Passover is the anniversary of our emancipation from Egypt and our birth as a nation. It is also a new year of sorts as Nissan is the first month in the Hebrew calendar. It is a time of renewal with the start of springtime and the ecosystem's life cycle. For me, it marks a personal renewal.
As of April 1, I am working at Zion Oil & Gas as an operations engineer. It is my first full-time position in seven years and I feel fortunate for the opportunity to work with some great people on a project to help make Israel energy independent. Because of my job-hunting, I have not been able to dedicate very much time to Shelanu. At this point, I hope to be able to better structure my time in order to give a fresh push to Shelanu's cause, which is so vital to the wellbeing of our nation and our country.
I am looking for individuals willing to take on the leadership of this cause, or at least take an active role in sharing the leadership. We have a great message and a great potential, but it takes a great deal of attention and coordination. And so, I'm looking for someone with experience in non-profit organizing and someone who truly understands and believes in our cause. If I'm talking to you, please talk to me.
Lately, I've been watching another renewal in America, the renewal of "We the People" as embodied in the April 15th "tea parties" all across the U.S., regional protests against the runaway spending that characterizes the current congress and executive administration. Fox News's Glen Beck has brought in an actor to dramatize one of the key writers of the American Revolutionary period, Thomas Paine, as he might have felt about the tea parties. It made me curious to go back and read Paine's classic work, "Common Sense," specifically the chapters relating to representative government.
"Some writers have so confounded society with government, as to leave little or no distinction between them; whereas they are not only different, but have different origins. Society is produced by our wants, and government by our wickedness; the former promotes our happiness POSITIVELY by uniting our affections, the latter NEGATIVELY by restraining our vices. The one encourages intercourse, the other creates distinctions. The first is a patron, the last a punisher.
"Society in every state is a blessing, but Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one: for when we suffer, or are exposed to the same miseries BY A GOVERNMENT, which we might expect in a country WITHOUT GOVERNMENT, our calamity is heightened by reflecting that we furnish the means by which we suffer."
I cannot think of anything more cogent that better captures the problem with Israeli politics and Israeli political media. Quite simply, the pundits and the reporters are constantly, misleadingly, and falsely emphasizing the political cliques as if they truly characterize Israeli society. And, conversely, the proportional parliamentary government, rather than limit itself to providing essential governing services, tries to pry its way into every aspect of Israeli society and, in so doing, become a bloated, encroaching albatross on our shoulders.
I'll be applying the words of Thomas Paine in future blog entries as well.
Tuesday, April 07, 2009
Thursday, January 22, 2009
Haisraelim Part 2
Today, I spoke with Prof. Gideon Doron, the head of the Haisraelim party and holder of its top slot on the list. He clarified some important items on the party's platform.
Haisraelim is not pushing the Megidor proposal. Gil Hoffman made an incorrect connection between Gideon's prior involvement with the President's Commission chaired by Megidor and his current party activity. Haisraelim is not stating any specifics regarding how many in the Knesset should be directly elected, only that there should be representatives directly elected. Furthermore, according to Gideon, they are indeed supporting single-representative districts. So, I do feel alot better about that.
I still have my reservations about the party. Haisraelim should not address the issue of the constitution nor make gender equality an issue in the party's list selection. Gideon qualified these as "marketing issues." I also feel that those financing the party are "blowing their wad" too early, without even a minimal cultivation of Israeli community support. One thing for sure, Shelanu will still have plenty to do after this election.
Haisraelim is not pushing the Megidor proposal. Gil Hoffman made an incorrect connection between Gideon's prior involvement with the President's Commission chaired by Megidor and his current party activity. Haisraelim is not stating any specifics regarding how many in the Knesset should be directly elected, only that there should be representatives directly elected. Furthermore, according to Gideon, they are indeed supporting single-representative districts. So, I do feel alot better about that.
I still have my reservations about the party. Haisraelim should not address the issue of the constitution nor make gender equality an issue in the party's list selection. Gideon qualified these as "marketing issues." I also feel that those financing the party are "blowing their wad" too early, without even a minimal cultivation of Israeli community support. One thing for sure, Shelanu will still have plenty to do after this election.
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
January 2009 Update
Inauguration Day
Today is Inauguration Day and the celebration of the incoming 44th President of the United States has been, by any scale, the grandest in history. A record two million people attended in person and I have no doubt that live viewership on broadcast, cable, and internet channels was the largest of any political event in history.
