Tag Archives: American Politics and Life

Republican Craziness and Hubris Explained

22 Sunday Sep 2013

Posted by in American Politics and Life, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Paul Krugman and Marty Kaplan did not talk to each other last week nor coordinate their op-ed pieces in different newspapers, but they well could have.

Marty writes in “The Most Depressing Brain Finding Ever” (The Los Angeles Jewish Journal, and The Huffington Post, September 16) that recent studies show partisanship undermines reasoning skills:

“…say goodnight to the dream that education, journalism, scientific evidence, media literacy or reason can provide the tools and information that people need in order to make good decisions. It turns out that in the public realm, a lack of information isn’t the real problem. The hurdle is how our minds work, no matter how smart we think we are. We want to believe we’re rational, but reason turns out to be the ex post facto way we rationalize what our emotions already want to believe.” http://www.jewishjournal.com/marty_kaplan/article/most_depressing_brain_finding_ever or http://www.huffingtonpost.com/marty-kaplan/most-depressing-brain-fin_b_3932273.html

Krugman picks up where Marty left off (“The Crazy Party” – New York Times op-ed, September 19):

“Republicans are coming off an election in which they failed to retake the presidency despite a weak economy, failed to retake the Senate even though far more Democratic than Republican seats were at risk, and held the House only through a combination of gerrymandering and the vagaries of districting. Democrats actually won the popular ballot for the House by 1.4 million votes. This [i.e. Republicans] is not a party that, by any conceivable standard of legitimacy, has the right to make extreme demands on the president. [My emphasis]” http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/20/opinion/krugman-the-crazy-party.html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20130920

We now have brain science to explain the bizarre and destructive impulses and positions taken by the Republican Party and their irrational and extremist base vis a vis The Affordable Care Act, the United States budget and the US debt ceiling.

If the researchers are correct, then the more real facts, information and logic that bonafide experts in various fields (e.g. economics, health care, science, climate change, etc.) present, the more convinced will be the extremist ideologues and their followers of whatever nonsense they started out with in the first place, and they will stick to what Stephen Colbert once called “Truthiness!”

I asked Marty what he thought was an effective game plan against the purveyors of such craziness given the Republican Congressional leadership, Fox “News” and Cable right-wing syndicated television and radio, and he said, “We have to fight stories with stories, and not let their bubbameises destroy our dreams!”

Note: Definition of bubbameises – a type of urban legend, or “tale” based in superstition or folklore; filled with unverified claims, exaggerated and/or inaccurate details – i.e. nonsense!

Ian Lustick’s NY Times Review Rant on the “Illusion of a Two-State Solution”

16 Monday Sep 2013

Posted by in American Jewish Life, American Politics and Life, Ethics, Israel and Palestine, Israel/Zionism, Jewish History, Uncategorized

≈ 5 Comments

Tags

, , , , ,

I was stunned by Ian Lustick’s front page above-the-fold NY Times Sunday Review (September 15) article of 2339 words (long by most standards) with huge graphics not only because of the immense space The NY Times gave to a very small minority position within any community, but also because of its timing – the day after Yom Kippur and in the middle of serious negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians to find a two-state solution. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/15/opinion/sunday/two-state-illusion.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

I knew Ian Lustick when we were students together at UC Berkeley in 1970-71. We were both part of a left-wing Zionist group on campus that published a newspaper called “The Jewish Radical.” Ian was a brilliant and charismatic graduate student in Political Science, as I recall, and he was a strong Zionist at that time.

What happened? I honestly do not know as we were only acquaintances and I have had no contact with him since. But, in reading his article, he has clearly changed and given up on the most extraordinary phenomenon in modern Jewish history, the restoration of the Jewish people in the historic homeland, the establishment of a Jewish state for the first time in 2000 years, and the dreams of Israel’s founders as expressed in Israel’s Declaration of Independence.

Ian’s analysis of the growth and number of Jewish settlements in the West Bank is not wrong. As he says, the United States should have put pressure on Israel to stop this long ago when a two-state solution would have come more easily.

