Israel Prepares for New Reality

 

For quite some time Israel has seen the writing on the wall and knew she was not prepared for what lies ahead in her future. She had absorbed influxes of immigrants over the years with varying levels of effectiveness. There was the initial pouring in of European Jews who survived World War II and the European death camps. This is the only influx of immigrants most of the world remembers and thus get the warped opinion that Israel is simply a European colony. The second influx of immigrants laid that misconception aside as false as these were the nearly one million Jews expelled from across the Arab and Muslim worlds from Pakistan to Morocco and Turkey to the Sudan to Yemen and beyond. These Asian, Middle Eastern and North African Jews comprise almost half the population of Israel at the time of the Six Day War in June of 1967. There have been subsequent waves of immigration with the largest single source being Russian Jews many of which spent time in work camps while others simply took advantage of a means to leave the Soviet Union. Other immigrant waves were less in numbers but some of those Israel is most proud to have found the means to settle and incorporate into the population. There were the Ethiopian Jews who have been airlifted from camps in Ethiopia and other Ethiopian Jews have made their way to Israel through airlifts and some by their own volition. There were the Bnei Menashe Jews from India and various other groups of Jews from the world over.

 

Israel is truly a multi-ethnic nation as well as multi-religious with approximately twenty percent of the Israeli population made up of Arabs, both Christian and Muslim, who enjoy the full rights as citizens of the State of Israel. There are Arabs in the Knesset, they are judges, doctors, nurses, teachers and virtually every other profession one can think of and have their own churches and Mosques worshiping as they please. They vote in all elections and are equal citizens in every aspect bar none. There is also a community of Bahá’í who have two shrines in Israel, one near the recognized heritage site outside of Akko on Israel’s northern coast and the other on Mount Carmel in Haifa (see image below). These are the resting places of Baha’u’llah and the Bab, the founders of the Bahá’í Faith. Israel and India are the sole nations with such Bahá’í religious structures and grounds. The Bahá’í Faith was founded in Iran in the mid-19th century in Iran where the religion is all but outlawed today.

 

Bahá’í Gardens in Haifa

 

Things in Israel are about to change with yet two more waves of immigration by Jews to come. The first has already started and will result in the many European Jews and remaining Jews throughout the world with two main exceptions, Canada and the United States, will begin their exodus to Israel though a fair number of European Jews may choose to immigrate to the United States given half an opportunity. The European influx has already begun with France, Sweden, the Ukraine and the Balkan States being the early entries as anti-Semitism grows once again across the continent. Perhaps by now we should call it the Dark Continent of Europe as its history of anti-Semitism dates back to the early Greeks through the Roman and Byzantine Empires and continued through every age of Europe with Jews often keeping a couple of suitcases packed in case the family had no time to pack before leaving. There were those who believed anti-Semitism was a monstrous evil which had been put in its grave but alas that did not even prove true for Europe, let alone the MENA States (Middle East and North Africa). What was disparaging was one particular result of the worldwide anti-Semitism study which found that some seventy percent of those considered anti-Semitic said they have never met a Jew. That has to be one of the most vexing discoveries from the universal study of anti-Semitism in the world today. Still, such does not alter the fact that anti-Semitism is on the rise in Europe and if truth be told, also in the United States. There remains approximately one and a quarter to one and a half million Jews across Europe which is one reason there has been such a concentration on building new apartments within the Green Line and any demographic scientist would point out that Israel does not have sufficient lands to support the entirety of the World Jewish population, though that is a definitive possible future. Where Israel would face incredible difficulties would be should the nearly six and a half million Jews from the Americas (North, South and Central America) move in great numbers to Israel as this would be a doubling of the Israeli population when adding in the coming Europeans whether these Europeans first settle in North America or come straight to Israel. These demographic bombs are part of the reason that Israel must insist that she be granted what was promised by the Oslo Accords and be permitted to annex at a minimum the lands of Area C.