I did not support Obama and I am, indeed, wary of how he will lead the United States. Yet, the event inspired me. As in Israel and every other functioning democracy, the transition of power was peaceful. But today, in the United States and on the Congressional Mall in particular, there was something more. The vast majority of Americans, including those who voted against Obama, expressed the sentiment that Barack Obama, who will lead America as its commander-in-chief, was the choice of the people. They felt this because he was personally chosen by individual voters, not through back-room deals and cross-party manipulations. In America, political parties are organizers and facilitators. In Israel, they are interest groups which act as public proxies; this must change.
I believe that all of America, including those who felt, as I did, that John McCain was the better choice, are proud to follow and be served by a President of African-American descent. For some, it was the dominant factor in their voting choice, a phenomenon that may have resulted in an unqualified individual leading America and the free world. Yet, I also believe that America and its political system, with its institutional political checks and balances, are robust enough to endure this. Even if the Obama administration disappoints greatly, Americans can take pride in their part of the process insofar as they respect the decision of their collective franchise. The point is that the American voters had the final word in this hiring process. And they will have it again when they, as voting individuals, re-evaluate the Obama administration in less than four years.
Haisraelim
A new political party is promoting the regional election of some Knesset Members as their main platform issue. The party is called "Haisraelim" and you can read about them at http://www.haisraelim.org. Though the party promotes the concept of regional representation, I cannot support it for several reasons. According to Gil Hoffman's recent Jerusalem Post article, "The power-to-the-people party," the party supports the Megidor Commission's disastrous proposal for only half of the Knesset to be regionally elected; the regions would not be drawn for single-legislator representation; there would be 17 regions with 2 to 5 legislators per region, resulting in some ambiguous accountability and representation issues. As I have explained before (see the FAQ page of Shelanu's web site), hybrid solutions which result in a hybridized direct/proportional system will be disastrous because the balance of power will be taken out of the hands of the voters. The influence of publicly accountable legislators will be diluted by the inclusion of publicly unaccountable party appointees. Also, in a hybridized system, the legislative "whipping boys" will not be the underperforming MKs; those who are punished for the lack of excellence will be those whom the voters are able to kick out; i.e., their incumbent representatives.
Secondly, Haisraelim approaches the problem of unprofessional government ministers by setting up a panel of MKs to oversee the "appropriateness" of ministerial candidates. This will certainly not make the process less "political." Knesset votes to confirm candidates are important, however this does not take the vital step of separating the branches of government that will result in an effective, responsive, and responsible government bureaucracy. This may also serve to obscure Haisraelim's key message of popular empowerment.
Thirdly, Haisraelim throws its hat in with other groups demanding a national constitution. However, at this time, pushing for a constitution would likely prevent the most important reforms that Israel needs. Those presently sitting in the Knesset, who were appointed on the basis of the current, disastrous proportional system of representation, are absolutely unfit to be writing and dictating the content of a constitution. An enduring, fitting, and beneficial constitution is much more likely once the public has voted in a better quality of legislator.
Fourth, Haisraelim insists on expressing the equality of the sexes by alternating its list slots by sex. In other words, the first slot will go to a man, the second to a woman, the third to a man, and so on. This flies in the face of one of the key aspects of regional, direct representation, namely, the value of individual empowerment and responsibility. A consideration of an individual's fitness to represent should mean looking beyond one's sex. In my lifetime, I have been served by male and female legislators; their sex had very little to do with their fitness and effectiveness. While gender equality is an important value, it should be manifested in a legislative selection that is gender-blind, not gender-centric. Haisraelim should stick to a message of individual accountability and individual excellence without gender restrictions.
Lastly, it is premature to launch a political party with regional representation as its main issue until the public is prepared for it. This should be done only after a dynamic movement has been operating and recruiting massive support from the Israeli public. Most Israelis who support regional representation will not dedicate their one vote to it for a simple reason. The party will do poorly at the polls and may not win even a single mandate. This itself may be unfortunate, but the real negative consequence will be the interpretation that the poor showing indicates widespread opposition to regional, direct representation. While I greatly respect Prof. Gideon, Haisraelim's leader, as an academic and visionary, I believe that he should have laid a more comprehensive groundwork of cultural activism and rallied significant public support before forming a political party. In fact, with a successful national movement, no single issue party would be needed; the largest parties would adopt a regional election platform as a means of finally eliminating the extortion of the small parties.
T-Shirts Have Shipped
The first batch of Shelanu shirts have shipped and they came out beautifully in all sizes, including toddler size 4 (which are available in pink and blue). We are now accepting donations for the next batch, so if you haven't already, please donate towards the t-shirt campaign. And if you have already, then send us pictures of you them so that we can put a personal, popular face on our web site. Click here for details on the t-shirt campaign.
Annual Meeting
Finally, we will be planning our annual meeting soon. If you'd like to help with the planning, please contact me.