It did not happen, but that does not mean that all is lost, and Ian’s conclusion that a two-state solution is an illusion is defeatism in the extreme especially at a time when the United States is engaged actively in negotiations that represent the only chance there is to preserve Israel as a democracy and the national homeland of the Jewish people.

I am including, by permission, a “Letter to the Editor” penned by my friend and teacher, Rabbi Richard Levy, past president of the Central Conference of American Rabbis, who has been involved in the peace movement reaching back to the days of “Breira,” (the first American Jewish organization calling for a two-state solution in the early 1970s) and who is now an important voice amongst J Street Rabbis. Richard shines a strong light on the absurdity of Ian’s prescription for a one-state solution. I hope the NY Times Letters page publishes Richard’s piece. They should!

TO THE EDITOR:

Seldom have I read a crueler, more heartless prescription for the Israeli-Palestinian struggle than Ian Lustick’s condemnation of Israelis and Palestinians to enduring the horrible trials of the Irish under Great Britain and South African blacks under apartheid. If the two-state solution is illusory, what are we to make of Mr. Lustick’s fantasy that if Israelis and Palestinians are forced to endure mutual violence long enough in a single state that “anti-nationalist Orthodox Jews might find common cause with Muslim traditionalists,” bridging a huge abyss not only of political but religious animosity, and “Israelis whose families came from Arab countries might find new reasons to think of themselves not as ‘Eastern’, but as Arab”–when the way Jews were treated in those countries led them to be among the Israelis most hostile toward Arabs? Furthermore, secular Palestinians in Israel and the West Bank are already finding allies among secular (and liberal religious)

Israelis–allies for a two-state solution. And if diplomacy has to give way to decades more of “blood and magic”–what are we to make of the successful diplomacy ending the strife in Northern Ireland? Why should the Israelis and Palestinians be denied the opportunity to attempt diplomacy once more in the quest for two states?

Perhaps the answer to these questions lies in Mr. Lustick’s comments about “post-Zionist” and “statist Zionism.” For him, Zionism would appear to be the main culprit, for which a two-state solution is but a scapegoat. For a two-state solution would preserve a Zionist state, run democratically by a Jewish majority–and Mr. Lustick wants to eliminate that possibility.  Not only to eliminate it, but to crucify it on a one-state platform of “ruthless oppression, mass mobilization, riots, brutality, terror, Jewish and Arab emigration and rising tides of international condemnation of Israel,” all of which would result in the withdrawal of American support.

It is easy to condemn a policy of supporting two states if the only state that currently exists is the one a person wishes to be destroyed. Mr. Lustick’s piece was well titled. It is an illusion to think he opposes a two state solution–it is the Zionist state that he opposes, and sets out a blueprint to destroy.

Rabbi Richard N. Levy

Hebrew Union College, Los Angeles

Syria, Russia, Israel, and American Moral Responsibility

15 Sunday Sep 2013

Posted by in American Jewish Life, American Politics and Life, Israel and Palestine, Israel/Zionism, Jewish History, Jewish Identity, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , ,

I chose not to comment on the Syrian atrocity during the Ten Days of Repentance because my attentions were primarily elsewhere, on the greater themes of the High Holidays and with my congregation. However, I have been thinking about it, and the following are some of those thoughts:

For me the greater issue, beyond the tragedy in Syria itself, is on what moral responsibility the United States bears as the only world superpower. Though the UN does some important work in international relief (i.e. in Jordan today), the Security Council is a dysfunctional body because it demands 100% agreement to do anything, a demagogic principle if ever there was one. That being the case, moral responsibility for such tragedies passes to the US.

It is distressing that this Syrian crisis is the only world tragedy that seems to garner American interest, given other catastrophes in Darfur, the Congo and Burma.

