able to arrange for meeting space for their school's student councils. They encouraged students to work with the faculty of the college to do academically oriented student activities. In the early years, the student council worked with the Yeshiva College librarians to purchase the textbooks needed for the courses being taught each year. The council even diverted some of its funding to that.

The YCSC, like all the other student councils likely worked closely with the deans of Yeshiva College, or the school it served, and the faculty of the school to accomplish its programing. YCSC organized athletic and intellectual competitions both within and outside of the school. They brought in guest speakers to talk about politics and intellectual pursuits, and paid for fun social events for people to just hang out in. 

We know that YCSC's relationship with the faculty was instrumental to its success, since it was one of the complaints they lodged against the dean of Yeshiva College, Dr. Shelly R. Safir, in 1936. During the very early years of the school, the Student Council directly collected the activity fee and managed its own banking. However fairly quickly, the activity fee collection was handled by the office of the Bursar (financial office.) 

The bursar then had to appropriate the money to the student council in order for them to spend it. I speculate that the process began with YCSC drafting a budget. This budget would plan out how their money for that particular semester would be spent. X amount would go to subsidizing the Commentator, X amount to the Yearbook committee, X amount to the chess club, and so on. The budget probably had to be approved by the dean of Yeshiva College before the bursar could authorize the funds. 

This whole process meant that the students had to pass a budget before anything could be done that semester, but it also meant that the students were the one's who directly spent the money on events. 

Even as far back as the 1940s, the school was trying to slowly professionalize its student services. Such as the career placement center, its dormitories, and health services. They created a position in the 1950s called the dean of men who supervised the men's housing and the dean of women who supervised women's housing. The dean of men/women and the deans of Yeshiv/Stern college worked with their respective student governments jointly. We can find an example of a training session these two deans did for the Stern College for Women Student Council during the early years of the school. 

The dean of the college still held the veto power for student activities during this era. A good example of this being exercised, was when Dean Isaac Bacon of Yeshiva College blocked the formation of a Student run radio station for several years until he was able to work out an agreeable arrangement with the Student Council in 1968. 

By the mid-1980s, the office of the dean of students was being solidified. The responsibilities of events planning were shifted away from the dean of the colleges and onto the dean of students. Since the dean of students office was created, the functional autonomy of the student government has decreased slowly over time. 

I suspect that this loss of power directly translates to a frenzy of amendments to the constitution and even rewriting the whole document in an effort to reclaim control. Students don't really realize that the policy of the school has changed since previous generations, and they believe that the constitution is a respected document. If only the could change it, things would get better. So we see that the SCWSC produced a new constitution for itself in 1996 that clearly outlined how the treasurer of the council would do the banking. I speculate that this reflects a reality where student council was losing the ability to do its own banking, and they were trying to keep it by putting it into writing. 

The Yeshiva College Student Council saw over 30 amendments passed over the 1990s leading up to an overhaul of the whole student council system in 2001 that combined all the small student councils in a large Student Union body. 

Very quickly, the original student council basically separated again, and its unlikely that they ever functioned as the unified body that the framers intended. The 2014 amendments, made this arrangement official. 

By 2004 the Dean of Student had organized the Office of Student Affairs that managed student activities. Its hard to say the extent of the office's control of the process of event planning. We know that the Commentator was still doing its own banking during this period, but the YSU was less vocal about its plans to do things. Long gone were the days when the Student Council would draft a budget in the first few weeks of the semester. The YSU still did an opening meeting that mimicked the budget, but they were just taking suggestions for things to do, the meeting was under no obligation to produce an actionable budget. 

By 2011, the Office of Student Affairs was subdivided again, and the Office of Student Life was formed to specifically focus on managing events. At least five full time employees were devoted to this cause. The office produced a policy sheet directed at student leaders to explain how the office worked. No longer were students allowed to independently spend student activity money. Every single purchase was managed through the Office of Student Life. This intricate involvement of every step in the process of event planning meant that the office recommended you submit all the details of your event three weeks in advance to allow for everything to be cleared and managed by the office. 

Both the Commentator and the Observer changed their website domains from .com to .org around this time. We know from some issues that recently arose regarding both domains, that OSL makes the payments to maintain the domains, and nowadays OSL also manages the banking of both papers. I suspect that this change in domain was due to an OSL policy that wanted to control all the spending of student activity money. 

Oddly enough, the Seforim Sale was given immunity to the control of OSL. The seforim sale operates like an old school student organization, with more autonomy than anything else. I don't know why that is exactly, but perhaps someone high up enough in the YU administration knew that forcing the Seforim Sale to comply with OSL regulations would cripple it and destroy it. 

Under the current system, one has to wonder, what is the place of elected student officials. In the early days of OSL, the office actually directly managed the election, but they quickly saw how dicey counting ballots can be and quickly stepped out of it. So the students independently run an election and then OSL recognizes whomever the election committee declares the winner. There are so many rules in the election that are so specific that every year there's been some kind of court case to settle who actually won the election due to issues of eligibility to have that seat in student government. 

OSL wants to cater to the interests of the students, but they also have to follow university policy and will limit what student leaders can do. Our current imagination of the all the positions in student government is based on a time when OSL didn't exist and student government actually needed to manage things. 

I don't really know what the answer is, but I do know that our current constitutions assume that students are doing a lot more than they actually are in these elected positions. 

The constitutions did not always need to exist. In fact the early student governments didn't have one. They likely just functioned off of the policies set forth by the deans of the schools that created them. These constitutions mimicked those policies when they were eventually drafted, but the secrecy of what actually is policy at YU nowadays means that so much of the constitution might not actually be policy. Which discredits its legitimacy as a document. 

With all that considered, I propose that the Office of Student Life and the Dean of Students publish their policies. They can update them as often they like. They don't have to be accountable to the students, but the policies have to be open for us to see. 

The policies should include info about the limitations of what activities can be, like no alcohol and sex. They should include limitations on who can be student leaders, such as whether or not a student's standing with the registrar should affect their eligibility to be part of things. 

Once we know what the limitations of student autonomy within activities is, we can work with OSL to draft a set of by-laws that actually reflect the political reality of the school and allow for more natural and seamless collaboration between students, faculty and administrators.