Today is Inauguration Day and the celebration of the incoming 44th President of the United States has been, by any scale, the grandest in history. A record two million people attended in person and I have no doubt that live viewership on broadcast, cable, and internet channels was the largest of any political event in history.
I did not support Obama and I am, indeed, wary of how he will lead the United States. Yet, the event inspired me. As in Israel and every other functioning democracy, the transition of power was peaceful. But today, in the United States and on the Congressional Mall in particular, there was something more. The vast majority of Americans, including those who voted against Obama, expressed the sentiment that Barack Obama, who will lead America as its commander-in-chief, was the choice of the people. They felt this because he was personally chosen by individual voters, not through back-room deals and cross-party manipulations. In America, political parties are organizers and facilitators. In Israel, they are interest groups which act as public proxies; this must change.
I believe that all of America, including those who felt, as I did, that John McCain was the better choice, are proud to follow and be served by a President of African-American descent. For some, it was the dominant factor in their voting choice, a phenomenon that may have resulted in an unqualified individual leading America and the free world. Yet, I also believe that America and its political system, with its institutional political checks and balances, are robust enough to endure this. Even if the Obama administration disappoints greatly, Americans can take pride in their part of the process insofar as they respect the decision of their collective franchise. The point is that the American voters had the final word in this hiring process. And they will have it again when they, as voting individuals, re-evaluate the Obama administration in less than four years.
Haisraelim
A new political party is promoting the regional election of some Knesset Members as their main platform issue. The party is called "Haisraelim" and you can read about them at http://www.haisraelim.org. Though the party promotes the concept of regional representation, I cannot support it for several reasons. According to Gil Hoffman's recent Jerusalem Post article, "The power-to-the-people party," the party supports the Megidor Commission's disastrous proposal for only half of the Knesset to be regionally elected; the regions would not be drawn for single-legislator representation; there would be 17 regions with 2 to 5 legislators per region, resulting in some ambiguous accountability and representation issues. As I have explained before (see the FAQ page of Shelanu's web site), hybrid solutions which result in a hybridized direct/proportional system will be disastrous because the balance of power will be taken out of the hands of the voters. The influence of publicly accountable legislators will be diluted by the inclusion of publicly unaccountable party appointees. Also, in a hybridized system, the legislative "whipping boys" will not be the underperforming MKs; those who are punished for the lack of excellence will be those whom the voters are able to kick out; i.e., their incumbent representatives.
Secondly, Haisraelim approaches the problem of unprofessional government ministers by setting up a panel of MKs to oversee the "appropriateness" of ministerial candidates. This will certainly not make the process less "political." Knesset votes to confirm candidates are important, however this does not take the vital step of separating the branches of government that will result in an effective, responsive, and responsible government bureaucracy. This may also serve to obscure Haisraelim's key message of popular empowerment.
Thirdly, Haisraelim throws its hat in with other groups demanding a national constitution. However, at this time, pushing for a constitution would likely prevent the most important reforms that Israel needs. Those presently sitting in the Knesset, who were appointed on the basis of the current, disastrous proportional system of representation, are absolutely unfit to be writing and dictating the content of a constitution. An enduring, fitting, and beneficial constitution is much more likely once the public has voted in a better quality of legislator.
Fourth, Haisraelim insists on expressing the equality of the sexes by alternating its list slots by sex. In other words, the first slot will go to a man, the second to a woman, the third to a man, and so on. This flies in the face of one of the key aspects of regional, direct representation, namely, the value of individual empowerment and responsibility. A consideration of an individual's fitness to represent should mean looking beyond one's sex. In my lifetime, I have been served by male and female legislators; their sex had very little to do with their fitness and effectiveness. While gender equality is an important value, it should be manifested in a legislative selection that is gender-blind, not gender-centric. Haisraelim should stick to a message of individual accountability and individual excellence without gender restrictions.
Lastly, it is premature to launch a political party with regional representation as its main issue until the public is prepared for it. This should be done only after a dynamic movement has been operating and recruiting massive support from the Israeli public. Most Israelis who support regional representation will not dedicate their one vote to it for a simple reason. The party will do poorly at the polls and may not win even a single mandate. This itself may be unfortunate, but the real negative consequence will be the interpretation that the poor showing indicates widespread opposition to regional, direct representation. While I greatly respect Prof. Gideon, Haisraelim's leader, as an academic and visionary, I believe that he should have laid a more comprehensive groundwork of cultural activism and rallied significant public support before forming a political party. In fact, with a successful national movement, no single issue party would be needed; the largest parties would adopt a regional election platform as a means of finally eliminating the extortion of the small parties.