Of course, this is nothing new. American bombers could have destroyed the train tracks leading to Bergen Belsen in WWII, but did not. The US was absent during the genocides in Cambodia, Rwanda, Bosnia, after chemical weapons use on civilians by Sadaam Hussein in the first Gulf War, and after Hafez Al Assad’s murder of 20,000 civilians in Hama in the 1980s.

I understand the quagmire into which the United States would step if it becomes the world’s policeman, and that gives me pause, but it is painful as a Jew to stand by idly while others bleed (Leviticus 19:16) especially in the wake of our people’s experience in the Shoah when no one came to our people’s aid. Given these two opposing impulses, I stand on the side of active engagement whenever and where ever a humanitarian crisis, such as those I listed above, occurs.

I understand American hesitancy to get involved in Syria, because there is no good-guy in the Syrian opposition, and the next dictator is likely to be just as bad as the current one. However, President Obama’s “red-line” is a critical one to enforce every time it is crossed, and it needs enforcing now.

Another worry I have is concerning the perceived loss of American credibility relative to the Israeli-Palestinian negotiations. There are a number of causes behind the weaker perception of America today including the serious damage done by the Bush Administration’s wrong-headed and tragic Iraqi War adventure, current congressional timidity and partisanship, and misjudgments by President Obama. For the Israeli-Palestinian negotiations to succeed with a two-state solution resulting, the United States must be engaged actively and, I believe, with muscle. The weaker America appears, the worse that is for the future of a secure democratic and Jewish State of Israel.

Finally, though I understand the international power play in which President Putin is engaged, I do not accept the view that President Obama has somehow sunk the American ship. If the Russian-American agreement on Syrian chemical weapons succeeds in keeping Assad from ever using them again, it is a win-win-win for the United States, Russia, and any future population that could be similarly attacked.

Before Yom Kippur, the Central Conference of American Rabbis (representing 2500 Reform Rabbis world-wide) made the following statement on Syria, with which I agree:

The Central Conference of American Rabbis condemns the Assad regime’s use of chemical weapons to kill more than 1400 persons, including some 400 children, as a violation of international law and a crime against humanity. As Jews, we are well acquainted with a tyrannical regime’s use of lethal gas to commit mass murder and of the failure of democratic governments to intervene.

The CCAR applauds the President’s decision to respond to the Syrian authorities’ illegal and morally reprehensible conduct and to seek the complete, prompt, and verifiable removal of chemical weapons from Syria by means of diplomacy, if possible, before resorting to the use of military force.

We reaffirm the principle that the use of force should be undertaken with utmost reluctance, only when reasonable alternatives have been exhausted or prove unavailable.

We call on other governments throughout the world to join the effort to ensure that Syria does not commit another such atrocity.

We believe that effective action regarding the Assad regime’s use of chemical weapons is essential to deter the use of weapons of mass destruction by others and reinforce the credibility of U.S. policy concerning such weapons.

We support the firm and unequivocal determination of the President and Congress to prevent Iran from developing or obtaining nuclear weapons.

We express our deep concern for the State of Israel and its citizens, who have been threatened with retaliation in the event of American military action, and reaffirm the CCAR’s steadfast support for Israel’s right to defend its citizens from all who seek to harm them.

We yearn for the arrival of “the days to come” that Isaiah foresaw, when nations “will beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks: Nation shall not take up sword against nation; they shall never again know war.”

We pray that the Jewish New Year, recently begun, will see the dawning of peace for the entire human family.

 

 

 

J Street’s Unfair Exclusion From Denver JCRC

26 Monday Aug 2013

Posted by in American Jewish Life, American Politics and Life, Ethics, Israel and Palestine, Israel/Zionism, Jewish History, Social Justice, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , ,

I am a member of a closed list-serve called RAVKAV that includes all Reform Rabbis. There everything under the sun is discussed on a daily basis. The agreement is that all communications are confidential.

That being said, there has been some confusion of late about J Street and JStreetPAC that I and several other colleagues cleared up, and since we rabbis were confused I must assume that many in the Jewish community beyond rabbinic circles are likewise confused. Hence, the purpose of this blog-post.

