Second Temple

Jewish violence against Jews cannot be overlooked or condoned.

It’s time to talk about Jewish violence against Jews.  This blog may make me unpopular with some readers.  I’ve decided that as a person with a public readership, I have a responsibility to speak out against this phenomenon, which should be condemned.  Those who justify it—I’m not even talking about those who do it—are wrong.  They are contributing to the destruction of the Jewish community in Eretz Yisrael in a way that nothing else does.
I am very well aware that the authorities of the State of Israel use deliberate, premeditated violence against their political opponents

I am very well aware that the authorities of the State of Israel use deliberate, premeditated violence against their political opponents, and even consider it justified.  They said as much to the Parliamentary committee that investigated the pogrom at Amona.  I am aware that a man with a large public following and many admirers, Ami Ayalon of Labor, goes around the country singing the praises of civil war.  I heard him with my own ears.  I consider it a better than even chance that if we ever get to the point of a conflict over the destruction of Migron, Jews in the uniform of the Israeli state will open fire on other Jews at the order of their superiors.  They will think those orders justify what they do.  (How did he say it in German?  “Ich befehlen waren,” I obeyed orders).  Jews will be wounded, possibly killed, by that fire.  And yet I say that in present circumstances violence against Jews is immoral, even in self-defense.

How the internecine fighting that characterized the Second Temple period began is not recorded.  We only know how it ended.  But it was undoubtedly a product of escalation.  The people were politically divided, then as now.  One faction, perhaps the Tzedukim (Sadducees), possessed political power and were probably not above using force to reinforce it.  That will have produced a reaction—maybe throwing stones at first, who knows.  But stones led to knives and knives to swords and set-piece battles and the rest is recorded in the kinot of the Ninth of Av.
And yet I say that in present circumstances violence against Jews is immoral, even in self-defense

Chazal permit one to use deadly, even preemptive force against someone coming to kill you:  Haba laharogcha, hashkem vehorgo.  The words refer to a private conflict between individuals.  But I’m not trying to pretend to be a Halachic authority here, which I’m not.  I say that when violence is used and returned and escalated, then we are in a civil war, and civil war will finish not only us, not only our political opponents, but the entire Jewish community in Eretz Yisrael.  Therefore I think it is incumbent on us never to use violence against another Jew in a political context, even in self-defense.  Many of us are willing to give our lives in an IDF uniform for the welfare of the Jewish people.  I view this form of mesirut nefesh—not to harm Jews, whatever the provocation—in exactly the same way.  If preserving the welfare of the Jewish people requires self-sacrifice, so be it.

I personally think that nothing will hasten the demise of the current Israeli political establishment as the political fallout resulting from the unilateral use of deadly force against its domestic opponents.  If you ask me what the “solution” is, I think it lies in that direction.  But that is not an adequate reason either to eschew or to embrace violence.  Fundamental moral issues are involved.  One would have to be a wicked fool to look forward to or desire the political “profit” a unilateral slaughter of faith-based Jews would produce.  And one would have to be an equally wicked fool to desire, in present circumstances, to return the government’s violent provocations tit for tat.  The other side having abandoned wisdom, the burden of taking care for the Jewish people’s future falls on us alone.  That’s just the way it is.
when violence is used and returned and escalated, then we are in a civil war, and civil war will finish not only us, not only our political opponents, but the entire Jewish community in Eretz Yisrael

I therefore condemn unreservedly the wicked fools who placed a pipe bomb in the home of the vicious Jew-baiting Jew Ze’ev Sternhell.  They have no right to pass sentence of death on any Jew, far less on those innocent Jews who might die as a result of escalating violence.  Though I understand the frustration of the Jews of Yitzhar, I unreservedly disapprove of their throwing stones at IDF soldiers in Yosh.  One of those stoned was a grandson of Rav Kapach, ZT”L, and a former student at the yeshiva in Maale Adumim, none of whom will ever participate in an expulsion though it cost them their livelihoods and liberty.

My teenage daughters made clear to me that if Migron is to be destroyed they intend to go.  They are bold and fearless and I doubt I could prevent them if I tried.  I told them what I feared would happen.  My youngest daughter, just 14, looked me in the eyes and asked me, “and if so, are you telling me not to resist violence with violence?”  “Yes,” I said.  She held my gaze, and then nodded.  “But in any case I will be with you,” I ended.

Reflections on Tzipi

Tzipi Livni deals with things that nobody can take seriously.  Unfortunately even politicians who know better are content to emulate her.

Ten times over the last six months I have started a blog intending to write something profound about Tzipi Livni.  I have been defeated each time, and gone on to other things.  This is a person who defies profundity.  She takes Abu Mazen and Condoleeza Rice seriously.  Who can take someone like that seriously?  
Livni takes Abu Mazen and Condoleeza Rice seriously. Who can take someone like that seriously?


If Tzipi Livni weren’t a Kadima leader, she’d be a Kadima voter.  Kadima voters spend most of their lives making another shekel and scheduling their next European vacation.  They use politics and the media for entertainment and therapy.  They would like to believe in a world where Tzipi Livni and Abu Whatsisname are going to sit down and make the struggle over Eretz Yisrael go away—not to mention Hizbullah and Hamas and Iran’s bomb.  But it’s not as if they seriously expect to have an impact on these problems, any more than one solves the problem of poverty by giving a quarter to a panhandler in the street. 

The thing about Tzipi is that she is passionate, to the degree that her personality can sustain such an emotion, about things that adults realize are just a game.  She must live in heaven; her job description is to be in therapy all the time.