T-Shirts Have Shipped
The first batch of Shelanu shirts have shipped and they came out beautifully in all sizes, including toddler size 4 (which are available in pink and blue). We are now accepting donations for the next batch, so if you haven't already, please donate towards the t-shirt campaign. And if you have already, then send us pictures of you them so that we can put a personal, popular face on our web site. Click here for details on the t-shirt campaign.
Annual Meeting
Finally, we will be planning our annual meeting soon. If you'd like to help with the planning, please contact me.
Monday, September 29, 2008
A Lesson in Succession
Last week, Kadima members voted in a party election to see who would succeed Ehud Olmert, who resigned from the office of Prime Minister. Tzipora Livni won the election and, unless early general elections are called, will run the government for the next 18 months. Roughly 50,000 party members voted to see who would lead a "democratic" nation of 7.3 million; that's less than 1% of the population, less than 2% of eligible voters.
This was consistent with the rules of this travesty that we call a democracy in Israel because the underlying political philosophy is collectivist. Individuals are not elected, parties are. Parties appoint legislators to represent party interests. Individuals don't lead; parties lead. Therefore, technically, no succession was necessary. Of course, de-facto, individuals wield power within Israeli political collectives. The understanding is that the leader of a party that wins the right to form the government becomes the Prime Minister. Thus, when Prince Ehud of the Fat Envelopes resigned, the party collective had replaced him in a way that suited the interests of the party collective, not the public of voting citizens.
The quality of leadership within a system is reflected in its rules of succession. For less than 2% of a population to choose its nation's chief executive is an embarrassing joke on democratic principles. When compared to the rules of succession of the President of the United States, last week's Kadima vote seems worthy of a banana republic.
In the United States, there is never a situation in which a chief executive is directly appointed by a party elite or from a limited primary within a party, unlike the travesty we just witnessed in Israel. When a President cannot continue in his duties, he is succeeded according to the following order of succession.
In cases of "dual vacancy" (i.e., removal of both President and VP,) successors DO NOT attain the title of President but of "Acting President." Any scenario in which both President and Vice-President would be removed (health, impeachment, assassination, other coincidences) constitutes a time of a "caretaker" administration in a national emergency. Dual vacancies result in a special presidential election held the following November (unless the vacancies occurred after the first Wednesday in October, in which case the election would occur the following year; or unless the vacancies occurred within the last year of the presidential term, in which case the next election would take place as regularly scheduled).
The constitution discourages authorizing the chief executive to appoint a successor who has not been popularly, individually elected. So, after the VP, the next two in line are NOT members of the executive cabinet (who were appointed by the President), but rather the popularly elected senior members of the majority parties of the two houses of Congress, who represent the majority will of the people in lawmaking. Note that if the current Republican-affiliated President and Vice-President become unable to serve, the next two in line of presidential succession (Speaker of the House of Representatives Nancy Pelosi and President pro tempore of the Senate Robert Byrd) happen to be from the rival Democratic Party! Remember, though, that any such succession would be very temporary and considered a "caretaker" measure in a time of national emergency.
The U.S. rules of Presidential succession are an impressive example of respecting the will of the people while responsibly ensuring a continuity of governmental functioning. We can attain the same high standard of public service if we push through the right reforms.
This was consistent with the rules of this travesty that we call a democracy in Israel because the underlying political philosophy is collectivist. Individuals are not elected, parties are. Parties appoint legislators to represent party interests. Individuals don't lead; parties lead. Therefore, technically, no succession was necessary. Of course, de-facto, individuals wield power within Israeli political collectives. The understanding is that the leader of a party that wins the right to form the government becomes the Prime Minister. Thus, when Prince Ehud of the Fat Envelopes resigned, the party collective had replaced him in a way that suited the interests of the party collective, not the public of voting citizens.
The quality of leadership within a system is reflected in its rules of succession. For less than 2% of a population to choose its nation's chief executive is an embarrassing joke on democratic principles. When compared to the rules of succession of the President of the United States, last week's Kadima vote seems worthy of a banana republic.
In the United States, there is never a situation in which a chief executive is directly appointed by a party elite or from a limited primary within a party, unlike the travesty we just witnessed in Israel. When a President cannot continue in his duties, he is succeeded according to the following order of succession.
