Monday, December 18, 2017

A JOURNEY OF A THOUSAND MILES


When I see the love fest between Netanyahu and Trump (a nativist, corrupt, narcissist, liar) it makes me cringe. I was dismayed recently when I opened a Middle East magazine in the local book store that portrayed the Palestinian Arabs as innocent victims of a demon Israel. I am also dismayed when a commentator on television news says that some nativist action by Trump is only applauded by Russia and Israel (without acknowledging that not all Israelis are pro-Netanyahu or the extreme Right just as not all Russians are pro-Putin). I am a Zionist in that I am concerned for safety of the 40% of my fellow Jews in the world who live in Israel. Israel faces an existential problem in its relations with the Moslem world including the Palestinian and other Arab people as well as the government of Iran. But is the belligerency of Netanyahu’s words really promoting the safety of the people of Israel or undercutting their safety? I am disheartened when I hear many of my fellow American Jews beginning to question their fondness for Israel. I want desperately to speak only good about Israel, and there are certainly many good things to say about Israeli democracy (although incomplete), science, technology, stability (better than in much of the surrounding neighborhood), but the settlements and the actions of the Israeli Far Right interfere. Theodore Herzl (the founder of the Zionist movement) in his novel Old New Land envisioned an Israel where Jews and Arabs would work together. He saw the danger of the revisionist extreme Right in Zionism.

The Arab leaders can not be taken off the hook. They have missed many opportunities for Palestinian self determination. Israel would have accepted the UN partition if the Arab League armies had not invaded the land in 1948. Most Palestinian Arabs moved out of the land to make way for those invading armies.  During the Jordanian occupation of the West Bank and the Egyptian occupation of the Gaza Strip, there was no call for an independent Palestine. In 1967 it was Egypt and Jordan that invaded the land putting all of it plus the Sinai Peninsula in Israeli control, although in the long run it was Egypt and Jordan that gained from that war by transferring the occupation headache to Israel. In fact Jordan later wisely cemented its freedom from the West Bank by renouncing any claim to it. When Ehud Barak offered Yassir Arafat the best deal he could offer, Arafat made no counter offer and started an intifada to which Barak overreacted. This ended a decade of peace building. A pro-Palestinian acquaintance once justified Arafat’s actions by saying he had to do what he did because the other Palestinians would have killed him if he had done otherwise. But that is exactly the problem. If a Palestinian leader has to risk his life to make peace, there will be no peace. On the other hand Yitzhak Rabin was assassinated because he was a hero for peace.
I have some advice for the Center, Left, and Arab parties in Israel. Together you might actually be the majority in the State of Israel. You guys might very well be the hope for peace, but it won’t happen unless you put aside your less important differences and get together to take the government back from Netanyahu, the Settler Movement, and the Far Right. And my advice to the Palestinians is if the Center, Left, and Arab parties in Israel can form a coalition that can win over the Israeli government in the next election, you better get together and reach a compromise with that government, because that is the best deal you are going to get. Of course, that’s assuming you really want to come to some reasonable agreement (or perhaps you just prefer playing victims over actually taking the responsibilities of leadership). Maybe all sides prefer the status quo of dragging their feet. After all there is a kind of peace punctuated by an occasional riot. But I am afraid that this peace is a temporary illusion which will not last forever. I don’t think real peace will come only from some grand peace treaty, but rather from the ground up by people on the ground learning to live together either as separate nations, one nation, or some kind of confederation. Also it won’t happen overnight but if it is to happen at all, things have to start to move in that direction. I remember someone once said something like “a journey of a thousand miles begins with one step."

Saturday, November 11, 2017

A GOOD PERSON CAN MAKE A BAD DECISION


George W Bush seems to me to be a good and honest person with good intentions. However, when he was president he made a disastrous decision to invade Iraq to topple Saddam Hussein. It seems he received terrible advice from his advisors. The war was supposedly because Hussein was developing weapons of mass destruction. However none were found. The invasion was supposedly part of the response to 9-11. But although Saddam Hussein was a cruel dictator, he probably had no direct involvement in 9-11. The war in Afghanistan truly was related to 9-11 because Al Qaeda (the perpetrators of 9-11) were centered in Afghanistan with the consent of the Taliban who at the time ruled Afghanistan. Unfortunately the war in Iraq and ousting of Saddam Hussein upset the balance of power between Iraq and Iran. It also created a power vacuum which was taken up by a Shiite Iraqi government allied to Iran whose fundamentalist government is no friend of America. It also unleashed various hostile Sunni factions, and ultimately led to the creation of ISIS. The Iraq war also spread the US forces thinly, thus impeding progress in the Afghanistan war. Add to all of that the price in lost American military lives, lost Iraqi lives, the loss of American resources, and the exposure of the limitations of American power. Besides being a mistake from the outset, the war was conducted without a plan of what to do with Iraq after it was conquered. The Iraqi people did not spontaneously come together to form a new government. The Iraq War was a disaster in which we are still embroiled after years have gone by. I think by the end of his term in office, President Bush himself realized his failure.

I do not believe that George W Bush is an evil person, but he made a bad decision in invading Iraq, and to make matters worse he had no constructive plan for after the invasion. The result has been a tragedy for America, Iraq, and the world.

Monday, October 23, 2017

EXISTENTIAL ISRAEL


The issues between Israel and the Palestinian Arabs as well as the Israeli Arabs are existential. However the various parties have different existentials. The most obvious difference might be those of the Palestinians and Israelis, or is it? Israelis including Israeli Jews, some number of Israeli Arabs (probably most), and probably most or all of the 5% of Israelis who are neither Arabs or Jews share allegiance to the State of Israel as it is. Then there are the Palestinian Arabs and perhaps a minority of Israeli Arabs who say they want to live in an independent State of Palestine (or is that really what they want?).

Now lets look more closely at the Israelis. Lets start with the Israeli Jews. Most religious Orthodox Jews see Israel as a state for Jews who share the Jewish religion. There are also non-religious Jews on the radical right of the political spectrum who include in their existential people who share their culture and history (but which culture and which history? Ashkenazic? Mizrachi? Ethiopian?). And what about those Israeli Arabs who are integrated into Israel and its culture?

