Lubavitchers as Citizens: A Paradox of Liberal Democracy, by Jan Feldman
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2003.212 pp. $32.50. Political scientists and political theorists have not been very kind to Lubavitchers. The main complaint against the Lubavitchers is, simply, that they are not very good citizens. The critics argue that the Lubavitchers do not think for themselves enough but simply blindly follow what their rebbe says, are not interested in the common good but use politics solely as way to advance their own interests, shelter their children from different ways of life, generally live an insular life that ensures that their children will have little choice about how to live their own lives, and live in a traditional and patriarchal system that discriminates against women. Moreover, these critics argue that the obvious corollary to the Lubavitcher attachment to faith is a dangerous denigration of reason. Jan Feldman sets out to defend the Lubavitchers against these charges, though she wants to do more than that: she wants to explain the Lubavitch worldview and their relationship with the outside world. She has interviewed many Lubavitchers and lived with them, giving her an excellent understanding of their way of life. The first chapter shows how the Lubavitchers ill-fit in the reigning theories of democratic citizenship: the theories of liberals, civic republicans, feminists, and even communitarians all have trouble with Lubavitchers. Before Feldman responds to these complaints, she presents three chapters to explain Chassidim in general and Lubavitchers in particular. Chapter 2 gives a brief overview of the origins of Chassidim, their history, and their current structure, while chapters three and four explain the relationship between the Lubavitchers and American and Canadian politics (these chapters focus mostly on the Lubavitch community in New York and Montreal, since they are the largest in each country). The remaining five chapters (capped by a very short conclusion) defend the Lubavitchers from their critics, and argue that liberal democratic theory ought to make space for the Lubavitchers and not treat them as an embarrassment or as a hostile enemy. Feldman argues that Lubavitchers do use reason, are quite reflective, and consciously choose to live their lives. Lubavitchers are also loyal citizens, who are quite thankful to be able to live in the U.S. or Canada. Lubavitch women are not hapless and hopeless victims of a patriarchal culture, but choose to live full lives, where they are treated respectfully, receive a good education, and are able to create their own world with other women. Lubavitchers are not classical liberal citizens: they are not radical skeptics or radical individualists. They are not relativists, like many liberal citizens are. Rather, their faith gives them certain values that help structure their world. …
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it