The matter was raised concerning the Denver JCRC’s exclusion of J Street as a member organization in May of this year. One of my colleagues pointed to JStreetPAC’s endorsement of candidates for national political office (i.e. the House and Senate) as justification for the Denver JCRC excluding J Street from membership.

The Denver JCRC is a coalition of nearly 40 organizations, synagogues and at-large members in the Denver area and acts as a service provided to the community by the Allied Jewish Federation of Colorado.  The purpose of this JCRC is to convene the ‘common table’ around which member organizations can engage in civil discourse through open dialogue to address issues and design strategies on issues of concern to the Jewish community. Included in the list is the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). The nearly 40 member organizations can be found here http://www.jewishcolorado.org/page.aspx?id=241337

If this is an inclusive organization, why did the Denver’s JCRC exclude J Street?  I do not have an answer, but I do believe it is important to clear up confusions about what J Street is.

J Street’s mission is simple – “We believe in the right of the Jewish people to a national homeland in Israel, in the Jewish and democratic values on which Israel was founded, and in the necessity of a two-state solution.” www.jstreet.org

J Street includes an Educational Fund and has a division within it called JStreetPAC. My colleagues confused the two divisions of J Street, their functions and the legal distinctions, and on that basis one stated that the Denver JCRC’s position vis a vis J Street is correct and appropriate.

The J Street Education Fund is a 501c3 entity and is legally independent of the JStreetPAC that does the political work.

For the record, J Street is a member of other JCRCs including in Boston, Westchester, Atlanta, and Baltimore that all recognize that J Street’s community based work is done by the J Street Educational Fund.

With regards to the Denver JCRC, an overwhelming majority of those voting yay and nay on J Street’s application voted in favor. The final vote was 18 in favor, 12 opposed, and 8 abstentions. J Street did not attain the needed votes because of arcane rules for JCRC membership that require a two-thirds majority (a super-majority!).

For the record, the litmus test is not whether a candidate is Republican, Democrat or Independent for an endorsement by JStreetPAC. The litmus test is whether said candidate supports a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and advocates an activist American involvement in mediating between the parties, as the United States is currently doing.

JStreetPAC has supported two Republicans in the past on this basis. The fact that all 71 candidates that JStreetPAC endorsed in the last election cycle, of whom 70 won their elections in the House and Senate, were Democrats is a reflection not of JStreetPAC’s partisan orientation at all (it is not partisan in the sense of supporting one American political party over another), but rather because the two state issue was not embraced according to J Street’s principles openly by Republicans, nor did Republicans welcome JStreetPAC’s endorsement in the last cycle.

JStreetPAC would be delighted to work with any Republican or Independent that embraces openly the principle of the two-state solution.

One colleague justified excluding J Street from the JCRC based on the fact that the JCRC then would have to include the Republican Jewish Coalition. But would the RJC be open to Democratic candidates for office? Obviously not, as it is purely partisan whereas JStreetPAC endorses candidates based on a clear policy position not party affiliation. This is a distinction with a clear difference.

I suspect that as time progresses Republicans may be open to JStreetPAC endorsements given that even the Israeli ruling coalition (or that part of it that is not against a two state solution) and a significant majority of members of the Knesset are in favor of an end-of-conflict two-state solution with a state of Israel sitting securely side by side with a state of Palestine.

Join Me at This Year’s Annual J Street National Conference in Washington, D.C. – September 28 to October 1

09 Friday Aug 2013

Posted by in American Jewish Life, American Politics and Life, Ethics, Israel and Palestine, Israel/Zionism, Jewish History, Jewish Identity, Social Justice, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , ,

I have attended many conferences in my life, and none is quite like the annual national conference of J Street in Washington, D.C. for thought-provoking, inspiring and informative sessions with a wide diversity of views on the issue for which J Street was created five years ago, resolving through American mediation the Israeli-Palestinian conflict once and for all.

J Street’s principles are clear and simple, though the conflict is not:  “We believe in the right of the Jewish people to a national homeland in Israel, in the Jewish and democratic values on which Israel was founded, and in the necessity of a two-state solution.”