Lets look at the Palestinians. Hamas in Gaza says they want to conquer all of the land of Israel/Palestine and do not recognize an Israel in which Jews are the majority. For them existential is no Jews or at most a subjective Jewish minority. Fatah on the West Bank says they want an independent Arab Palestine in the West Bank and Gaza, but a minority there now say their existential could be one binational state for Arabs and Jews (with an Arab majority?).

So, my opinion is that finding a common existential for most of the inhabitants of the Land of Israel/Palestine would go a long way to bringing peace to that land and making it an example for all of the Middle East. This common existential is possible and already exists for many Jewish and Arab Israelis (I don’t know the numbers or percentages). This common existential should be nurtured not only in the State of Israel but might eventually extend to the West Bank and eventually perhaps to Gaza. A first step can be found in Hand in Hand which has been creating schools where Jewish and Arab Israeli children study together. What better way can there be to create a common existential than by starting with children? There are details to be worked out, but the result can be a stronger and more peaceful Israel/Palestine or whatever you call the place and one that finally realizes the dream of Theodore Herzl of a land where Jews can live in peace and feel at home and the Arabs can have the same.

Saturday, September 30, 2017

US AND THEM


When I was a young man, I once asked my mother out of curiosity a question, “Would you rather I marry a Jewish girl who is Black or a White girl who is not Jewish.” Her reply was that she would prefer a Jewish Girl who is Black. She also gave a reason which had nothing to do with religion but rather “because she would be one of us.” The problem with the Alt-right or White Supremacists or Neo-Nazis or Nativists or whatever you want to call them in America is that they have a narrow view of who should be included in the word Americans. These people believe that Americans are White people who follow the Christian religion, speak English, vote Republican, and do not belong to certain minorities (most importantly Hispanic). They consider “Us” as only limited to that subset of “real American” Whites. They fear that the other “not real”  Americans are becoming or have become the majority in our country. Unfortunately we now have a president (Trump) who panders to a subset of Americans who hold that point of view. Mr. Putin (the Russian dictator) through hacking and posting fake news on social media managed to hijack the most recent US presidential election to squeak Trump over the line in crucial swing states winning the election for him (despite his loss of the popular vote). Putin considers it in Russia’s interest to weaken America and other Western Democracies by promoting divisiveness here and in our allies.

As a Jew, I also am concerned about the State of Israel which is home to about 40% of my co-religionists in the world today. Theodore Herzl, the founder of modern Zionism, promoted a Jewish state as a haven where Jews might escape anti-semitism. As things have progressed, Eretz Yisrael (Israel/Palestine) has evolved into a land of Jews and Arabs (mostly Moslem) to a varying degree controlled by Israel. The State of Israel is 75% Jews, 20% Israeli Arabs, 5% not Jewish or Arab. Gaza is Arab. The West Bank is mostly Arab with a large minority of Jewish settlers. There is guilt and suffering on all sides. This blog entry is too short to go into all the details of a complex problem, but I believe the only solution is to re-wire the idea of “Us” whether that rewiring evolves into 2 states, 3 states, a confederation, or one state. The goal of any solution should be peace, prosperity, and dignity for all the inhabitants. I do not believe this solution will be imposed by government negotiations alone or primarily, but rather by changing the mindsets of the ordinary people on the ground, in other words by changing the ideas of who are “us.” When local Jews, Arabs, and anyone else living there perceive their combined “us” supersedes their separate “us,” the peacemaking tasks of the government or governments will become much easier. Then the lives of the local people will be greatly enhanced, and the benefit might be an example for the surrounding region. The evolution will not be fast, but if it never starts it will never happen.

There is an organization called Hand in Hand that creates combined Jewish and Arab schools in Israel for children. This is a ray of light and a place to start. It is opposed by extremists on both sides. It is supported by Reuven Rivlin, the president of Israel. However, if I google Hand in Hand together with Netanyahu or Mahmoud Abbass, nothing pops up. Unfortunately the presidency in Israel is largely ceremonial. Let us hope that the Hand in Hand movement will grow enough to force the leaders with power on both sides to wake up.

Saturday, August 26, 2017

FRANKEN AND HARRIS



In a previous entry, I suggested Kamala Harris for president in 2020. I would also like to suggest Al Franken, one of them for president and the other for vice-president. Maybe Franken should be the one for president in 2020 because he is older and then Harris in 2028, but the reverse would be OK. I think they would make a great team.

There are 2 considerations. Who would be the best at doing the job of being president and who would have the best chance of getting elected? Hillary Clinton would have done an infinitely better job of being president than Donald Trump, but she did not win the election. Had she been a better campaigner she might have overcome the effects of the Putin hacking and the gerrymandered electoral college. Competence and winning the popular vote did not make her president.

As for doing the job, both Franken and Harris seem to be pragmatic liberals. Ideals are necessary, but one has to get them done. Some examples of necessary ideals are universal affordable health care, protection and encouragement of immigrants, gun control, a balanced well run long term economy (as opposed to a Far Right free for all economy that favors quick buck artists and predators at the expense of everyone else). Those are a few examples, but the list goes on. I believe both of them are left of center moderates who are willing to work with corporate America if those corporations are willing to share a fair part of their success with the rest of us whose labor fuels that success. Both are senators who know and can work with Congress.

As for getting elected, both of them are interesting people. Harris is a former state attorney general, a woman, and of a racially diverse ancestry. Franken is a former comedian who has shown an ability to seriously conduct the work of a senator. His satirical ability and sense of humor would serve him well in the White House as well as on the campaign trail. Also together they represent both the coasts and the center of America, Harris from Coastal California and Franken from Midwestern Minnesota (and for you East Coasters Franken spent time in New York when he worked at Saturday Night Live.

After the chaotic, stifling, and destructive team of Trump and Pence, Franken and Harris would be the breath of fresh air needed to clean up the mess that will be left behind by the present team.