Among the adults who cannot make themselves take seriously the things Tzipi takes seriously are senior politicians like Ehud Barak, Binyamin Netanyahu and Eli Yishai, maneuvering to become king or, failing that, kingmaker.  Netanyahu, at least, has the liberty to express what he thinks about Tzipi’s games, a luxury the other two do not enjoy.  There are elements of tragedy about Barak, a political realist (though with very moderate political skills) condemned by fate to use a party deeply committed to political impossibilities as the vehicle for his personal ambitions.  
Tzipi is passionate, to the degree that her personality can sustain such an emotion, about things that adults realize are just a game.

In fact, if I cared to advise Barak (and, like him, were cynically indifferent to the issues at stake), I would say to him:  Give up on Labor.  Defect to the Likud.  Netanyahu is in the market for prominent leftists and generals.  Your views and his are almost identical. You could slip neatly into place as Netanyahu’s defense minister and #2, which is where you’re going to wind up anyhow after the elections.  When Netanyahu retires you might even succeed him, which you’ll never do in Labor.

The distressing thing about Israel’s impending election campaign is that it’s not going to be about anything real.  It’s not that the country doesn’t face urgent problems, it’s just that the campaign isn’t going to be about them because they’re on nobody’s agenda.  Two years ago the country’s entire foreign policy agenda fell apart and nothing has yet emerged to replace it; it’s not even being argued about, certainly not by the Likud.  For the war that revealed that the country’s foreign policy agenda was hollow also revealed that its political elites and dominant culture were hollow.  They haven’t the strength or the innovation to come to grips with Israel’s new problems or devise plans to overcome them.  The war two years ago was big enough to shatter their agenda but not big enough to shatter them.
Israel’s impending election campaign is not going to be about anything real. The urgent problems aren't on anybody’s agenda.

This can’t last forever.  Even now there are faint echoes of this appreciation in Israel’s public realm.  There’s a good chance that Israel will sooner or later face a two- or three-front war that will put the 2nd Lebanon War in the shade.  That’s the excuse Livni and Barak are using to entice Netanyahu into a coalition now, though they’re really more concerned with retaining their seats than in addressing the problem. 

I hope the war doesn’t come but I don’t place a lot of stock in unfounded hopes.  If the country survives, change will be forced upon it, it having failed to embrace change when the opportunity presented itself.  We ought to be thinking about what we can do to prepare for that eventuality.  I don’t mean in a military sense, since these are things you and I can affect but little, but rather preparing an alternative against the day when it becomes patently clear that the current Israeli establishment cannot go on.

While on Hold at my Broker's . . .

Gentle readers, let me worry about Tzipi next week.  This week I have something more general to get off my chest.

This blog is about Israeli topics, but it’s not inappropriate to comment on wider issues in the news and their possible effect on us.
The idea that that precious creation, the free market, is sustained by government going away is one of the most vicious myths people with libertarian tendencies have propagated.

The American financial meltdown underlines a couple of basic principles: 

1.  Economic survival depends on functioning markets.  The real threat to the world economy is the possibility that people, fearing the risks, will stop buying and selling capital—money, for those who want a simpler word.  That’s like no longer buying and selling oil because you’re afraid of the price, only worse; some things don’t run on oil, but every economic transaction runs on credit, even if you pay with what you think is cash in your pocket.  No capital transactions=everything stops. 

2.  It IS the job of governments to ensure that markets function, because that’s a vital social activity.  One doesn’t want the government actually running them, but it’s got to make sure they run.  That means efficient and effective courts, legal rules, monetary policy, fiscal policy, bankruptcy laws, etc., etc, not to mention judicious regulation.  Yes, regulation.  The idea that that precious creation, the free market, is sustained by government going away is one of the most vicious myths people with libertarian tendencies have propagated.  The free market is a delicate plant that needs a lot of cultivation. 

I’m a conservative, but I don’t think serious conservatives have ever doubted that proper regulation and oversight of markets is critical in order to make markets function well.  Regulation per se isn’t the enemy; there is a proper balance between more and less regulation at which markets function optimally over the long term.  The balance isn’t fixed, but American market regulation has been way below optimal for a while.
Israeli banks will also note serious losses, but Tel Aviv’s Ahad Ha’am Street is not panicking because it Can’t Happen Here. Seriously.

When people who should know better—like American financiers—go on a binge, like a drunk at the wheel, then preserving the free market requires aggressive intervention.  Now is one of those times.  Watch what happens to that drunk when he’s wheeled into the emergency room after the crash.  Watch the surgeon.  Is he engaged in nonintervention?  Is preserving the individual autonomy of the drunk on the gurney his highest concern?  Does he act like he believes that the doctor who operates least, operates best?  If he does, we’ll fire him after the funeral.

If the American economic tailspin deepens that’s going to be bad news for a lot of its allies and trading partners, including Israel.  One Israeli bank has announced that it will write off between 88 and 109 million dollars worth of Lehman Brothers paper that is now worth its weight in Confederate scrip.

That hurts, and other Israeli banks will also note serious losses, but Tel Aviv’s Ahad Ha’am Street is not panicking because it Can’t Happen Here.  Seriously.
An economic crisis in America may leave the next President, whoever he is, with a lot less time and attention to deal with the Middle East Peace Process. It’s an ill wind, they say.

That’s because Israel has first-rate regulators.  Its banks are regulated by the Bank of Israel.  Most Governors of the Bank of Israel during the past 23 years have been stellar, including the incumbent, Stanley Fischer.  Over a decade ago the BOI laid down a hard and fast rule:  No bank can invest more than 20% of its portfolio in property or property derivatives.  Other regulations on fancy derivatives have emerged with time.  The banks have complained.  So have property developers who weep that they’re being “strangled of credit.”  But most ordinary Israelis have little reason to weep over the BOI’s policies.

An economic crisis in America may leave the next President, whoever he is, with a lot less time and attention to deal with the Middle East Peace Process.  It’s an ill wind, they say.