The core of J Street’s argument is that a secure democratic Jewish state of Israel living side-by-side with an independent Palestinian state through a two-state solution is the only way Israel can remain both Jewish and democratic.

J Street represents 180,000 individuals in 50 community chapters and a college division (J Street U) that is active on more than 50 campuses.

​J Street’s political action committee (JStreetPAC) is the largest pro-Israel PAC in Washington, D.C. and raised $1.8 million in the last election cycle (2012) to support 71 congressional and senatorial candidates, of which 70 won their elections.

J Street expects to bring to its conference between 2500 and 3000 participants, including 650 college students.

The Conference this year will include MK Shelly Yachimovich, leader of the opposition Labor party, and other Members of the Knesset from Labor, Meretz, Yesh Atid, Hat’nuah, Likud and Shas. The list of conference speakers also includes other Israeli and Palestinian leaders, American officials, journalists, and heads of Israeli and Palestinian NGOs.

Among the featured sessions are:

→ A View from the Hill: Is Congress Changing?
→ How Israel Emerged as a Partisan Wedge Issue in US Politics
→ Friends from Afar? The Impact of the Pro-Israel Establishment on Achieving Two States
→ The Future of State 194: Palestinian Politics Today
→ West Bank Settlements and the Two-State Solution: Not Too Late
→ How the Israel Conversation is Shut Down and Opened Up
→ Good Neighbors: Israel’s Role in a Transitioning Middle East

Whether you live in my city, Los Angeles, or anywhere else, J Street welcomes you to attend. See details on the conference here http://conference.jstreet.org/ and J Street’s website here www.jstreet.org.

Minimum Wage, “Fox News”, John Oliver, the Farm Bill & Food Stamps

04 Sunday Aug 2013

Posted by in American Politics and Life, Ethics, Health and Well-Being, Quote of the Day, Social Justice, Uncategorized, Women's Rights

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , ,

Right-wing extremists in the media and Congress are waging a full-scale assault on millions of poor people by refusing to raise the minimum wage (currently at $7.25/hour = $15,000 annually for full-time work) and include funds for food stamps on the Farm Bill now before Congress.

Watch John Oliver’s brilliant piece on “The Daily Show” focusing humorously – though it is no laughing matter – on the arrogance, ignorance and heartlessness of the “Fox News” crowd!  http://americablog.com/2013/08/john-oliver-fast-food-workers-striking-video.html

For more information on the minimum wage, see http://action.ourfuture.org/p/dia/action3/common/public/index.sjs?action_KEY=204

It is the same people on “Fox News” and in the extremist wing of the Republican Party who want to slash billions of dollars out of the Farm Bill that would hurt 47 million food insecure Americans who depend on food stamps to feed themselves and their families. The vast majority these 47 million people are the working poor, children, seniors on fixed income, and people with disabilities.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/02/us/politics/gop-push-to-slash-food-stamps-puts-farm-bill-in-jeopardy.html?_r=0

Hubert Humphrey put it exactly right 45 years ago:

“The moral test of government is how that government treats those who are in the dawn of life, the children; those who are in the twilight of life, the elderly; and those who are in the shadows of life, the sick, the needy, and the handicapped.”

Two Narratives – Two Truths

22 Monday Jul 2013

Posted by in American Jewish Life, American Politics and Life, Book Recommendations, Israel and Palestine, Israel/Zionism, Jewish History, Jewish Identity, Stories, Uncategorized

≈ 3 Comments

Tags

, , , , , ,

Much will be said in the coming days and weeks about what negotiations mean, what Israel and the Palestinians are willing to do and give up, whether the gap is just too wide, and whether a two-state solution is possible given current thinking on both sides.