- Vice President
- Speaker of the House of Representatives
- President pro tempore of the Senate
- Secretary of State
- Secretary of the Treasury
- Secretary of Defense
- Attorney General
- Secretary of the Interior
- Secretary of Agriculture
- Secretary of Commerce
- Secretary of Labor
- Secretary of Health and Human Services
- Secretary of Housing and Urban Development
- Secretary of Transportation
- Secretary of Energy
- Secretary of Education
- Secretary of Veterans Affairs
- Secretary of Homeland Security
In cases of "dual vacancy" (i.e., removal of both President and VP,) successors DO NOT attain the title of President but of "Acting President." Any scenario in which both President and Vice-President would be removed (health, impeachment, assassination, other coincidences) constitutes a time of a "caretaker" administration in a national emergency. Dual vacancies result in a special presidential election held the following November (unless the vacancies occurred after the first Wednesday in October, in which case the election would occur the following year; or unless the vacancies occurred within the last year of the presidential term, in which case the next election would take place as regularly scheduled).
The constitution discourages authorizing the chief executive to appoint a successor who has not been popularly, individually elected. So, after the VP, the next two in line are NOT members of the executive cabinet (who were appointed by the President), but rather the popularly elected senior members of the majority parties of the two houses of Congress, who represent the majority will of the people in lawmaking. Note that if the current Republican-affiliated President and Vice-President become unable to serve, the next two in line of presidential succession (Speaker of the House of Representatives Nancy Pelosi and President pro tempore of the Senate Robert Byrd) happen to be from the rival Democratic Party! Remember, though, that any such succession would be very temporary and considered a "caretaker" measure in a time of national emergency.
The U.S. rules of Presidential succession are an impressive example of respecting the will of the people while responsibly ensuring a continuity of governmental functioning. We can attain the same high standard of public service if we push through the right reforms.
Thursday, August 14, 2008
Friedmann Gets It. Really.
Once again, the Israeli legal elite is upset with Justice Minister Daniel Friedmann for reminding them that their circle is not the incarnation of a modern Israeli monarchy. Friedmann has proposed a law to revise and split the current duties of the office of attorney-general into two separate positions: legal adviser to the government and chief prosecutor.
For the first time in Israel, the proposed law will restrict the powers of the legal adviser, who has enjoyed an effective veto of executive policy decisions through his own legal interpretation. Ever eager to defend the legal elite's ambition to rule, Attorney General Menahem Mazuz warned that if the government is not forced to abide by the opinion of the legal adviser to the government, no minister will have to abide by the legal opinion of the advisers in his ministry. Well, is this not the point of executive discretion and responsibility? The public elects leaders, not legal advisors, to actually lead, don't we?
In a familiar chorus, Mazuz wailed that the law would cause the whole structure of the rule of law to collapse. No, Menny, due process prevents that. The government will still be sued and the courts will still be called upon to adjudicate the legality of policy on occasion. The key difference is that governmental adversaries will actually have to mount a legal argument. No, Menny, the judiciary does not have the right to neutralize the public's mandate of its elected leaders and representatives.
Government as a clearly-defined service bureaucracy to a democratically empowered - and empowering - public. Friedmann gets it. Mazuz, who is trying to preserve rule by legal fiat, clearly does not.
For the first time in Israel, the proposed law will restrict the powers of the legal adviser, who has enjoyed an effective veto of executive policy decisions through his own legal interpretation. Ever eager to defend the legal elite's ambition to rule, Attorney General Menahem Mazuz warned that if the government is not forced to abide by the opinion of the legal adviser to the government, no minister will have to abide by the legal opinion of the advisers in his ministry. Well, is this not the point of executive discretion and responsibility? The public elects leaders, not legal advisors, to actually lead, don't we?
In a familiar chorus, Mazuz wailed that the law would cause the whole structure of the rule of law to collapse. No, Menny, due process prevents that. The government will still be sued and the courts will still be called upon to adjudicate the legality of policy on occasion. The key difference is that governmental adversaries will actually have to mount a legal argument. No, Menny, the judiciary does not have the right to neutralize the public's mandate of its elected leaders and representatives.
Government as a clearly-defined service bureaucracy to a democratically empowered - and empowering - public. Friedmann gets it. Mazuz, who is trying to preserve rule by legal fiat, clearly does not.
Sunday, July 20, 2008
Demagoguery's Terrible Deal
Many of Israel's influentials, politicians and pundits, have declared that last week's exchange of murderers for corpses was some sort of moral victory for Israel. Some declare that the decision was "uniquely Israeli" because of some convoluted connection to our responsibility to our soldiers. What utterly hollow euphemisms.
The deal mortgaged the future safety and lives of soldiers and civilians, who will be the targets of kidnapping and slaughter by an unrepentant Samir Kuntar, his sponsors, his colleagues in terror, and perhaps generations of jihadist-indoctrinated youth. We ruined the processes of deligitimizing and neutralizing of Hizbullah which were necessary to reduce the group's popularity and to help Lebanon break free of Syrian-Iranian hegemony. We greatly reduced the chances that the abducted soldier Gilad Schalit will return home alive. So, which moral values did Israel serve?
