Maimon, The Outcast

I'm continuing to learn as I make my way through books about Maimonides.  As I said, he can't win.  He was too smart, too unique, too out of step with the Jews, too definite and without compromise.  He threatened too many people; and the traditional Kabbalistic/Ashkenazic/Gaonic ways of life were against him.  He wanted for the Jews, what the Jews didn't want. His intentions were the best--for the glory of Hashem (God), and "all Israel."  However, "all Israel" wasn't on the bandwagon with him.

One of his fundamental goals was to organize and settle the totality of age-old Talmudic dissension, controversy, and dispute, henceforth and forever more; essentially, he wanted to separate the wheat from the chaff, deleting argument from Jewish law (halacha); he wanted the Jewish world to be able to cleanly and easily grasp the crux of the law without having to stumble and meander through all the arguments preceding it.  The Jews, however, problematic and divisive to the core, had to argue with someone, so they disputed Maimon instead of Talmud--exactly what he was trying to eradicate!!!

The Jews needed to stick with what they knew--Talmud the old-fashioned way; a "mishmash" of debate. Interestingly, the Jews accepted Judah ha Nasi and his Mishneh; they accepted Joseph Karo and the Shulchan Aruch (Set Table--rules of behavior).  But when Maimon came along in between the two, isolated there in the southern Sephardic/assimilated Graeco-Roman-Moslem world, it was a "Thanks but no thanks."  Maimon was perceived as being too radical.

I love Maimonides.  I understand why he wasn't accepted.  I respect that.  He wasn't wrong; he was different.  He was writing for "the Bunch," and at the same time, he wasn't one of them.  Remember about community--how one has to fall in line.  How community keeps one in line if one falls out, or ultimately rejects him, altogether.  Snius, snius--(Modesty, modesty: Humility). 

That's the answer.  Right there.  Maimon didn't fit the mold.  It wasn't that he was arrogant, or mean, or anything that was a negative.  He was just different, and too bright to know or reckon with how deeply his work and persona impacted others.  He was aware of others' disdain regarding him, and their arguments concerning his dedication to rational discourse. Yet, he hoped that in time--the future--Jewish perspective no longer would be personally directed at him, and objectively would swing toward his way of thinking, instead. It did not.

His was THE greatest mind during all of the Middle Ages (not just amidst the Jews, but everyone)--on a par with Einstein, easily; albeit much better rounded than an Einstein.  Maimonides was a freak, an outcast; too brilliant for the masses--even the educated masses--to grasp. Astounding man.

The truth is, the Jews didn't want him because his expediency, clarity, and organization of thought threatened their established, dithering ways. Maimon, in his zeal for codification and rationalism, was about more than just regimenting the Talmud and Jewish law.  Ironically, and Jewishly, he was about unraveling the "Jewish mind" without realizing it.  He wanted a kind of linear thinking, in a Jewish world that was ponderously circular in ideology and thought. Essentially, he wanted the Jews to think like the Greeks: they were not able, as they were Jews.  There is a fundamental difference between the two cultures in terms of mindset.  This is one element that Maimonides was unable to grasp, in my opinion; quite possibly because he was Jewish, himself.

Perhaps, one could say the Greek mind was about, "either this or that." The Jew is about, "Well, maybe a little this and maybe a little that; but then again, maybe not..."   For the Greek, everything has to add up mathematically; for the Jew, there are always two possibilities; unless there is need for one more.

Alas, Aristotle and Maimon, of the crisp and decisive Greek mentality, must have had fits regarding such willy nilly back and forth discussions and debates.

Thus, Maimon became read and studied as a Jewish philosopher, and a commentator on Jewish law.  His effort to re-write and define the Talmud, was acknowledged, but not rendered authoritative. A first-rate second-stringer at best, others were studied long before him--if he is studied at all. He ran rings around every single Jewish scholar who ever lived.  Even now. But it didn't matter.  He wasn't part of the Bunch.  And that, in Judaism as with all tribes, is the bottom line.

I read about him with tears in my eyes.  It is so hard to be different.  It really is very lonely at the top...

Survival Skills In A Tough Economy: UniformMarketNews.com

(Note: This article was never published, nor was I paid for it, as Uniform Markets' felt the article was too negative.  In truth, it was perfectly correct and accurate.)