I have just begun reading an important new book published last year called Side By Side – Parallel Histories of Israel-Palestine edited by Sami Adwan, Dan Bar-on (zal), and Eyal Naveh of the Peace Research Institute in the Middle East (PRIME). Developed over the last 15 years by Palestinian and Israeli scholars and educators, this work represents a wholly new way of teaching the Middle East to Israeli and Palestinian High School students. Regardless of one’s identity, both sides likely will be surprised that, more often than not, each holds a one-dimensional view of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that will obstruct peace-making.

The two narratives and interpretations of the meaning of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict are set side by side in 400 pages. Clearly, we live in two worlds and our understanding of the same historical events are very different.

Each side’s better understanding of the “narrative” of the other will hopefully result in a softening and opening of the heart to the other’s identity and experience.

No one in the Middle East wants to be a fry-ar (Israeli slang; “sucker”). Negotiations will be very difficult.

We here should be giving Secretary Kerry every benefit of the doubt in his efforts to facilitate negotiations between the Israelis and the Palestinians towards a two-state solution and a peaceful resolution of this conflict. Criticism of Kerry should be silenced. Mocking him, especially by Jewish media pundits should be quelled. What is important now is to support this renewal of negotiations. The alternative to a two states for two peoples resolution is more war, more suffering and a darkening of the landscape to death and the destruction of dreams.

Losing Weight and Getting Fit

07 Sunday Jul 2013

Posted by in American Politics and Life, Health and Well-Being, Life Cycle, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

,

Studies indicate that 70% of American adults and 30% of American kids are overweight or obese. When considering that staggering figure, how widespread today are common eating disorders, and the huge cost of medical care for those who suffer weight-related illnesses, it seems that most of us need to pay greater attention to our health.

When I was young I ate everything I wanted and could lose weight at the drop of a hat. But as I got older, the pounds accumulated and it became increasingly difficult to lose. Experts say that at age 30 if we change nothing in our eating habits or exercise routines, each year we will gain a minimum of one pound. By the age of 60, we will be 30 pounds heavier at least.

I raise this now because after I was diagnosed with prostate cancer four years ago, my wife and I decided that it was time for us to take control of our health, and make some changes in what we ate and how much we exercised (for those with eating disorders and food addiction, professional help is warranted).

I have developed a list of 10 things we continually strive to do to be healthy, most of which are recommended by experts. I am not always consistent, and maintaining my ideal weight is a daily struggle, but I work at this every day. Here is what we do. If any of this helps you, dayeinu:

  1. Move more – We can build our strength and stamina to run, walk, swim or ride a bike one hour every day, four or five times a week. Some recommend walking a minimum of 10,000 steps daily. We can add steps by changing other habits. For example, I now never take an elevator unless I am climbing more than five floors, and even then I might take the stairs. I park my car far away from my destination to force me to walk the rest of the way. I rarely use valet unless it is raining or bloody hot.
  2. Eat less – I do not fill my plate as I used to do, and I stop myself (most of the time) going back for second helpings. If I snack between meals I choose something healthy – almonds, vegetables, fruit, 100% whole wheat bread. I avoid eating anything white (milk products, sugar, or salt). Eating late at night anything other than fruit is a bad idea!
  3. Avoid most saturated fats – They raise cholesterol levels and increase the risk for heart disease. This includes fatty meats and poultry, steak, hamburger, and beef sausage. Dieticians give the green light on lean cuts of meat (I eat almost no red meat anymore, and I don’t miss it), and skinless everything, as well as fish that is rich in omega-3 fats. If I consume milk products, it has to be non-fat milk (the only time I cheat is when I use whole milk in coffee), and I avoid most cheese unless it is very low fat. Dark chocolate, for me is a necessity, but I limit myself to a square inch or two daily. Scientists say that dark chocolate is actually a good thing, as is 3 or 4 cups of caffeinated coffee a day. Thank God!
  4. Avoid trans fats – This is found in spreads of all kinds, packaged foods and mixes, frozen foods, fast food, breaded anything, baked goods, chips, crackers, breakfast cereals (except oatmeal and some cereals without sugar and additives), candy, toppings, and most dips (except low fat yogurt-based or guacamole).
  5. Eat only 100% whole grain – In bread, cereal, cookies, and cakes.
  6. Add no extra sugar or salt – Avoid all sugar syrups, all sugared drinks, and experts say diet sodas as well.
  7. Eat lots of fruit, vegetables and fish.
  8. Drink alcohol in moderation – I drink red wine because it is great for the heart and soul, an ounce of scotch (on occasion) and only light beer.
  9. Drink water often – I do not use plastic containers as they are cancer causing.
  10. Weigh yourself every day – I adjust my daily intake of food and increase my exercise routine if I find, to my horror, that I’ve gained weight (even a pound) from the day before. If I have lost weight I resist hard rewarding myself with more chocolate.