Did the deal value human life? Not for Israel. Hizbullah chief Hassan Nassrallah demonstrated more respect for the lives of his fighters. When Israel negotiated without insisting on "proof of life," the lives of the kidnapped stopped being the crucial element in the negotiation. When we made kidnapping a profitable enterprise for our enemies, returning their able, motivated fighters for Israeli corpses, we declared that Israeli blood – past, present, and future - is cheap; on the other hand, we'll pay handsomely for the bones.
Did Israel honor her soldiers? Some senior commanders asserted that they could not turn down the Hizbullah deal and still ask solders to follow them into battle. If conscripts didn't feel that Israel would pay any price, including terrorist demands, to retrieve them dead or alive, went the argument, conscripts wouldn't serve with the dedication they do now. Such a statement is an insulting libel to the young men and women who who declare their willingness to endanger their lives for Israel's safety. The terrible sacrifices paid by Eldad Regev and Ehud Goldwasser were not honored by freeing the willing confederates of those who killed them. No; this deal had nothing to do with patriotism or with honoring military service.
One concept highlighted by the exchange was Israeli (i.e., Jewish) victimhood. Commentators remarked on the asymmetric stakes: the sympathetic lever that brought strong Israel to her knees. However, while Israel might enjoy some short-lived sympathy, Hizbullah was the winner of greater respect and legitimacy. Living things perceive differences between healthy organisms and sick ones. While Hizbullah is reviled as a torch-bearer for oppressive, Jihadist Islam, steeped in misogyny and totalitarianism, this deal arguably served its nefarious interests. Israel's sanctimony of superior civility doesn't garner much admiration when our actions are so self-damaging. Before long, most of the world, except for the Jihadists, will forget the images of Nasrallah and the Lebanese celebrating the release of a monster. It will refocus on the convenient scapegoat to ingratiate itself with the provider of the next barrel of oil.
Israel couldn't turn the deal down, remarked analysts, because if they did Hizbullah would not allow "closure" from the Second Lebanese War. Some closure. Hizbullah's arsenal of missiles is larger than ever and includes Iranian missiles capable of reaching the Negev. "No price is to great," declared Israel's elites of demagoguery. "We must do this for the families of the kidnapped, even if it's just to give them something to bury." And what of the families of kidnapped soldiers to come? "We'll deal with the future in the future," they replied, ignoring rational, burning concerns.
Therein lies the real root of Israel's problems. As long as the empowered reap political gains, Israel's political system is designed to provide instant gratification. Our officials are not chosen for long-term solutions; they are not chosen for integrity; they are not even chosen for their experience. They are chosen for short term remediation, for championing trendy causes celebre, for reciting simple catch-phrases that Israelis are told by their media that they want now. Ehud Olmert was desperate for the kind of headlines that helped him at least postpone a denouement from his scandals, the fallout from which is very close to terminating his political career.
We needed a leader to tell Karnit Goldwasser, gently, that while we sympathized with her we could not exchange bloodthirsty terrorists for what we confidently believed were corpses. The strength to act in this way has its roots in integrity, a quality our officials won't have until we are able to select them for it. We have to stop empowering patronizing demagogues; we must institute a system of elections with direct representation that lets us select talented, accountable individuals.
There was no moral victory here, no "uniquely Israeli" resolution that strengthened us through some dilemma of higher conscience. A combination of shameless demagoguery and moral bankruptcy on the part of Israel's political elite prostrated the country before one of its most brutal and evil foes.
The deal mortgaged the future safety and lives of soldiers and civilians, who will be the targets of kidnapping and slaughter by an unrepentant Samir Kuntar, his sponsors, his colleagues in terror, and perhaps generations of jihadist-indoctrinated youth. We ruined the processes of deligitimizing and neutralizing of Hizbullah which were necessary to reduce the group's popularity and to help Lebanon break free of Syrian-Iranian hegemony. We greatly reduced the chances that the abducted soldier Gilad Schalit will return home alive. So, which moral values did Israel serve?
Did the deal value human life? Not for Israel. Hizbullah chief Hassan Nassrallah demonstrated more respect for the lives of his fighters. When Israel negotiated without insisting on "proof of life," the lives of the kidnapped stopped being the crucial element in the negotiation. When we made kidnapping a profitable enterprise for our enemies, returning their able, motivated fighters for Israeli corpses, we declared that Israeli blood – past, present, and future - is cheap; on the other hand, we'll pay handsomely for the bones.