 

That brings us to the election of Donald Trump, a man who might become the most supportive President concerning Israel. It is undeniable that the Republican Platform plainly states that they no longer support the two state solution. President elect Trump has stated he does not see the “settlements” as a problem for making peace. One advantage Donald Trump has is that he fully understands contracts and can read the Oslo Accords and the promises and preconditions placed into that agreement and the related United Nations Resolution and realize at no point does anything demand Israel vacate all of the lands won in their defensive war in 1967 and the Six Day War and 1973 and the Yom Kippur War. It is obvious that Israel having returned the Sinai Peninsula and given up Gaza has already fulfilled any obligation for returning lands and that the main reason there has been no peace reached between Israel and the Arab Palestinians has been the Arab intransigence demanding the total destruction of Israel as a Jewish State, let alone the Jewish State. Between the Republican Platform and statements from Donald Trump an end to this decades’ long nightmare might actually be forthcoming.

 

This likely also explains the opposite voting patterns between American Jews residing in the United States and American Jews residing in Israel. In the United States it was reported that approximately, if not more than, three-quarters of Jews voted for Hillary Clinton while Israeli Jews and Orthodox Jews in the United States voted over three-quarters for Donald Trump. This last fact, especially orthodox Jews, of Jewish support for President elect Trump should dispel the ugly rumor that Donald Trump harbor anti-Semitic feelings. He will be the first American President with Jewish grandchildren as well as a daughter who has converted to Judaism (see images below). Trump’s chosen Middle East and Israel advisors support Israel and the Zionist enterprise of reestablishing the ancient home of the Jewish People with Jerusalem as its political and religious Capital City. Of course everything remains to be seen and what will be borne out after the State department gets their say into the mix will remain to be seen.

Ivanka Trump with Jared Kushner
and daughter Arabella Rose and son Joseph Frederick
and Ivanka with youngest son Theodore James

The final concern which Israel very well may face in the future would be the near unthinkable of anti-Semitism becoming so strongly engaged by populations the world over that Israel becomes the sole refuge from the storm. This would most certainly double the population of Israel and as what starts with the Jews rarely ends there, the potential for certain, if not all, Christians becoming victims of secular purges where any religion outside secular humanism are chased from the world’s societies. There are many who claim that the numbers of Christians would prevent such from ever coming to fruition in the Western world. The problem is looking at the Western world, especially Europe, and one sees a land destitute of Christians. The churches and cathedrals stand with empty pews Sunday after Sunday with some being sold to be torn down, used for Mosques or any other assorted uses. Should Christianity face the same withering assault from secular purists they too might seek refuge where religion still has a home, Israel and certainly areas in South America and Central and Southern Africa and Asia. There can be little denial that much of Western society no longer finds a place for religion and in a couple more generations such a trend to believe in mankind and the governments that man creates could lead to a cleansing of what would be viewed as a backward and suspicious practice with archaic structures and beliefs which would have no place in the perfect world presumably designed by man dedicated to pure intellect. For me, just leave me be and let me know how that works out in the end. I have my suspicions and they do not appear to be pretty, at least not as pretty as the secular humanists like to paint their bleak existence.

Beyond the Cusp

Nation State or International Integration

 

The election this fall is not about Islamic State, al-Qaeda, Taliban, or other security. It will not be about most of the items the media is talking about. What it is about is the economy, jobs, employment, wages, and everything about the economy but not in the obvious ways being discussed. Where will this next Presidency balance? The main item is which way does it benefit the United States most, continuing internationalism or returning to nationalism.

 

The media and most politicians are pushing this global economy, global integration, global cooperation, global solutions while hiding a dirty little secret, they are selling global as the solution while having the United States and the advanced nations pay for everything while equalizing the global playing field, whatever that means. We had a debate last night and we heard more of the same. Clinton claimed more globalism and taxes on the rich and Trump tried and may have meant to sound like Reagan. What they were not telling the people is that Clinton was using the same internationalism where the world matters more than the United States so in order to equalize the world the United States and the advanced world has to bleed to allow the rest of the world to catch up and then all will be well and how wonderful the world can be. Trump is actually claiming that every nation take their own and put them first and attempt to allow the nations who are leading the world to continue to be the leaders and then assist other nations in making gains and follow and give them access to advances as they are able to implement these advances. So, which way will work best. That depends on which nations one decides should be permitted to advance their own interests than to share with the world.