Losing weight requires not a small measure of self-discipline, will-power, patience, persistence, optimism, and self-forgiveness.

If weight gain is your problem (and clearly, say the surveys, it is for most of us) it is best to think long-term (months!!!) and delight in small successes. When you reach your goal, however long it takes, reward yourself by going out and buying new clothes.

Good luck!

Vocally Support the American Effort to Reach a Two-State Solution Now

11 Tuesday Jun 2013

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , ,

Those who say that PA President Abbas’ constant refusal to sit down with PM Netanyahu without preconditions to restart negotiations for a two-state solution is an indication that he and the Palestinians are not able or willing to make peace is not the entire story.

When Israeli government leaders like Likud MK Danny Danon make statements that the government of Israel does not support a two-state solution, we have to understand that the Palestinians can legitimately argue that Israel too (at this point) is not a real partner for peace despite Bibi saying he is for a two-state solution.

Further, When PM Netanyahu insists that the Palestinians accept Israel as a “Jewish state” (which raises all kinds of problems internally including what “Jewish” means and who decides, and that such a designation excludes 20% of Israel’s non-Jewish population) as opposed to the “Democratic state of the Jewish people” (which includes all Jews and every other non-Jewish citizen) Palestinians can legitimately argue that he is throwing obstacles in the way of finding a two-state solution.

Remember that no Israeli Prime Minister before Bibi ever made the demand that the Palestinians recognize Israel as a “Jewish state.” The PLO and PA have recognized the state of Israel, but not with any more specificity than that – and why is it even necessary if a secure two-state deal can be reached? Israel will define itself. All that is necessary from the outside is that it recognize Israel – and that has already occurred.

The Palestinians claim that they have no partner for peace in the Israeli government. Some Israelis claim they have no partner for peace among the Palestinians. There is truth in both claims. It is a mistake to lay all the blame on one side.

There has been a powerful silence among all American Jewish organizations in support of the Obama-Kerry mission except the Union for Reform Judaism and J Street. Why is that? I suggest that far too many of our organizational leaders are being led by cynicism and fear.

That negativity will not bring us closer to a secure two-state solution, which is in America’s best interest, Israel’s best interest, and the Palestinian’s best interest. Rather, we need to be supporting Secretary Kerry vocally, letting the Obama administration as well as our senators and congressional representatives know of our support (call and email them all) and let the American effort take its course. Indeed, we will know in the next 2 to 4 weeks what success, if any, this American effort will have.

Even former Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman has said that Israel cannot afford for this American diplomatic effort to fail.

I ask that those who have already decided that a two-state solution is not possible to ask themselves what is the alternative – one state that loses Israel’s Jewish character or an endless occupation that loses Israel’s democratic character?

Time is not on Israel’s side, and the only way to secure Israel’s future as a democracy with a Jewish majority is in a two-state solution. If you love Israel as a democracy and the state of the Jewish people, this is the ONLY alternative.

Let your representatives know how you feel and support everything the American government can do to promote a diplomatic and peaceful resolution to this age-old conflict that results in two states for two peoples.

    

The Inner Korach – Then and Now!

