STANDING FOR ISRAEL'S TRUTH EFFECTIVELY

 .....Moshe Kempinski

Since the early seventies Israel seems to have been losing in the public relations war again and again. After the Six Day War in 1967, Israelis awash with a sense of pride which quickly developed into arrogance seemed to have lost the ability to explain their position and situation. What followed after the Yom Kippur war was that the frustration of being misunderstood in the world deepened into a fierce feeling of self doubt and insecurity. It was not long before many Israelis and many more Jews in the exile began to adopt the views and aspirations of some of the worst of our enemies.

There are two possibilities. The first is that the Jewish people and the struggling Israeli nation were wrong about the options presented to them at the outset of the six day war. Perhaps peace is simply attainable if only the Israelis were more conciliatory.

The second option is that we have been so sure of our cause that we assumed everyone simply understood and thereby left the battlefield of public opinion to the other side.

The first possibility has proven to be false again and again, most prominently after the irresponsible expulsion and disengagement from the Gaza strip. That leaves the second possibility which needs to be addressed as quickly as possible. With the strong surge of blog and internet media, simple civilians are suddenly in a position to have an impact on the stage of world opinion in ways that were unheard of earlier. We just need to seriously consider what approach is effective and which one simply becomes a salve for our own conscience or an outlet for our deep concerns and angers.

I have been involved with various forms and modes of dialogue and opinion exchanges for over thirty years. The experience of life, marriage, and children has given me, as it has every other individual in this world insight and wisdom regarding meaningful dialogue. My experience as a family therapist, kiruv (Jewish outreach) worker, political activist and in involvement in all sorts of dialogue between groups of differing ideologies or faiths has presented me with a few other insights as well. It is with that in mind I would offer the following rules of interchange and dialogue.

There are many people in this world that are truly interested in broadening their world view and knowledge base, whether consciously or not. They only know what they have been taught. As a result every lover of the land of Israel and of the spiritual message it conveys, can become an agent of change, growth and destiny. It is in our hands to be in the words of Rebbe Menachem Mendel of Vitebsk , "the language of G-d".

Rule number one in dialogue is that dialogue is not about agreement but rather about understanding. Though that may be self obvious but it needs to be restated and that simple statement frees the listener from the onus of a response. He is free to listen.

Rule number two is to never let anger and frustration overwhelm your argument.

Rule number three is to begin with your points with ease and patience. You also must always remember that your goal is not to convince the other side but rather help them understand you a little more. Since you believe in the truth of your argument, know that if they are ready to listen they may also be ready to eventually change or grow.

Rule number four is to never assume that your listener knows what you know and feels the truth that you feel. Ignorance is rampant so a lot of what your listener believes is based on the little that he knows. Never point to that ignorance but you must be aware of its existence. Your role is not to make your listener aware of how much he is in the dark but rather simply to add a little more light.

Rule number five is that it is an accepted axiom that every story has another side. If you present your points as a simple attempt to shed light on the possible other side of the story, people are ready to listen. I was once speaking to a Quaker group that was in Israel supporting Palestinian refugees. I offered them the choice to either believe that I and other Israelis they met are simply hating racist thugs , or that perhaps we are seeing and living a different reality .I simply suggested that I wanted to let them have a peek into my reality and that they would do with it what they desired. That request opened a discussion that was much more sincere and relevant than most such discussions.

Rule number six is to accept that the job before us is massive and is therefore impossible and overwhelming. Therefore the focus should be on the little picture and not on the larger one. The little picture is the big picture. Your neighbor, your fellow employee and your local place of worship is your target audience. A corollary of this point is to not waste time on "the haters". Their hatred comes from a place much deeper than anything you could reach.

Rule number eight is being smart in your approach and use the language, metaphors and spokespeople that would be meaningful to your listener. Remind your listener that the Palestinians have become the greatest victims of their terrorism and the most unwitting pawns in the power games of corrupt leaders. It is futile to paint the other side as the embodiment of evil, and the pawns of Satan and expect anyone to listen to the rest of your points. The other side is more realistically portrayed as the victims of the evil desires of men. Leave any insights you may have about spiritual realities out of the arena of perceived realities. It is especially true in the Middle East that the perception of reality is more impactful than reality itself.