 

Internationalism is wonderful if your country is on the receiving end and not so wonderful if you are being bled to bring the other nations up to their level. The problem with that are many of these nations that are presumably being given advances in order to raise them to the same level are led by dictators who are enriching themselves and not making their nations any closer to the advanced world as that does not directly benefit them. What these dictators are not being intelligent about is that had they advanced their nation they would have enriched themselves in the process. They are not even thinking nationally rather than internationally. Internationally is a recipe for disaster as it inhibits the leaders from leading and demands that the least efficient be granted the largess while the leaders are placed in financial straight-jackets. Internationalists place a stop sign where all nations must park their own business and park their nation by the side of the highway and wait for the rest of the world to reach an equal position. The problem is that many of these nations, which they are waiting for to reach the same point, are themselves broken and not gaining and will never catch up as they are not even making any effort to reach the next level. Internationalism believes that making all nations equal will solve the world’s problems and inequalities, despite it not ever bringing the rest of the nations to first world status.

 

 

World Map with Borders Deemphasized

 

Nationalism is the opposite view which allows each nation to advance at their own rate and still demands that the first world assist the developing nation but does not demand they try to make equal those nations so dysfunctional that they are the closest thing to an economic black hole as can be found. Nationalism rewards each nation for their efforts and allows each nation to gain at their own speed. Allowing the leaders to lead gives other nations a target and proven path they can emulate but without national gain by the wealthiest nations to blaze the trail for the others to follow. The basis for nationalism is it allows each nation to set their own monetary policies and is against unifying monetary policies as such a system is flawed and destroys the lesser productive nations which has been proven by the European Union Euro which has benefited Germany while leaving Greece behind. Nationalism allows each country to do the best for their own people and society. That does not mean that nations which are developing should not be aided and it is in the interest of the most advanced nations to assist those nations who are developing and making the right choices and allowing them to benefit from the experiences of those nations who have traveled those roads before them. But those nations which are completely dysfunctional cannot be assisted as long as their governance is broken and until the nation decides to change their dysfunctions there is no reason to throw good money after bad.

 

Internationalism is a wonderful, feel-good policy filled of kind words and low on actual results. Internationalism demands that all nations be made to give according to their ability and the funds are granted to countries according to their needs. Internationalism demands open borders allowing free immigration with no limits or criminal and other background checks or other limits or restrictions. The policies sound as if they will allow all nations equal opportunities in word while defining this policy as bringing all nations up to the same level and making things fair for all nations. The truth is that this is accomplished by tearing down the greater nations while benefitting some of the least deserving nations who are corrupt criminal enterprises more than they are actual functional nations. Rewarding the worst while impeding the best prevents progress and will constantly restrict progress and the discoveries of new technologies and new systems which would result in assisting those nations seeking a better future to implement the proven methods. To get an idea on the difficulties caused by internationalism there is a perfect example which we can observe, the European Union. How has that equal currency been working for over half of Europe who are not Germany or Britain but are Greece, Spain, Italy and even France and many of the former Warsaw Nations. The common currency has taken the small differences of economic production where the agrarian economies which work on a different production level having to survive with the same policies of the industrial and other highly developed nations.

 

World Map and Relative Wealth of Nations

 