Saturday, August 19, 2017

TRUMP IS WRONG IN DEFENDING THE WHITE SUPREMACISTS WHO INVADED CHARLOTTESVILLE

Trump defended the Alt-Right Neo-Nazi White Supremacists who marched in Charlottesville. As usual, his claims were typical Trump BS.
1. Trump claimed they were there to preserve monuments that represented part of American heritage. Actually, the removal of those monuments was being considered because that was the will of the local elected government representing the will of the majority of the local Americans living in that community. Those monuments were placed to honor leaders of the Confederacy which fought to preserve slavery, and as such are offensive to the majority living in the community.
2. Trump claimed that both sides were equally guilty. The White Supremacists came heavily armed wearing combat style gear, shouting Nazi slogans. The counter protesters were not armed and were dressed in regular street clothes. The Nazis were the invaders, not the locals.
3. The murderer who drove a car into a crowd of people was one of the Nazis, not one of the locals.
4. The Nazis came not to preserve some statues, but to intimidate and show their toughness. Their stated goal is to start a revolution to take over America. They fear progress, truth, and diversity.
5. Incidentally, Robert E Lee opposed Confederate monuments. He said they would keep open wounds created by the Civil War. Also, descendants of Robert E Lee, Stonewall Jackson, and Jefferson Davis support the removal of the Confederate monuments.

Friday, August 11, 2017

WHY KAMALA HARRIS SHOULD BE THE NEXT PRESIDENT

At this moment, if my reading of Senator Kamala Harris is correct, I think she might be the best candidate for the Democratic party to nominate to run for president in 2020.
I am a slightly left of center person. I favor a pragmatic national policy that promotes progressive ideals but does not alienate the business community in the process. After all, the business community brings in the tax $ to pay for progressive projects. I favor an economy that is regulated to run as smoothly as possible over the long haul and which brings benefits to everyone rather than a free for all unregulated economy that favors the quick buck artists (like Trump) or a kleptocracy that tips the scales unfairly for the few at the top.
I believe we need to unite the Democratic party but also include moderate Republicans who are turned off by the craziness of the Radical Right and the antics of Trump. When some on the far left label Senator Harris, President Obama, and other Democratic pragmatists a neoliberal, I consider that a plus. If neoliberalism means pragmatic liberalism, then I am a neoliberal. Senator Harris is high on my list of favorites to run for the next president because I think she has the substance to appeal to the Center and is interesting enough to bring along the Left. I think Senator Harris might be the best candidate to bring back the Obama coalition.

Monday, July 31, 2017

DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE AND IMMIGRATION


I recently came across a text book from a political science class which I took about 60 years ago. It is a compilation of various important political documents. One that caught my eye is the American Declaration of Independence. In perusing it, I found ideas that I must have read in the past but which had little real meaning to me at the time of reading or perhaps that I had just forgotten. One such line that holds particular importance in the present time is a grievance against King George of England which says, “He has endeavored to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the laws of naturalization of foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migration hither,…”

So King George discouraged immigration to America because he feared immigration would make America stronger and therefore more difficult to control just as Trump and the GOP in the present time discourage immigration because they fear immigrants are more likely to become Democratic voters thereby increasing the strength of the Democratic party relative to the Republicans. The USA is a nation of immigrants and their children. Immigration is an important factor in making America strong and independent just as King George feared many years ago.

Wednesday, July 26, 2017

HEALTH CARE


Obamacare has provided higher quality health care for more Americans at a more affordable price than existed before Obamacare, and has done it preserving a well regulated capitalist healthcare system. It is a work in progress and needs tweaking (not repeal and/or replacement with inferior quality Trumpcare) to make it even better.

To provide high quality equitably distributed health care it needs to keep:

1.    Mandated health insurance for everyone. Taking away the mandate will cripple American health insurance. If healthy young people are not included, the pool will be weighted with expensive sick people. That’s how insurance works. You pay into it even when you don’t need it so that you have it when you do need it.

2.    Acceptance even with pre-existing conditions. The mandate will ultimately even this out.

 It needs to add:

1.    A public option. This will add to competition (a capitalist concept). It will also fill gaps where a suitable private option is not available (like some sparsely populated rural areas).

2.    Promote efficient health care delivery systems to keep down costs. For example, in the Kaiser model, the insurance company and medical group negotiate the plan every year. Medical group has responsibility to provide quality care. Insurance company has responsibility to provide the money. Together they negotiate value.

3.    Control drug prices. It should be illegal to advertise prescription drugs to the public. That adds unnecessary expense and promotes drugs based on popularity rather than effectiveness, efficiency, and necessity.

4.    It is known that non-profit health care plans provide the best care for the price, probably because they don’t have investors skimming off the top. Perhaps the market will eventually eliminate for profit plans.

A single payer system is not necessarily the best way to go. But as things progress, if it becomes apparent that it is the best way to go, then so be it. All things being even, a well regulated capitalist system is probably the best.

Trumpcare and lack of regulation promotes fly by night, quick buck, in and out plans that keep quality down in order to keep prices competitive. Patients get caught when they need care that is not provided. Also, preventive care in high quality plans actually keeps costs down by keeping patients healthy. People with no or poor quality insurance end up with more expensive emergency room care that the community ends up paying for. Emergency rooms are set up and their staffs are trained to provide emergency care, not routine health care.

 

Monday, July 24, 2017

ANTI-SEMITISM AND ISRAEL


We 5 million Jews in America are fortunate to live in a country where anti-semitism exists but is at a low. The 6 million Jews in Israel live in an embattled fortress (or ghetto) located in a scary chaotic part of the world. Many of the other 2 million Jews are exposed to a growing resurgence of anti-semitism to varying degrees in various parts of the world. Modern Zionism began in the late 19th Century with the hope that the existence of a Jewish state would be an antidote to anti-Semitism, a place where a Jew would live in peace. Unfortunately no plan however noble and well thought out unfolds perfectly.

For me, being a Zionist means I am concerned for the safety of all my fellow Jews everywhere in the world, and 5 out of 13 of us live in Israel. When Benjamin Netanyahu claims to represent all of us Jews in the world, I disagree. When he asks us all to go live in Israel to be safe, he is not exactly correct. It depends on where the particular Jew happens to be living as to whether he or she is more or less safe than in Israel. Is Israel protecting me as an American? It is a 2 way street, but I think my country, America, is in a greater position to protect Netanyahu’s Israel. The truth is that we all live in the same world, we Jews and everyone else. There are people in the world who are willing to harm us and others for some abstract foolishness. Unfortunately, people who are stupid in their purpose can also acquire enough technical ability to create great harm. We Jews must be a part of the sane, intelligent, and good people who work together to overcome the foolish people who wish to do harm to us and even themselves for their cause. Israel like other countries does good and bad, probably more good than bad. Israel has produced great scientific and technical achievements that have given benefits throughout the world. Unfortunately it has not always acted wisely in its relations with the Palestinian Arabs just as the Palestinian Arabs have not always acted wisely in their relations with Israel. Hopefully one day, their problems can be resolved so that Israel can be the haven that Theodore Herzl envisioned for all the inhabitants of Israel and Palestine.