If you're reading this and you're like most of us, you're probably saying your prayers at night, and struggling plenty by day: The uniform industry, like many of those in today's world, is feeling heat from the huge economic meltdown.  Unlike jobs in technology, healthcare, the military, maintenance, or educational sectors, which are considered sacrosanct and necessary, the entire American market is in jeopardy; the apparel and uniform sectors are hanging by a thread.  Only those with the cleverest of survival plans, abilities to be flexible and roll with the punches will survive the shakedown.

If one goes online, looks in the Yellow Pages, or watches the ads in the newspapers, it will become readily apparent that under the heading of "Uniforms," there are not a lot of choices available.  Part of that is because not everyone wears a uniform and it’s a smaller niche industry; the other reason is that there just aren't that many of us around any more.  Tip: Consider partnering with a larger company.

Chances are that if you go out to dinner, you'll find your servers in T-shirts, polo shirts, or white dress shirts—basic and no frills.  They will all have been made off-shore.  If they need a cover-up, it's quite possibly an apron—also less expensive if purchased from an off-shore company that manufactures by the thousands.   If you check pants, it's the same: Off-shore.  It doesn't matter whether they're industrial, chefwear, casual or dress.  For the most part, it's off-shore manufactured slacks that are being worn. Tip: Sell off-shore merchandise as well as "Made in the U.S.A."

What is also noticeable is that fewer and fewer establishments are purchasing uniforms at all.  Employees are asked to purchase their own garments within certain guidelines.  Uniforms are no longer desired, save a cover-up to protect an employee's street-clothes, if even that.  While the littler mom-n'-pop shops are cutting out uniforms altogether, even the bigger companies are honing down.   Tip: Think aprons and vests.

Larger establishments are leaving the rental business as a means of handling their uniforms, and returning to the concept of purchasing the garments while letting the employees launder their own.  One large Sheraton hotel in Colorado is reported to have cut its uniform costs by $100,000 per year, as a result of returning to purchasing their garments instead of renting them.  Tip: If you're a renter, offer the alternative of buying.

Embroidery and silk-screening are the good news and the bad news in the uniform business.  One can look at them as the ribbon around the uniform package—good looking identity by offering a logo on low-cost garments, rather than higher priced uniforms that offer the identity by themselves.  Or, one can do away with the identity imprints as being too costly, and merely use a style, a color, or an accessory such as a hat, scarf or tie—one less aspect again on which to spend extra dollars.  Tip: Be familiar with alternative accessories.

As businesses go out of business, as corporations become more casual, as mergers rid themselves of duplication, as salaries and budgets become less instead of more, the question of how the uniform will survive, is a very real one.  It used to be, of course, that mostly service people wore them.  It also used to be that there were very few choices of garments available, and styles, colors, and fabrics from which to choose were limited.  A waitress looked like a waitress, a chef looked like a chef, a nurse looked like a nurse, and a doctor looked like a doctor.  Today, there are literally big-box stores for medical and kitchen wear.  It will be interesting to see how they do as time goes forward. Tip: Think about adding garments for the service industry in your inventory.

The entire state of California expects to go under in a couple of months, the real estate and banking industries are dying on the vine, and the automobile industry is in the soup.  If they go under, the ripple effect in terms of the economy will stagger businesses everywhere.  What does this forecast about uniforms—an added burden on company budgets?   Can't bank personnel just wear their own clothes?  Can't eateries?  Do liquor stores and mall personnel, or department stores really need an entire ensemble, when a single article will do just fine?  Tip: Think inexpensive, practical, and clever.  

Several of the manufacturers and retailers here in the United States are out of business.  Others are barely managing, as one owner of a factory that's been in business for over a century, said the other day.  "Production is down to three days a week," she confessed.  "People are making do, and no one wants to buy.”  

A customer who had long bought a particular product for his Shrine accessories is now ready to change the product and purchase Canadian, NAFTA and customs be hanged.  "It's half the price," he defended.  "Even though the quality isn't nearly as good as American, we can't afford the real McCoy any longer."  Tip: Offer alternatives.  Think outside the box.  Never say "never."

The trick of it, if there’s any "trick" at all, is to survive however one can. 