Permitting each nation to perform at their highest level and to their full potential will set target paths for other nation to follow along the proven road set by the highest performing nations. Progress is the fuel that raises all nations in turn. Progress provides the test paths and allows developing nations to benefit from their more advanced nations but only when they decide to advance. No nation could be forced to grow their economy and advance their national infrastructure and when a nation refuses to advance itself then forcing the rest of the world to wait for such a nation to reach an equative level is ridiculous and counterproductive. Internationalism is wonderful idea if it could function as promised. Nationalism is the dirty sounding word which is accused of being selfish because it benefits the wealthy nations and prevents developing nations from ever reaching the top level. The obvious fault is that accusation is completely false. If nationalism prevented up and coming nations from ever becoming the top nations were true then China would have ruled the world, Spain would be a leading nation, Greece would be the top nation in Europe, Egypt would be the most advanced nation in construction and engineering, Persia would still control East-West trade routes, Portugal would be a great power with colonies throughout the world, and the Hittites would be the great power in the norther worlds of Europe through to Turkey. Top nations change and have changed throughout the history of the world while nationalism was the rule of the world. Internationalism has caused massive stagnation as the world as a whole is not permitted to advance because the leading nations are held back presumably for the benefit of the lesser nations. This will always be a supported philosophy as there will always be more developing and undeveloped nations than leading nations as only a few nations will be in the top ten percent, which is why it is referred to as the top ten percent. Internationalism has been working so well over the past twenty to thirty years since 1979 while the rest of history was pathetic and without economic advancement advances by all nations and we are still using salt as a currency, aren’t we? The progress from salt as money to salt as something on almost every dinner table was a result from nationalism, not internationalism.

 

Compare the two with eyes open and the preferable form, open competition or controlled advancement, the choice could provide opportunity or a slow decadence and eventual decimation. Internationalism is welfare on an international scale much in the form of the Soviet Union and the initial Plymouth Rock Colony which would have starved if not for the Native Americans who grew and hunted for surplus for the winter and had sufficient to teach and feed the Pilgrims. After that experience of all get all they need, while most gave nothing in effort, they introduced a new program where each family kept a percentage of what they grew and the remainder was shared, the amounts of food skyrocketed. That is the balance which nationalism can produce, the most advanced achieve at their highest level and those developing nations learn from those leaders and in time some will replace them as they eventually falter. That is the secret of effort based economies, the people or nations at the top changes with time when another makes decisions which make them even more profitable as the other sinks under likely bureaucratic waste. You decide.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

Brexit Opposition Proves There is but One Side

 

Both progressives and conservatives are ridiculing the British for voting to leave the European Union (EU) and reestablish their borders, control of their economy and implementing their own independent immigration law as well as seeking their own trade deals. All of these and more were denied Britain while mired in the EU. There should have been less surprise as the British have for all their history been an independent sort and always a bit apart from the rest of Europe. But there was another item which has become very evident since the Brexit vote, almost everybody was piling on the scorn all claiming that the British had gone absolutely and madly insane voting to leave the bureaucracy that is the EU because the cold and moderating decision making by the overlords in Brussels simply was and always would be superior than anything any elected government can produce because elected governments often change between conservative and progressive thus often working against themselves alternating directions as the governing coalitions change back and forth. This had, for reasons that escape us, brought out condemnations from progressive leftists and right wing conservatives which are an unusual occurrence as these two sides never seem to agree on anything. So, what is at work here to get these presumably opposing sides of the political arena to agree?

 

There has been a theory which is often relegated to the perpetually discontented that there is little difference between the two opposing parties in the United States, the Republicans and the Democrats. The only difference is the speed in which they are driving off the cliff. They claim the left is Thelma and Louise at the end of the movie driving off the cliff with the foot to the floor going as fast as the vehicle will go while the right are driving in a Model A Ford which is only capable of going 35 MPH thus creeps over the cliff, but over the cliff both sides are taking us. We are somewhat less familiar with the particulars of European politics but are willing to bet that Europe too had its perpetual malcontents who feel the same way, just with more parties to blame. Then there is the Israeli politics where if you are happy with the government, just wait a few minutes and it will pass. But the editorial cartoons, editorial articles and even what today passes for news reports all questioned the sanity of the British body politic, or at least those voting on Brexit favorably. No matter what newspaper or news broadcast and the vast majority of talking heads all were scratching their heads and completely gob-smacked over the yay vote on the Brexit referendum. Some even went so far as to question the sanity of David Cameron in keeping his promise to hold a public referendum over remaining in the EU as promised during the campaign. One must respect David Cameron for holding himself to keep what he promised after his party won an outright majority thus not requiring their forming a coalition with another party on who they could claim demanded no referendum as a condition for joining the coalition. Sometimes winning is losing and the Brexit vote was exactly that because the Conservative Party won an outright majority making Cameron Prime Minister and leading to Brexit, forcing Cameron’s resignation.