Friday, July 21, 2017

ETHICS AND LEGALITY IN GOVERNMENT


Walter Schaub, the recently outgoing Director of the United States Office of Government Ethics, was interviewed on television after he decided to resign from his post. In the interview he explained that the function of this Office is to advise people in government how to avoid doing unethical acts and warn them when they are doing unethical acts whether on purpose or inadvertently. He complained that Trump and his team are not concerned with acting ethically. They believe that anything they do which does not break the law is OK whether or not it is ethical, in other words whatever they can get away with. That view is apparently the way Trump acted in his business dealings before he became president. As president, Trump mixes up his personal business with his role as a public servant and uses the office of presidency to support his personal financial business. Trump believes that is strictly speaking within the law. There is some question as to whether that is true. However even if it is legal, it is not ethical to push the envelope to the edge. Those who follow and enable Trump say all politicians do it, so it is OK. However that is not true. Trump is unique in his lack of ethical behavior.

Monday, July 17, 2017

WHO IS A JEW AND WHO IS A HEBREW?


Like all religions, Judaism seeks to make order out of an otherwise chaotic and tragic existence which gives each person life and the ability to think and then abruptly takes it away in a ridiculously short time. Most religions (at least Western Religions) offer what they consider the true or best path to the after life for everyone. For Christians this is belief in Jesus as the Son of God. For Moslems this is belief in Mohammed as the Prophet. Some of the sub-religions in each of the major religions believe that they have the real true path as opposed to the other sub-religions. Therefore according to each religion and even sub-religion, a person would have the best (or in some cases only) path to Heaven by following the teaching of that religion or sub-religion, and therefore all people should believe in their teachings. Some extreme forms of religion believe in killing people who do not accept their way.

Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (whether you believe them as historical or mythical people) were tribal leaders and the origin of the Jews in our Bible. They lived in a time when most people believed in multiple gods and each culture had its own. Abraham believed there was one God for all people, but he did not demand one formal religion for everyone. The name Judaism comes from Judah, one of the sons of Isaac and therefore does not actually occur until some time after this period. Judaism arose as the religion of the Jews during or after the time in Egypt. According to Jewish thought, the Jews (or Hebrews) are a people, and Judaism is the religion of that people. We Jews are the people who brought monotheism to the world according to our teachings, and monotheism is the truth for everyone as opposed to polytheism. The Jewish religion is how Jews worship God, not necessarily how others need to. Other monotheistic religions are how other people (nations in English, goyim in Hebrew)”, worship the same God. Judaism is not the track to salvation for everyone. The good news is that this allows for religious tolerance in Judaism, but the bad news is that it can mix up religion and nationalism. Possibly the best description of the Jewish view of being Jewish can be found in the musical play Fiddler on the Roof where Tevye in speaking to God says, “I know we are supposed to be the Chosen People, but could you maybe next time choose someone else.”

This mixing up of religion and nationalism is not so much of a problem for us American Jews. We live in a country that emphasizes separation of church and state since America’s beginning. This creates questions in Israel which was founded as a Jewish and democratic state. But this founding concept creates questions because ¼ of the population are not Jews, and ½ of the Jews do not practice the Jewish religion. Another complicating factor is that the state gives management of Jewish religious matters including the definition of who is a Jew to the Orthodox Jewish Rabbinical establishment. Other branches of Judaism (e.g. Conservative and Reform) do not receive the funding that Orthodox Judaism receives.

The definition of who is a Jew depends on who is doing the defining. Some people would say it refers to only people who practice the Jewish religion. Others would extend it to people whose ancestors at one time practiced the Jewish religion. Officially Jewishness conveyed by heredity is only conveyed by one’s mother being a Jew, but not everyone is so strict about that. One might say that inherited Jewishness is lost if one converts to another religion. These details can be accepted or not accepted without great consequence in the Diaspora but become a matter of identity in Israel where it takes on a political importance because by law any Jew can enter Israel and immediately become a citizen. This is inherent in Zionism’s purpose. Some people would define a Jew as anyone who inherits Jewishness from a father or a mother, and some might extend it to anyone who is willing to accept and share our identity, history, and fate.

I think there should be 2 words, one for a person who practices the Jewish religion and one who is a Jew by sharing our history, culture, language, and identity. One who is Jewish by religion could be called a Jew and one who speaks Hebrew and embraces the Jewish culture could be called a Hebrew whether or not one is a Jew by religion. This view (or at least a similar view) was espoused by Bernard Avishai in his book, The Hebrew Republic. There should be more to being a Hebrew than just saying “I am a Hebrew.” Otherwise any person who wishes to do harm to Israel could say it to enter. Any Jew as presently defined would be a Hebrew. Being a descendant of practicing Jews could make a person a Hebrew. Israeli Arabs could be Hebrews if they take on Hebrew as at least one of their primary languages and recognize Hebrew (Jewish) culture and history as at least part of their own history and culture, thereby assimilating at least partially into the general Israeli culture. Considering himself (or herself) a Hebrew might remove any mixed emotions an Israeli Arab might feel. Any Hebrew living in Israel would have to pledge his or her primary allegiance to Israel. The designation of Hebrew would not automatically apply to Palestinian Arabs outside of Israel (whether or not it seems fair) because it would change the demography in such a way that would change the character of Israel. Designating a person who would not qualify as a Jew under the present definition as a Hebrew would have to be done by the secular Israeli government on a case by case basis. The reason for all of this would be to increase Israel’s strength and security by being more inclusive to all its citizens and by bringing in as many loyal citizens as possible. There are only so many Jews in the Diaspora and most have no desire to move to Israel. Inclusivity will push the demographic clock in Israel’s favor, and put it in a more strategic position whether things evolve into 2 states (Israel and Palestine), one unified Israel, or a confederation of Israel and Palestine.