If it means pounding the pavement, cold calling, follow-up calls, using the Internet, having flyers or sandwich boards on the street, do it. If working out of your home, shortening your hours, cutting your personnel, cuts down on the overhead, do it.  If you need to streamline your telephones and technology in order to save dollars per month, do it.  Tip: Advertise like crazy and think do-it-yourself tactics.

Whatever it takes, either commit yourself to the long haul, or think about getting out.   Be careful not to drive your business, your credit, and your capital into the ground on a last-ditch hope that you might make it.  Last but not least, be sure you get a minimum payment of 50% up front, and the balance pre-paid before delivery.  Even the best customers these days are huge risks.  The bigger the customer, the greater the loss for you if he defaults.

Is Green The Color of Money?--UniformMarketNews.Com

Going “green:” Environmental protection from the decadence of technology in order to allow our natural resources to breathe again.   Today’s conscientious society, in developing entire new lines of clothing, is at once saving the planet from careless abandon during our parents’ generation, and hoping to garner a fortune in the manufacturing business at the same time.  Let us review…

In order to maintain itself, the uniform industry has to dedicate itself to a few steadfast principles: Economy, durability, longevity, practicality, and attractive appearance.   As things currently exist, few to none of these aspects that are so necessary in a top notch uniform are real possibilities in an organic garment.  Perhaps they will be accessible one day—even sooner rather than later—but for now, there is a choice to be made between the two. 

Let’s take economy.  The cost of organic fibers is anywhere from two to four times greater than standardized fabric.  For virgin plants, there have to be customized agricultural procedures, with special protection from bugs but without using bug sprays, or isolated fields that don’t utilize practiced protective measures.  At this point in time, these methods of growth and harvesting are minimal in volume compared to standard horticultural techniques; thus, enormously expensive.  A tough sell in the marketplace. 

There is currently a need and desire for processing new plants that heretofore were not used for fabrics, but now are—corn or bamboo, for example, which take enormous amounts of costly dilution in order to become usable as woven fibers.  Imagine that folks are now craving to wear garments made out of what used to be used for building houses, bridges, and flooring.  It’s a great idea, but the procedures are neither cheap, easy, nor as environmentally friendly as one would think.

Most of the organics come in very neutral tones, and in order to dye them (are we insisting on organic dyes, which themselves are limited and add up monetarily?) we’re again limited in overall palette selection.  Every time we want to dye organic goods, it’s an additional process with specialized chemistry.  The dollar signs increase, and the customer has to make choices.   You can purchase a swell set of scrubs, for instance, 100% organic cotton or hemp in the neutral tones of ivory and olive, for just $80.00, or a poly cotton set in the color of your choice for $24.00.  Who can afford it?

Durability and longevity are critical in the uniform industry.  It’s vital that garments last as long as possible before replacement.  There are several really attractive fabrics in the organics—knits, charmeuses, silks, corduroys, open weaves, to name a few.  For garments that need these kinds of materials: t-shirts, blouses, jackets, diapers, etc., organics are terrific.  But by and large, the uniform business is not made up of such commodities, whereas the seasonal, quixotic and short-lived fashion industry is. 

Rather, sturdy uniforms that are built to be cool, inexpensive, and last over time with as little care as possible, are what is required.  With the exception of the jutes and burlaps, it’s going to be difficult to find an organic weave that is as strong as it is long lasting.  And between us, who wants to wear  apparel made of burlap? 

Hemp is a very durable fiber, but the weave is loose, and it doesn’t hold.  It’s more gauze-like.  Tencel wrinkles and stains like crazy.  Cotton has never been strong; denim wears out quickly—look at any pair of blue jeans at the knees.  While it’s true that organic t-shirts for restaurants, or organic smocks for spas would be perfect choices, the overall tenacity of the garments just isn’t there.

The practicality of organics in the uniform industry is probably the most important issue of all.  Populations have only come upon technology in garment manufacturing during the last 60-100 years, depending upon one’s point of view.  Before that, there were no polyesters, no fabric treatments, no blends.  There were no special soaps, dyes, treatments, or chemicals. 

While it’s true that there was ignorance about the prevalence of existing metals, such as lead or mercury, it really wasn’t until the 20^th century that things stopped being “organic.”  The simple reason for the infusion of chemistry into our lives was that advancing technology was able to make our world easier and more comfortable by treating fabrics in such a way as to give them greater strength.   Before that, mothers stayed home and scrubbed with their washboards, mended if there was a hole, ironed after the clothes had dried on the line outside, and people had lower expectations, just being grateful to have anything to wear at all.