 

 

All the immediate ramifications aside, the reality is the reactions to Brexit passing has revealed that there are things that the left and the right can come together on, even if they did so independently with their shock, amazement and disapproval of the British decision to leave the EU. Some who came out a little upset had previously denounced the EU bureaucracy as a dictatorial menace threatening all of Europe with its edicts and such and now they were lamenting that Brexit could signal the end of the EU many guessing who would be the next to leave the sinking ship which was obviously the EU. We have our reservations on this automatically leading to the death of the EU as there will always be a remaining core even if France were to depart. Brussels can always count on Germany remaining along with Belgium along with Hungary, Austria, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Poland, Italy, Greece and likely others as other than Britain the other nations mostly retired their currencies in favor of the Euro so leaving the EU would leave them facing a potentially cost prohibitive task of recreating the national currency. The previous paper currency would probably need updating or face an untenable threat of counterfeiting as their older bills probably lack the newer intricacies newer paper money use to prevent easy counterfeiting of their money. Still, if a nation planned their leaving of the EU, plus the fact that exiting the EU can take at least two years, an exit could be managed providing the government was stable enough that they would not need fear too many challenges. But what would possibly be the promise the EU proffered that would be so tempting to both ends of the political spectrum that there would be such agreement?

 

Many people probably have long forgotten one of the selling points originally given for the establishing of the precursor and then finally the making of the EU. The theory was that this was going to be the making of a “United States of Europe” which could rival the United States in economic force and be able to hold their own against the United States and also China on the world market. This was probably wishful thinking but there was a secondary reason spoken of in whispers and hushed tones as if it were some taboo subject, one which must not be permitted the light of day. The EU was to be another unifying economic and governance organization. The United States already represented one of the “great blocs” and the EU would be the next such bloc and it was thought that Russia and China with a few satellites would be a third and this would leave Africa, the Middle East and South America to form one or two other blocs. The oil cartel OPEC came to be seen as one and the South America trading bloc which to a limited extent included India made another loosely grouped bloc. The aim behind the EU was for them to challenge the United States in the coming unifying of these blocs going forward in the next stages where these trading blocs would also begin to take on governing as the EU had with bureaucrats smoothing out any differences allowing for unifications of currencies, trading and governance. Eventually these separate blocs would start to merge into one world-wide trading bloc leading to a unified governing bloc and soon thereafter a world body of bureaucrats who arranged trading formalities and mechanisms which also controlled a unified currency and would supersede the individual government through holding a veto power over legislations and the first task the bureaucrats would face would be unifying the legal systems and laws beginning with trade laws, tariffs and expand from there. The eventual aim was to be that new world order which would be called anything other than new world order, but it would be a world government which would be made up of experts and specialists who would be given the powers and other needful supervisory roles which would grow until the system was inescapable and all national borders would slowly be erased and the world would be unified into one super-governance.

 

There would be a few nations who would require additional pressures in order to force them into the mold of a singular ruling bureaucracy. The United States, Canada and originally, and once again, Britain would be the potential standouts whose strong self-defining histories would make incorporating them into such a system would present special problems. The idea that the Islamic world was not also viewed as a potential set of difficulties is another overlooked problem. Then there was one other nation that from all the lists and presumed alliances and the institutions which were to be formed and slowly merged all left out one nation. They were most definitely refused an alliance in the Middle East, Europe would not offer them a hand, they were nowhere near Asia and the United States had more often than not been in an adversarial role despite accusations of the United States being all but controlled by this nation and Africa and South America likely have no intention of including them. That troublesome country would be Israel. Europe has admitted Israel into projects if Israel adds far more than anyone could argue that they were not an asset to the aims, and thus Israel is accepted in order to advance European interests. With Brexit the world has thankfully taken a giant step back from bureaucratic Gehenna and potential liberty and freedom have taken a step towards safekeeping into the future.

 

Beyond the Cusp