Saturday, July 8, 2017

AN EXCITING VERSUS BORING PRESIDENT


During the 2016 presidential election, I happened to be speaking to a person who asked me whom I was planning to vote for. I answered that I was planning to vote for Hillary Clinton. So I asked him who he favored. He answered he was planning to vote for Donald Trump. I then replied, don’t you think he is kind of crazy. He agreed. He said he thought Trump was different, interesting, perhaps exciting. He would shake things up. It did not make sense to me, but I think it was a major factor in making Trump appealing to enough people to take him over the top in winning the electoral college. We hear people say that Hillary should have done a better job in addressing the concerns of the rust belt workers. We know that Putin sent his hackers to tip the scale for Trump, his preferred candidate. I think those factors actually did play important roles in electing Trump, but I think there was an additional factor that was also important and maybe the most important of all.

When the race for president between John Mc Cain and Barack Obama was drawing to a close, it was becoming evident that the economy was about to crash after years of the government borrowing money to pay for the Iraq War and more importantly income tax cuts which drained the treasury. President Bush called both candidates to a meeting where the economic problem was presented to them. Obama had thoughtful intelligent questions and Mc Cain did not. It became apparent to enough of the electorate that the USA was in deep economic trouble, and Obama was the candidate who was better prepared to address the problem.

On the other hand, after 8 years of incremental economic growth under Obama (despite obstruction by the Republican Congress), many people became bored. Success and the absence of turmoil can be boring. So along came Trump, a populist candidate who complained (untruthfully) that America was in a bad situation. Many people, especially some who had not progresses as much as they thought they should have, believed him. Many of those same people were major beneficiaries of programs like Obamacare. Perception trumped truth. Hillary Clinton was portrayed as a continuation of the Obama presidency (boring). A number of people on the Left were bored. They liked the fire and spice of Bernie Sanders, but were turned off by the business-like approach of Hillary (again boring) and stayed home from the election (or in some cases actually voted for Donald) in spite of the urging by Sanders to vote for Clinton.

So what are the implications for the future? I think there is enough of a push back in America to give at least one house of Congress to the Democrats in 2018. But what will happen in 2020 assuming Trump is still president and still wants to run for another term? Should the Democrats run a boring competent candidate like Hillary Clinton or a fiery far left candidate like Bernie Sanders. It probably won’t be those candidates. It probably will depend on what will be happening as the election is approaching. If things continue to go downhill as they have been doing during the first months of the Trump presidency, a boring Democratic candidate might not look so bad. Mark Warner would be a balanced candidate with solid ideas, but is he too boring? I like the fire of Elizabeth Warren. As a believer in well regulated capitalism, I find some of her ideas to the left of mine, but I think if elected she would face whatever reality presents itself in a reasonable manner. After all, people on the extreme Left and Right viewed Obama as a Leftist because he was Black, had a funny name, and used active slogans to motivate his base. But from the beginning if one actually listened to his ideas, he was and has remained a slightly left Centrist (which is the main attribute that appeals to me).

Well we will see how things unfold over the coming 2 and 4 years. We live in interesting times. Maybe less interesting or downright boring would be better.

Tuesday, July 4, 2017

WELL REGULATED CAPITALISM


Fareed Zakharia interviewed Senator Mark Warner on television last Sunday, and I was impressed with Senator Warner’s views. He seemed to favor a well regulated capitalism that works for all Americans. This differs from the views of the Tea Party Republicans who favor an unregulated capitalism that works for richest people at the top, the fast buck artists, and the financial predators. It also differs from the social bigots who believe Trump when he blames their failures on people other than themselves (like immigrants) and gives them false hope that he will return America backwards to a time that worked for them but no longer exists. But it also differs from the views of the far Left. He does not lay the blame for all of America’s ills on the large corporations.

My views on the economy which I think are similar to Senator Warner’s views (if I read them correctly) are that socialism has good intentions but does not necessarily produce the best results. Communism (which is socialism combined with authoritarianism) had a run during the end of World War I until almost the end of the 20th Century when the Soviet Union collapsed. After a brief flirtation with democracy, Russia returned to authoritarianism under Putin with an extreme government controlled capitalism. China, the other huge communist country has evolved into a combination of residual authoritarian communism combined with capitalism (although softer, more responsible, and more successful than Russia). It seems that most of the communist countries have ultimately evolved into capitalist economies although often retaining the authoritarianism of communism. This speaks for the desirability of some sort of capitalism. On the other hand, capitalism left unchecked by regulation as desired by the Tea Party leads to a quick buck predatory capitalism in which wealth becomes concentrated into a small group of oligarchs who control the economy to create a kind of socialism for the very rich. A capitalism that works for everyone must be well regulated to keep it from running amuck. This well regulated capitalism must combine as much as possible the competition of capitalism with social justice for everyone.

Wednesday, June 28, 2017

TRUMP VERSUS MUELLER


It seems odd that the new President of the United States, the Commander in Chief of our military, is a man who dodged the draft during the Vietnam War. He was a rich kid with a rich influential father who managed to get out of the draft. It was typical Trumpism. Why do what you can get others to do for you? It was supposedly because he had bone spurs in his feet. Really? There was no mention of bone spurs in the glowing health report that he got from his doctor during the election. He did not serve. He did not run away to Canada (at least those guys had a cause). Donald’s cause was running out to make money with questionable business practices, a precursor to fake Trump University and stiffing employees and small business contractors.

Now Trump’s people are starting to malign Robert Mueller who is heading the investigation into Putin’s attack on the American election process to favor his preferred candidate, Trump. Unlike Donald, Mueller enlisted in the Marines during the Vietnam War, risked his life, was wounded, returned to service when his wound healed, and was decorated for bravery.

Mueller has a strong reputation for honesty, integrity, and impartiality. Trump on the other hand blatantly lies which is obvious to anyone who listens to what he says and tweets.

Yet a certain group of loyal Trumpers continue to believe his BS. Abraham Lincoln said you can fool all of the people some of the time and some of the people all of the time. It seems Trump’s loyal followers are the some of the people.

 

Sunday, June 4, 2017

BDS


I am opposed to BDS (Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions). I am critical of the extreme Right in Israel (as well as among Jews here in America and the Diaspora), but BDS does nothing to improve the problem between Israel and Palestine. In fact, it aggravates the problem. Also, it assumes that the Palestinian Arabs are innocent victims, and Israelis are aggressors which is not true. In spite of their conflicting interests, Israelis and Palestinians also have interests in common which I believe actually outweigh their differences. BDS works against those common interests and often targets academic and artistic Israelis who are most interested in promoting peace while giving the most far Right ammunition to promote the idea that peace and fairness are impossible. Although I do not look with favor at the Settlement movement because of its negative effect on Israel, there have been instances where BDS has caused Palestinian unemployment by boycotting combined Settlement/Palestinian businesses and Settlement businesses that employ Palestinians. BDS is not a movement to promote peace or fairness but rather a movement that seeks to destroy Israel and in the process does nothing for the real interests of the average Palestinian.