Today, when we ask for wicking, which is the process of drawing extra moisture away from the skin and absorbing it into the cloth in order to stay cool and sweat-free, we are seeking greater comfort for ourselves.  Technology is responsible for such a procedure.  It’s not organic.  Neither are soil-resistant finishes, wrinkle-free, nor permanent press treatments.  If you like water repellent rain coats, better forget about them—not to mention water proof.  All of these stay-warm light weight fabrics such as Gortex:  They’re o.u.t.  The nylons, like Supplex?  The stretches as in Spandex?  Nope.  Not those either.  In fact, the entire recreational/sports world will have a big problem going green, in spite of active wear soy pants, or polar fleece sweatshirts made out of recycled bottles.

Finally, the appearance of a uniform is critical, because it sets the visual tone of identity for the group it represents.  It’s difficult to find organic fibers that have a crisp, bandbox look, and where the colors are vibrant and cheerful rather than more earth-toned and subdued.  Instead, most of them appear limp, saggy, baggy, and used.  For many, this look will speak up and say, “Look at me!  I’m green!”  For others, it will be a costly reminder of dull, drab, and impractical.  It will be very interesting to see where the trend takes us.      

      

Teddy Roosevelt & Illegal Immigration, 1907

Catwalker/Shutterstock.com

One of the tragedies of today’s world--since the last third of the twentieth century--is that we have become adversarial towards one another regarding issues and values that used to be common for all of us.  It used to be that the ideas we now fight over were once givens; and on some of those "givens," our foundation as a nation was built.

The below isn't about obliterating original family, culture, religious heritage, and/or customs.  Our ancestral traditions and beliefs give us history, tradition, and personhood.   The below is about patriotic unity and duty.  It is about chauvinism and nationalism--love of one's country. 

American society also consists of an ancestry of families, culture, heritage and customs that matter; we must not forget that America itself is an entity with traditions, a language, schools, literature, style, values, societal norms and mores that represent our own culture.  These attributes of our everyday life are equally as important as those that we inherited from past generations across our borders and the seas.   If we want to preserve our nation and all it stands for, American values must matter most to each of us. 

America is and always has been the leader of the free world. While not perfect, it stands alone in protecting the rights of others, everywhere.  This is a part of who we are as Americans. 

Nowhere in the world has a society/civilization existed where revolution was led from within--the colonies against England--and where, when the battles ended and leadership taken, was power then given to the people in an orderly fashion, to rule with laws.

George Washington, our first leader, was president for 8 years; he stepped down willingly in order to let others serve--unheard of until that time and still unique in most countries of the world, today. 

America has laws: a constitution, with a bill of rights for every citizen in this country.  Our entire framework is built on the holiness of law.  To defy the law is to defy a major premise of western civilization, and one of the major defining differences between humanity and the animal kingdom.  

Many countries have followed our lead; very few have had the spirit, the determination, the know-how to reach the potential and achieved greatness of America.  

We are by definition a society of immigrants, and we are multi-cultural in origin.  However, when immigrants and multi-culturalists become more invested in themselves and their separate individual rights with regard to their own personal practices, rather than the collective meld of our American heritage, then we are no longer a country with a united common purpose, but a pool of undefined rudderless riff-raff, instead. 

Assimilation is a slippery slope.  The good news is that we learn to get along with others, and appreciate an array of habits and perspectives.  The bad news is that it allows us to become ripe for others to conquer; for us to become another identity under another flag--with other values and other foci.  To deny or ignore this reality is to deny and/or ignore all of human history and human nature.  It will always be about the survival of the fittest. 

The price of freedom is responsibility--not only to us, but to our nation and fellow Americans who, despite so many challenges and imperfections, all these years have fought, worked, and kept our country whole.  Our national motto: E Pluribus Unum—out of many is one; not the other way around. 

Theodore Roosevelt's ideas on Immigrants and being an AMERICAN in 1907:  "In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin.  

But, this is predicated upon the person's becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American...  There can be no divided allegiance here.  Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all.  We have room for but one flag, the American flag...  We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language...   And we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people."