Finally be aware that destiny is being determined in our days and you have the opportunity to be part of it blossoming .In the words of Pirkei Avot (2:16), Lo Alecha Hamelacha Li’gmor… - "It is not incumbent on you to complete the task. Yet neither are you free to abstain from it. "

Yosef, Yehuda and Bibi…..

Moshe Kempinski  

The conflict between Yosef (Joseph) and what he represents and Yehuda (Judah) and what he is meant to represent runs as a continuum throughout Jewish history. A continuum wherein Yosef becomes  the prototype of the sons of Rachel and Yehuda representing the traits of his mother Leah. Throughout history the two sides struggle against each other and at times one side comes out in control and at others the other side becomes the prevalent force. Rachel the beautiful and activist of the two sisters was Yaacov's (Jacob’s) first love and the one that he intended to marry. Leah, the more submissive and quiet one was the one that he married regardless.

Yaacov, being Yaacov, is drawn to the self assured and activist Rachel and therefore becomes very connected to Yosef her son who shares some of her attributes. The sons of Leah have difficulty with the aggressive ego and self assured activism presented by Yosef and throw him into the pit. Two sons of Leah, Reuven and Yehuda try to minimize the crime and fail, leading one of them at least into depression and feeling a need to abandon his whole family. Yet Yosef after experiencing the humbling experience of slavery and his successful passing of the tests laid before him becomes fitting to become the leader of the nascent Israelite nation. He rules them in Egypt just as his dreams prophesied.

Yet it is a descendant of Leah, Moshe (Moses) who takes them out of slavery. Following that a descendant of Rachel, Yehoshua ( Joshua) brings them into the land. The pendulum swings both ways until Saul, a descendant of Rachel becomes the first king. He loses that kingship to King David whose reign seemingly will last forever. Yet it is David's grandson that loses part of his kingdom to Yerovam a descendant of Rachel. The kingdom he establishes is destroyed and is dispersed ,yet the remnant of all  twelve tribes gather in Jerusalem and the struggle continues until the reign of David will truly last forever.

What lies in the deeper levels of this struggle. What can we learn from this struggle  about lasting leadership. The Lubavitcher Rebbe writes that the struggle represents;" the conflict between growth and self-fulfillment on the one hand, and subservience and commitment on the other. Rachel, "of beautiful form and of beautiful appearance," embodies the drive for self-fulfillment and self-realization, while the humble, submissive Leah represents our capacity for servitude and self-effacement. "

It is clear that both forces are critical for the formation and continuation of this people. Yet the drive of Rachel and Yosef could easily be thwarted into self centered arrogance. The submissive attributes of Leah could lead to inaction and weakness. Yosef needed to go through the experience of Egypt as did all of his family to refine the balance. Yehuda on the other hand had to go through the difficult experience with Tamar to find his own balance.

Tamar his daughter in law  gives him back the power to live up to the secret power of his  name. When she is taken to be burned she declares "..'By the man, whose these are, am I with child'; and she said: 'Discern, I pray thee, whose are these, the signet, and the cords, and the staff.' " (Breishit/Genesis 38:25) She does not declare whose they are but allows Yehuda acknowledge his responsibility . In Hebrew he is Modeh/ axcknowledges  his part and the word modeh  forms the basis of his name Yehuda." And Judah acknowledged them, and said: 'She is more righteous than I; "( ibid 26). It is that strength of character he bequeathes to his descendant David. King Saul would not acknowledge his failings and loses the kingdom;

 And Saul said unto Samuel: 'Yea, I have hearkened to the voice of HaShem, and have gone the way which the LORD sent me, and have brought Agag the king of Amalek, and have utterly destroyed the Amalekites.  But the people took of the spoil, sheep and oxen, the chief of the devoted things, to sacrifice unto HaShem  thy God in Gilgal.' ( Shmuel 15: 20-21)) .

Yet  David did and with that established his eternal monarchy.