Saturday, May 27, 2017

WHAT CAN AMERICAN JEWS DO TO HELP SOLVE ISRAEL’S DILEMMA?


Israel has a dilemma, and what can I do as an individual American Jew to help? First of all, let’s look at some history to put things into perspective. Although traditional Zionism has existed for 2,000 years since the destruction of the Kingdom of Judea by Rome, Modern Zionism began in the 1880s with the leadership of Theodore Herzl. The purpose of Herzlian Zionism was to find a national home (not necessarily the Land of Israel/Palestine) for the Jewish people in the face of anti-semitism in Europe (even in the “enlightened” Western Europe). However for the Religious Zionists, who were a minority among the early Zionists, only Eretz Yisroel would do. Anyway there was no other country standing with open arms ready to share some land, even the ones with large sparcely settled areas. So why not the ancestral home of the Jewish people? Where else was there? Then came the Holocaust which created displaced Jewish survivors. Again the open arms were limited, certainly not in Europe. Then came the wars between the Jews and the Arabs. There were a number of wars, but the two most significant were the 1948 war when the Arab League (surrounding Arab countries, not Palestinians) invaded and 1967 when the surrounding Arab countries again invaded. The result of 1948 was the independence of the State of Israel with a Jewish majority. The result of 1967 was bringing the West Bank and Gaza (and temporarily Sinai) under Israeli control. The winner in 1948 was Israel because it resulted in an independent Israel with defined borders. Who won 1967? At the time it appeared to be Israel, but was it really? Actually Jordan and Egypt got rid of headaches in Gaza and the West Bank, and Israel inherited them. The Palestinians lost in 1948 because most of them were displaced when they moved out to make way for the invading Arab armies and then could not go back in. Those who remained became Israeli citizens and now make up 20% of the population of Israel. Jordanian and Egyptian rule was replace by Israeli rule for the Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank in 1967.

Israel’s dilemma today is that Israel is stuck with an occupation of the West Bank and a containment of a hostile sort of independent Gaza strip on its border. In the 1990s things were looking up. Peace was made with Egypt ending Israeli occupation of Sinai. The Palestinian Authority under Arafat came into existence giving the Palestinians autonomy. Some Palestinian Arabs became kindly disposed toward Israel (how many?) and were looking forward to eventual complete independence. Most Israelis had a similar view. Unfortunately hatred for Israel persisted for many Arabs, both Palestinian and in the surrounding Arab countries, and elsewhere in the Moslem world. Arafat would speak peace in English and hatred in Arabic internally. Also there was a fringe group of radical Jewish zealots (both in Israel and the Diaspora) who wanted ever growing settlements with the purpose of eventually becoming the majority in the occupied lands.

When Ehud Barak offered Arafat the Clinton Barak Plan which would have given the Palestinians an independent Palestinian state in the West Bank, Gaza Strip, and part of Jerusalem, Arafat rejected it without any further negotiation, and then commenced an Intifada with suicide bombers against Israel. Apparently some (or most?) of Arafat’s people still could not reconcile accepting the reality of Israel’s existence, and he was too chicken to go against them (or maybe he himself could not accept it?). Some time later Barak again tried to separate Israel from Palestine by forcing the closure of settlements in the Gaza Strip and withdrawing the Israeli army. The idea was to test separation unilaterally in the part of Palestine that is farther from Israel’s population center. The Palestinians in Gaza then elected a Hamas government that did not accept the reality of Israel and proceeded to attack Israel with rockets and commando raids. As a result, enough of the Israeli public became disillusioned with the two state solution to elect a right wing government and adopt a “who cares” attitude toward the settlements. This in turn has hardened the Palestinian Arabs to a greater extent against Israel and has further provided excuses for anti-Jewish hatred in the Moslem world (and elsewhere). To further stir the soup centuries old internal hatreds among Moslems between Sunnis and Shiites, between Iran and the Arab countries, between secularists and fundamentalists, not to mention the most extreme Moslem terrorists in Al Qaeda, ISIS, the Taliban, and many other copy-cat groups and individuals who glorify murder in the name of religion. Interestingly, in the middle of all this, a kind of under the table alliance has arisen between Israel and the surrounding Arab countries (the same ones that invaded Israel/Palestine in 1948 and then 1967). It is an alliance based on common enemies, particularly Iran. However it is an alliance with governments, not with the Arab people, and who knows how long those Arab governments will last and how long they can be trusted?

So, Israel exists, Jews in Israel/Palestine exist, Arabs in Israel/Palestine exist, and most are not going anywhere else. Most have no other place to go and don’t want to go to that other place that does not exist. Somehow the parties have to come to some kind of stable peaceful arrangement or there will be continuous war. That was not Herzl’s dream. The Moslems must come to terms with the fact that a nation exists in their midst with a majority Jewish population that over the last 59 years has progressed economically, scientifically, and culturally into a first world democracy while they have stagnated during that time. On the other hand, the Jews of Israel (and the Diaspora) have to accept the fact that 130+ years ago when we started modern Zionism and chose our ancestral home after 2,000 years as the place for a new Jewish country, we bought the place including the Palestinian Arabs, and therefore we Jews share some responsibility towards them as well as ourselves.

So where do we (Jews, Moslems, Christians, Israelis, Palestinians) go from here? Most of the Israeli people want, need, and deserve security, real peace, freedom from rockets and terrorists in their own land in which they have lived now for generations. There are religious fundamentalist Jewish zealots who push for further settlement expansion because they think all of Eretz Yisroel (the Land of Israel/Palestine) belongs to the Jews because they claim it says so in the Bible. They are a minority in Israel (growing but still a minority).

The Palestinians need and deserve respect, hope, a reasonable level of self-determination, and the possibility of economic advancement. The Israelis need and deserve peace (security), the ability to go about their lives without fearing that terrorists will send rockets over the border, set off bombs, or dig tunnels under the border to kill people.