Did Israel honor her soldiers? Some senior commanders asserted that they could not turn down the Hizbullah deal and still ask solders to follow them into battle. If conscripts didn't feel that Israel would pay any price, including terrorist demands, to retrieve them dead or alive, went the argument, conscripts wouldn't serve with the dedication they do now. Such a statement is an insulting libel to the young men and women who who declare their willingness to endanger their lives for Israel's safety. The terrible sacrifices paid by Eldad Regev and Ehud Goldwasser were not honored by freeing the willing confederates of those who killed them. No; this deal had nothing to do with patriotism or with honoring military service.
One concept highlighted by the exchange was Israeli (i.e., Jewish) victimhood. Commentators remarked on the asymmetric stakes: the sympathetic lever that brought strong Israel to her knees. However, while Israel might enjoy some short-lived sympathy, Hizbullah was the winner of greater respect and legitimacy. Living things perceive differences between healthy organisms and sick ones. While Hizbullah is reviled as a torch-bearer for oppressive, Jihadist Islam, steeped in misogyny and totalitarianism, this deal arguably served its nefarious interests. Israel's sanctimony of superior civility doesn't garner much admiration when our actions are so self-damaging. Before long, most of the world, except for the Jihadists, will forget the images of Nasrallah and the Lebanese celebrating the release of a monster. It will refocus on the convenient scapegoat to ingratiate itself with the provider of the next barrel of oil.
Israel couldn't turn the deal down, remarked analysts, because if they did Hizbullah would not allow "closure" from the Second Lebanese War. Some closure. Hizbullah's arsenal of missiles is larger than ever and includes Iranian missiles capable of reaching the Negev. "No price is to great," declared Israel's elites of demagoguery. "We must do this for the families of the kidnapped, even if it's just to give them something to bury." And what of the families of kidnapped soldiers to come? "We'll deal with the future in the future," they replied, ignoring rational, burning concerns.
Therein lies the real root of Israel's problems. As long as the empowered reap political gains, Israel's political system is designed to provide instant gratification. Our officials are not chosen for long-term solutions; they are not chosen for integrity; they are not even chosen for their experience. They are chosen for short term remediation, for championing trendy causes celebre, for reciting simple catch-phrases that Israelis are told by their media that they want now. Ehud Olmert was desperate for the kind of headlines that helped him at least postpone a denouement from his scandals, the fallout from which is very close to terminating his political career.
We needed a leader to tell Karnit Goldwasser, gently, that while we sympathized with her we could not exchange bloodthirsty terrorists for what we confidently believed were corpses. The strength to act in this way has its roots in integrity, a quality our officials won't have until we are able to select them for it. We have to stop empowering patronizing demagogues; we must institute a system of elections with direct representation that lets us select talented, accountable individuals.
There was no moral victory here, no "uniquely Israeli" resolution that strengthened us through some dilemma of higher conscience. A combination of shameless demagoguery and moral bankruptcy on the part of Israel's political elite prostrated the country before one of its most brutal and evil foes.
Thursday, July 10, 2008
Happy 4th of July – To America and the Jewish People
So, why should Israelis and Jews all over the world commemorate the date that thirteen American colonies declared their independence, as the United States, from England? It's not just the billions of dollars in aid Israel receives from Uncle Sam every year.
Already hailed as a milestone of essential scholarship, Michael Oren's recent work, Power, Faith, and Fantasy: America and the Middle East, 1776 to the Present, relates some astounding links between the Jewish people and the United States. The Puritans who came to America from Europe, "conceived themselves as the new Jews and the New World as the New Canaan." In an interview, Oren elaborated, "That immediately established a sense of kinship between them and the old Jews and the old Promised Land. Since then, many Protestants in the United States have seen it as their religious and national duty to help fulfill God’s promises to rescue the Jews from exile and repatriate them to their ancestral homeland." Oren also points out that in 1844, the head of New York University’s bible department, George Bush, a direct ancestor of two American presidents of the same name, wrote The Valley of Visions, a bestseller urging the United States to take a leading role in recreating a Jewish state in the land of Israel.
In Old World Europe,attempts at self-government were subject to the whims of monarchs and potentates; the value of human life was not a universal truism. The United States of America was founded on the basis that people are essentially good and capable of self-government, that individuals can make a difference in making the world a better or worse place. Israel and America share a mission to be a beacon of life-affirming values beyond their borders.
America does not have an unblemished record - there have been cases of institutional anti-semitism; Jonathan Pollard still sits in a maximum security prison. However, in its 230 year history, America has overwhelmingly been a blessing to the Jewish people. Jews were welcomed as full citizens in the newborn United States and, in 1790, George Washington addressed the Hebrew Congregation of Newport, Rhode Island, as follows.