07 Friday Jun 2013

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

,

The Wall Street Journal/NBC News published a poll this week reporting on the public’s approval rating of President Obama with special focus on his administration’s honesty and integrity in light of the Benghazi investigation, the IRS scandal and Drone attacks. The President currently enjoys a 48% approval rating and 47% disapproval, about what it was two months ago, largely along partisan lines but indicating a drop in approval among independent voters.

Sadly, there are many others in Washington who do not do nearly as well in the polls. The approval ratings for members of Congress as a whole have suffered dramatically in recent years into the low double digits not only because that august body has become so dysfunctional, but also because too many of our representatives refuse to compromise and find solutions to the nation’s many problems. Rather, they act more consistent with the laws of the jungle and abide by the philosophy that ends justify means, might makes right, cynicism trumps hope, and power is an ultimate “good.”

There are, of course, many decent servant-leaders in Washington and around the country who, despite formidable obstacles, seek to do well and work diligently on behalf of the common good.

This week’s Torah portion Korach considers both kinds of leaders as it tells the story of a major rebellion led by Korach and 250 Israelite leaders.

Korach was the first cousin of Moses and Aaron (Ex 6:18-21), a member of the priestly class and part of the ruling elite. The leaders around him are described as “Princes of the congregation, the elect men of the assembly, men of renown.” (Numbers 16:2) The Talmud says of them “that they had a name recognized in the whole world.” (Bavli, Sanhedrin 110a).

Despite his elevated status Korach wasn’t satisfied. He challenged Aaron’s exclusive right to the priesthood, and his cohorts Dathan and Abiram questioned Moses’ leadership. Korach’s goal was to unseat the divinely chosen leaders, and he appealed to the people to overthrow them using religious language and espousing the importance of rotating leaders in office, all of whom were equally worthy.

“And they assembled themselves together against Moses and … Aaron, and said [to them], ‘You take too much upon yourself, seeing that all the congregation are holy, every one of them, and the Lord is among them.’”

In actuality, Korach and his minions were not democrats at all; they were demagogues who manipulated and incited the masses for their narrow self-interests.

Rabbi Moshe Weiler, the founder of liberal Judaism in South Africa, has written that “Theirs [i.e. Korach and his cohorts] was the pursuit of kavod, honor and power, in the guise of sanctity and love of the masses.”

Onkolos (2nd century C.E.), in his Aramaic translation of the two opening words of the portion, Vayikach Korach (“And Korach took”) wrote It’peleg Korach (“And Korach separated himself”), suggesting that he did not consider himself to be one with the people nor was he interested in serving their interests.

Korach sought power for power’s sake and he ignited a controversy based on ignoble motivations and nefarious goals leading to the devastation of the community. In the end, the earth swallowed the rebels alive and sent them to Sheol in a spectacular inferno. (Numbers 16:31-35)

Korach’s eish ha-mach’loket (“fire of controversy”) became an eish o-che-lah (“a devouring fire”) that augured doom.

“The Sayings of the Sages” (5:21) reflects upon Korach’s rebellion and distinguishes between two very different kinds of controversy. The first is healthy and useful, pursued for the sake of heaven (l’shem shamayim) that brings about blessing and a stronger community. The second is a pernicious fight not based on lasting values and brings about disunity and destruction. Hillel and Shammai (1st century BCE) embodied the former, and Korach and his legions the latter.

Korach was essentially a cynic. Moses was the opposite, the humble servant-leader.

Who are we? Do we resonate with the voice of Korach or the spirit of Moses?

Who are our leaders? Are they interested only in power or in the common good?

Rabbi Rachel Cowan opines that though every individual may, indeed, aspire to be like Moses, Korach lives within our hearts too.

In thinking about ourselves and our leaders, the words of Maimonides remind us of the importance of pursuing higher virtue:

“The ideal public leader is one who holds seven attributes: wisdom, humility, reverence, loathing of money, love of truth, love of humanity, and a good name.” (Hilchot Sanhedrin 2:7)

Upon reading this my brother asked me, “Do you know anyone in public service who measures up to this high standard?”

I responded, “Not quite – but every public servant ought to aspire to do so.”

Shabbat shalom!