  And David said to Nathan: 'I have sinned against HaShem.'  And Nathan said to David: HaShem  also has put away your sin; you shall not die.  ( Shmuel II 12:13)

Binyamin Netanyahu is very far from being a Yosef or a Yehuda but he is poised for leadership. Throughout his political career he has been plagued by one problem. That problem was Binyamin Netanyahu.

He was so filled with drive and a sense of vision that he constantly stumbled over his ego. He was strong willed and sure of himself but he would easily be weakened by pundits and opinion polls. That is the failure and weakness of self centered visionaries, capable of so much but hampered by worrying if it looked good. The disastrous agreement in Hevron was a result of that weakness as well as his failings at Wye. For many Netanyahu is as much of a risk as was Olmert and Sharon. I do not believe that to be true …though I am very aware of the dangers. Yet what is important to remember is that Netanyahu will need to depend on many more Land of Israel faithful than ever before. His own top  Likud list plus Uzi Landau as number two on Lieberman’s list may serve as a good buffers against his own weaknesses.

Yet despite his weakness of wanting to be loved   he is being made ready to lead the people of Israel soon. He has some of the important characteristics needed for that leadership. What Binyamin Netanyahu needs to do then is to reach deeper into himself as Yehuda was forced to do. His problem is not about coming on strong but rather about coming across more human and humane. All that he would need to do is to sincerely acknowledge past mistakes. It is something that is hard for him it seems. It may be also something his political advisors warn him against because it might weaken his image.

They are wrong. That simple change of approach and style would cause a paradigm shift in his own awareness. This is especially true because it would almost instantly endear him to a people looking for real leadership. That acknowledgment is not about groveling and pandering but about the ability to grow from mistakes and move more humbly onto the path of destiny.

It is a path he must consciously decide to embark on.

THOSE ANGRY YOUTH

 

When the news first broke of the police expulsion of the residents of the Peace House I was overwhelmed by a wave of anger pain and disgust. Memories of facing the horsemen at the street corner demonstrations during the early Oslo years, , standing against the cold lifeless faces of the soldiers in Kfar Maimon, and driving helplessly  along the roads by the Gaza strip trying to find a way in , all came up like poisonous bile. Memories of the water cannons, the grey shirted Yassam thugs and the brutal forces at Amona all chilled my heart again  .

Nothing seems to have changed and nothing seems to have been learnt. Just like in Amona the possibility of an agreed upon solution was discarded in favor of confronting the "powers of evil" as a way of lifting the political prospects of our Minister of Defense.

No...the powers of evil were not the terrorists holding Gilad Shalit. It wasn't the murderers lobbing death missiles into Sederot. It wasn't even radical Islam which murdered so many good souls  just this  last week.

 It was a stand off against young ideological and faithful Jews living in a house that they legally purchased.

Yet the expulsion on Thursday was not the worst of the crime . The media defamation and hateful lies regarding the settlers of this house and of all the Biblical heartland  was horrific. Reports were repeated about a soldier blinded by acid poured on him. Just as in Gush Katif this news story proved to be false. Suddenly young religious Zionist youth were all branded as homeless toughs with no controls. The young families in the Peace House represented the greatest threat to Israeli democracy since the Altalena. Reshet Bet news correspondents described the people demonstrating in the street corners as "thrill seekers". Psychologists and pundits wondered on radio talk shows “ why these youth were so angry.”

Lets see if I can help.

You arrested them as they sat in intersections in a cry of anguish after terrorist murderers.

You threw 14 and 15 year old kids into jail for long periods of time as you were releasing terrorists murderers as a "gesture"

You ran over them with your horses and you attacked them with water cannons

You brutalized them with hooked batons and heavy clubs in Amona.

You threw them out of their homes

You blamed them for everything from Rabin's murder to the spread of world wide Islamic terror.

You called them thugs and wild weeds and yet let them die for your ill planned wars in Lebanon.

You threw stun grenades and tear gas canisters at them when you wanted to evict them AGAIN from a home they purchased

And you wonder why they are angry and mistrustful of you…