"May the Children of the Stock of Abraham, who dwell in this land, continue to merit and enjoy the good will of the other Inhabitants; while every one shall sit under his own vine and fig tree, and there shall be none to make him afraid."
Washington proved to be farsighted. Proud Jews, including Senator Joe Lieberman and NY Assemblyman Dov Hilkind, have influenced American politics at every level. Beyond that, Jewish culture has thrived and become a vital part of mainstream American culture.
As the founders in the United States were inspired by the Jewish people, let's hope that Israel can be inspired to live by America's founding principles of good governance. Shelanu proposes individually electing all legislators as sole representatives of their districts. We support a presidential executive system, completely separate from the legislature (Knesset), that places efficient and effective public service above the kind of sectarian patronage that characterizes Israel's ministerial appointments. These mechanisms, complementary and firmly rooted in principles of individual accountability and citizen sovereignty, have proven themselves over time, in the United States as a whole and in governments as small as the state of Rhode Island. They work because they're built on simple, solid principles which reward individual excellence and consider individual citizens to be the most basic unit of political influence.
Order your t-shirts today! See the post from earlier today.
T-Shirt Campaign
This month, we unveil our very first fundraising effort as a non-profit organization with a t-shirt campaign. Provocative and direct, with our icon produced exclusively by Studio Spinner, these shirts were designed to get people thinking and talking. Take a look at the new design on our web site at
http://www.directrepisrael.org/EN/Stuff.shtml
For a donation of NIS 100 ($30), to Shelanu, you will receive our brand new, redesigned t-shirt. Additional t-shirts can be purchased for NIS 50 ($15) apiece. Please specify t-shirts size(s) as well as contact information (including telephone, mailing address, and email address if possible).
Donations may be made by check or by bank transfer.
By check:
Make checks out to "Shelanu, Meitanu, Avureinu" and send to:
Shelanu
c/o Michael Jaffe
17 HaPalmach Street
P.O. Box 1228
Zichron Yaakov, 30900 ISRAEL
With your check, please include a note with t-shirt size(s), telephone, and mailing address information.
By bank transfer:
Bank of Jerusalem (Israeli Bank #054)
Branch #030
Account #300054210
Bank transfers orders: please call or email us with t-shirt size(s), telephone, and mailing address information
How to contact us:
Email: jmichaeljaffe@directrepisrael.org
Phone: From Israel 04-6398160, From outside Israel +972-4-6398160.
Fax: From Israel 153-4-6398160, From outside Israel +972-153-4-6398160.
Skype ID: jmjaffe
(We cannot accept collect calls at this time.)
Where does the money go?
As a new organization, we must attain a certification, known as a Form 46, that allows us access to many granting institutions. Shelanu should receive this certification over the course of the year, but only if we start with the preliminary support of individuals like you. If you want to make a difference to make Israel stronger, more secure, and more prosperous, there is no better way than helping to heal her democracy.
http://www.directrepisrael.org/EN/Stuff.shtml
For a donation of NIS 100 ($30), to Shelanu, you will receive our brand new, redesigned t-shirt. Additional t-shirts can be purchased for NIS 50 ($15) apiece. Please specify t-shirts size(s) as well as contact information (including telephone, mailing address, and email address if possible).
Donations may be made by check or by bank transfer.
By check:
Make checks out to "Shelanu, Meitanu, Avureinu" and send to:
Shelanu
c/o Michael Jaffe
17 HaPalmach Street
P.O. Box 1228
Zichron Yaakov, 30900 ISRAEL
With your check, please include a note with t-shirt size(s), telephone, and mailing address information.
By bank transfer:
Bank of Jerusalem (Israeli Bank #054)
Branch #030
Account #300054210
Bank transfers orders: please call or email us with t-shirt size(s), telephone, and mailing address information
How to contact us:
Email: jmichaeljaffe@directrepisrael.org
Phone: From Israel 04-6398160, From outside Israel +972-4-6398160.
Fax: From Israel 153-4-6398160, From outside Israel +972-153-4-6398160.
Skype ID: jmjaffe
(We cannot accept collect calls at this time.)
Where does the money go?
- Maintenance of our web site
- Legal and administrative fees of establishing and maintaining a non-profit status
- Design and production of educational materials about effective democracy
- Communication costs for publicizing Shelanu
- Planning and producing upcoming events, including our first nationwide general meeting and educational seminars
As a new organization, we must attain a certification, known as a Form 46, that allows us access to many granting institutions. Shelanu should receive this certification over the course of the year, but only if we start with the preliminary support of individuals like you. If you want to make a difference to make Israel stronger, more secure, and more prosperous, there is no better way than helping to heal her democracy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