We American Jews can donate money to causes that promote efforts that will further peace. These efforts are occurring already, but need to be nurtured. A great example is Hand in Hand, an organization that creates schools in Israel that teach Jewish and Arab children together. Starting to know each other early in life is key to making an inclusive strong Israel. Another cause that I favor is Ben Gurion University of the Negev. The Negev desert is the largest land mass in Israel and the key to Israel’s future. There are many other worthy causes that support Israeli modernism and the inclusion of modern thinking Israeli Arabs as well as Palestinians. There is hope. We Jews in America can and should support that hope.

 

Monday, May 22, 2017

RECIPROCITY


We Diaspora Jews have a reciprocal relation with the Jews in Israel. Israel provides a place for a Jew who has nowhere else to go. Even if I myself am happy and secure in my home country (for me actually more than in Israel), nonetheless it is still in my interest for such a place to exist. In return, we in the Diaspora support Israel with financial support and with moral support. We give Israelis the feeling that they are not alone. We in the Diaspora have the right to criticize the actions of the Israeli government when it is indicated just as we voice support for Israel against unwarranted attacks. Israelis also have the right to criticize us in the Diaspora when it is warranted.

There is also a reciprocal relationship between Israeli Jews and Israeli Arabs. Israeli Arabs enjoy Israeli citizenship which brings the ability to vote and equality before the law. They live in a country which is stable, basically democratic, economically advanced, and in many ways offers them more opportunity than elsewhere in the Middle East. The downside for Israeli Arabs is that many Jewish Israelis (certainly not all) look down on them, treat them as outsiders (just as Jews were treated in most of Europe) and do not trust them. The challenge for Israelis is to make their country more inclusive and integrated, particularly for the Israeli Arabs who make up 20% of the population. It will require better education of all Israeli citizens, Jewish and non-Jewish, to recognize their common interests. But it will maximize Israel’s strength and security. As for Jews having a special right to return, when Israeli Arabs have equal opportunity in every respect (private as well as public) and benefit fully and equally from Israel’s prosperity, then I think the right of return for only Jews will be a small trade off for the Israeli Arabs.   

Progress in the relationship between Israeli Jews and Israeli Arabs will hopefully lead to progress in the relationship between Israelis and Palestinians. I believe the problems between Israel and Palestine will eventually be resolved from the bottom up. Conferences and treaties at the government level will work after the ordinary people on the ground learn to interact with each other in a respectful and peaceful manner enjoying a prosperity in which all the people share in the fruits of that prosperity. The major role of governments will be to foster the relationship between Jews and Arabs by encouraging interactions in education, work, and other endeavors.

Sunday, May 7, 2017

The Battle for the Soul of Jews in Israel and America


I recently attended a debate in Ventura, California by 2 journalists (JJ Goldberg from the Forward on the Left and Jonathan Tobin from Commentary on the Right) called "The Battle for Israel's Soul." Perhaps I looked at it through my own lense which is generally left of center and in keeping with Goldberg’s views which are very pro-Israel but nonetheless willing to see Israel’s mistakes. Tobin is less willing to accept Israel’s mistakes and takes the view of the Right that all the fault is with the Palestinians. Although Tobin recognizes the unpredictability and other flaws of Trump, he paints Obama as being unfriendly to Israel which I believe is not true. On the contrary, I believe being a friend of Israel does not require slavishly agreeing with everything that falls out of Netanyahu’s mouth.

Tobin voiced the view that every time Israel has extended its hand to the Palestinians, it has been rebuffed and answered with terrorism. He also said that opposition to Israel in the world community is due to anti-semitism and not to any action taken by Israel. Goldberg pointed out that the world community (including the UN) was favorable to Israel at the time of its founding in 1948 and this favorability ended after the 1967 War with the beginning of the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip. My view is that both are correct. Efforts by Israel to give the Palestinians sovereignty have been rebuffed, often violently (Gaza withdrawal, Clinton-Barak Plan). Many or perhaps most schools in Palestine and the Moslem world teach hatred of Israel and Jews. However, there are reasonable people out there in Palestine and Moslem countries who do not hate Jews and who see Israel as a window to progress. If Israel is to ever attain peace, those people must be cultivated. It won’t happen overnight or in one flashy conference. But the alternative is a pessimistic eternal conflict keeping Israel a mega-ghetto. The road to peace will be difficult but not impossible, and there is no reasonable alternative.

Finally I observed that all the people attending the debate were old like me or at least late middle aged. Where were the young people? I am sure they exist in Ventura County. Are they not interested in Israel? I fear that the drag to the Right in the government of Israel and a minority of right wing American Jews, and the embrace of Donald Trump by that Right have turned off many young Jewish Americans. Most American Jews and especially young ones tend toward progressive liberalism (which actually is not a new phenomenon). It is the Right that has strayed off the path. It is the resistance to Trumpism that has captured the imagination of young American Jews. We Jews in the USA, Israel, and the rest of the world must encourage a progressive Zionism which discusses freely and looks at itself honestly and critically. In that way, we might maintain our future.

Friday, April 28, 2017

What is a Soul?


What is a soul? What is life? The Bible says that humans are created in the image of God. I don’t think the writers of the Bible were speaking of the flesh and blood physical image, but rather the consciousness and/or soul of humans. I believe that when we speak of a human life we are mainly speaking of human consciousness rather than the physiologic functioning of the various tissues and organs that make up a human being. In the art and science of Medicine, we have a term “brain dead.” Brain dead means the brain has stopped functioning and the person has permanently lost all consciousness, but the heart continues to pump blood, the lungs continue to breath, and some form of food and water can be brought to the body intravenously. In other words, the machinery of the body continues to function unconsciously (usually aided by artificial support). In my opinion this is no longer a human being in the image of God but rather a left over support machine on loan from God. So for us humans, consciousness is the life which we care about. The rest is just needed to support consciousness.

Then what is a soul? I think of a soul as a human consciousness plus all the accomplishments of that consciousness. Those accomplishments might include all the words spoken or written or in any way communicated to others, all the physical creations of that person (directed by the consciousness), the children and future generations descended from that person. I am sure there are also other types of accomplishments. When the consciousness dies, the accomplishments part of the soul live on at least for a while. But you can also say that the consciousness and its accomplishments have made an imprint on the history of existence, and that history has occurred even when all consciousness and the physical universe have expired.

Now in the age of computers and artificial intelligence it has become apparent that computers can appear to think the way flesh and blood humans can. This brings up the idea that perhaps one day scientists will figure out what it is that makes consciousness occur and how to artificially create and reproduce consciousness. Perhaps one day artificial consciousness will make flesh and blood consciousness irrelevant. Perhaps humans will figure out how to create consciousness that will last forever and how to control time and space in which those conscious humans can live. Perhaps scientists will even figure out how to look into the past and recreate the consciousness of those of us who have already departed. It all sounds impossible, but think of what a person centuries ago would think of the science of the world of today.

To a believer in fundamentalist religion, this might all sound like heresy. But I think rather it is perfectly consistent with religion and belief in God. It is what religion strives for. It fits with the ideas of the Bible because the authors of the Bible were intelligent humans who looked at existence with what was available to them in their time, just as scientists and other rational people of today view existence with the tools available to them, and future people will do the same with their as yet unimagined tools. In that way, humans might some day create the time of the Messiah.

Monday, April 24, 2017

Who is God?

This question goes to the origin of the human experience. There are atheists who deny the existence of God and agnostics who question the existence of God. Perhaps even the most religious believer in God might at times ask this question.

I think if you question the existence of God in a material sense, there is no answer. There is no scientific method to attempt an answer. In science one makes observations or relies on the observations of others and uses logic to extrapolate answers. I have not seen an object or person or sign that would definitively prove the existence of God, but I do believe in God, and I think that is true for most people who believe in God.

Belief in God or some form of deity seems to be almost universal in various cultures in various separated places going back to prehistoric times. Why? Imagine yourself as a primitive person living in a generation that has recently developed language and the ability to communicate a rudimentary history. You now realize that there are people who are no longer living and that the absence of physically living is the fate of all humans and other living creatures including yourself. The question now arises as to what is the purpose of living, creating, progressing, with the ultimate end of nothing. In other words, is there a meaning to life? So in this primitive culture, the idea arises that there are deities who are immortal and continue to exist forever, and that perhaps a human has a soul that goes on after death in some sort of existence. But most importantly, religion gives humans a purpose for existence. Life is not just meaningless. There is a reason to live, to reproduce, to build for the future even if eventually you as an individual will not directly participate in that future. At least one can rely on one’s family line, or tribe, or country, or people with common ideals, or all of humanity to give meaning and continuity to life. Eventually, humans came across the idea of one God over all of existence rather than multiple local gods. This unitary concept of God seemed more satisfying than multiple gods for multiple functions or multiple tribes.

For me, belief in God is not a question of God’s existence but rather of God’s purpose. God’s purpose is to give meaning to the existence of the lives of humans (and other creatures) even though that existence is tragically brief. I believe that if one finds meaning in life no matter how brief, that life is not just nonsense, that accomplishments and ideas will exist after one is gone, that teaching others will continue your efforts after you are gone, that life can be enjoyed no matter how brief, then one has found God. If one considers life just a chaotic meaningless nothing, then one can pray all day and all night, and one has not found God.

Saturday, March 25, 2017

A Letter to Prime Minister Netanyahu

It has been a long time since I have made an entry into this blog. I sent a letter to Mr. Netanyahu, the Prime Minister of Israel recently concerning his relations with the present President of the USA, but did not receive a reply. I would like to share my letter with you.

Benjamin Netanyahu
Prime Minister of Israel
Prime Minister's Office
3 Kaplan St. Hakirya

Jerusalem 91950

Dear Prime Minister Netanyanhu,

I am an American Jew and a Zionist. I am a Zionist because I am concerned for the safety and welfare of all my fellow Jews in the world including Israel (where many of my family live), not because of any particular rock or wall or piece of land. When anti-semites have spoken against Israel, I have spoken up for Israel. However, recently you, your right wing radicals, and your settlers have made it more and more difficult to do so. You meddled in the politics of my country, the USA, on the side of the Republicans. You insulted my President Obama (a true friend of Israel) because he spoke the truth. You have put yourself in bed with Trump, a demagogue who threatens American democracy, a darling of people who oppose minorities including us Jews. You have even gone so far as to praise the worthless wall that Trump proposes on our Mexican border that will only isolate and weaken America if he gets away with doing it. If you watch television, you can see the massive crowds that have come out to protest Trump. In those crowds, we Jews have been well represented (many wearing yarmulkes). Trump is an aberration that will one day be gone. When it suits him to do so, Trump will stab Israel in the back. Do not hitch Israel’s future to this false xenophobic crooked temporary tyrant.

I realize that Israel faces a difficult situation. It is situated in a bad neighborhood. Anti-semitism in the Moslem world exists and is taught in many of their schools. The Clinton-Barak Plan was destroyed by Arafat and his Intifada. The unilateral withdrawal from Gaza resulted in Hamas and their rockets. However the fact is we Jews chose to develop the Jewish state in Eretz Yisrael/Palestine, and the history of the past century or so has led to the present situation. Just as Israel and the Jewish people will not disappear, neither will the Palestinian Arabs or the Moslem world. Israel must come to terms with that reality. Israel’s challenge is extremely difficult but nothing is impossible.

Israel must engage and win over the Arab people, not just their leaders. Leaders come and go, but people stay. Israel’s strength is that it can offer the Palestinians its science, technology, modernity, education, and window to globalism. But you can not entice the Palestinians into modernity, friendship, and cooperation while you suppress them at the same time. I do not know or even care if the relationship will ultimately result in 2 states, 3 states, a confederation, or one binational state. However, to work, it must move in a direction that promises to respect all the individuals who live there and in which each person has an equal say in his or her governance. The settler movement works to contradict that goal. A xenophobic Israel will be one in constant conflict. That was not the dream of Herzl or Ben Gurion.

As an American Jew, I do not live in Israel, do not plan to live in Israel, and can not vote in Israel. My only vote is my voice and my pocket book. This past year I have contributed to Hand in Hand, Masorti Judaism, and Ben Gurion University. Hand in Hand is the most important because it brings Israeli Jewish and Arab children together in a formative time of life and can be a model to bring peace to all of Eretz Yisrael.

So, Mr. Netanyahu, do not place Israel on the wrong side of history. Do not drive a wedge between Israel and your fellow Jews in America and throughout the Diaspora. Do not alienate the American people from Israel by backing Trump, an unreliable unpopular phony.