The Logical Inconsistencies of Antisemites and Israel Bashers

Like any other extremists, antisemites and Israel bashers (and really, I can stop pretending there is any distinction there) have an extraordinary capacity for doublethink.  Doublethink was George Orwell's term for happily believing who mutually contradictory things at the same time.  Lately I've been pondering some of these things that antisemites and derangers believe and claim in tandem, which elementary logic dictates cannot be true in combination.

Not that logical consistency is a hallmark of antisemites and Israel bashers, but consider:

1) Jews aren't a people / Israel is racist

Denial of Jewish peoplehood is a staple of antisemites and Israel bashers.  We see it constantly on internet forums such as Daily Kos, HuffPo, and elsewhere that antisemites congregate in any numbers.  The fact that Jews are a people is supported by every shred of genetic and historical evidence.  But denial of such is so prevalent that it is functionally the "gateway" opinion to full fledged antisemitism.  If there is one thing in this world that David Duke, Hamas, and the Green Party of Australia agree on, it is that Jews are not a people.

Which is quite puzzling considering that often the very next thing out of their mouths is that Israel - sometimes its practices but usually its very existence - is "racist."  Such a charge can only mean that Israel advantages one ethnic group or race over others.

So if Jews aren't a people, then what ethnic group or race is allegedly "racist" Israel advantaging over others?  Am I supposed to believe that Israel just assembled a random collection of unrelated Khazars, Yemenis, and Ethiopians and decided to grant them privileged group status?  Ridiculous.

At this point Israel derangers might think they have an out by claiming that "racist" can mean favoring a particular religion over another, and while Jews are not a people in their minds they are a religion.  However such a dodge can be taken down trivially:  Israel is full of secular and atheist Jews who do not believe in Judaism the religion at all.  Even the great deranger "right wing" boogeyman Avigdor Lieberman is a secular atheist, and in fact has a political party based on that position.  And yet in spite of not being adherents of Judaism, these people are supposedly part of the advantaged segment of Israeli society.  Can you think of any theocracy or religious based state in the world where atheists are included in the privileged class?  Of course not.

The only way Israel can be "racist" is if Jews are a people or a race.

Now of course, I believe that Jews are a people and that Israel is not racist, which is logically consistent if one considers Israel to be a nation-state like most in the Old World, no different than Italy or Greece in that regard.  But for both of those to be untrue simultaneously is a logical impossibility.

2) Israel is a military juggernaut / Israel is a paper tiger utterly dependent on the USA

This one just makes me laugh.  In one breath we are regaled with all of the terrible sins of Israel's seemingly all-powerful endlessly ass kicking military - how they bomb innocent Gazans to smithereens, pre-emptively attack everyone under the sun, and even have nuclear weapons.  Not to mention that they militarily conquered and occupied all of this land in 1967.  Then in the next breath we are told how Israel would be nothing without America and always gets America to "do its fighting for it".  The later obviously ignores the many times that Israel achieved stunning military victory against much larger powerful neighbors with no outside help, such as in the 1948 war, the Six Day War, and so on, but whatever.

So which one is it, bashers?  Cuz it obviously can't be both.

3) Jews are an alien presence in Eretz Israel / The Dome of the Rock is on the site of The Temple

The later is not generally in the circle of concern of Western antisemites, but their Islamist allies are fond of it.

But let's look at the former first.  We constantly hear from the likes of Hamas - and misguided Western useful idiots (but interestingly not usually right wing antisemites) - that Jews are a foreign presence and don't belong in Israel, and will have to return to their "countries of origin."  This is fairly representative of Islamist (and even some secular Arab) extremist attitudes toward Israelis.

Yet somehow they have no problem maintaining that the Temple Mount where the Dome of the Rock sits is the genuine site of the ancient Israelite temples, not to mention many other episodes mentioned in The Bible.  This is just absolutely inconsistent with the position that Jews are usurpers living in Israel, since all of these episodes are obviously associated with Jews.  But hey, as we are seeing, consistency is not their strong suit.

4) The Green Line is an international border / Israel is not recognized as a state

Whatever your feelings about the Israeli occupation of the West Bank, it is clear that anti-Israel rhetoric constantly appeals to the pre-1967 Green Line as an international border between two polities which was violated and then occupied.  We are told that Israel must evacuate its illegal settlements from beyond the Green Line, as this is conquered land, and return everyone to behind the line.  Fair enough, as far as it goes.

But for the Green Line to actually demarcate one state from another, that would necessarily mean that there was a state on both sides.  However, until 1979 no Arab state recognized Israel as a state within any borders, the Green Line or otherwise.  No diplomatic relations, no name on maps, nothing.  The armistice that ended the 1948 war which established the Green Line in the first place, on Arab insistence, made it clear that the Green Line was only a cease fire line, and did not imply any sort of permanent border.

Even today, only two Arab states, Egypt and Jordan, recognize Israel as a state.  For the rest, and for all of their sympathizers in the West, since Israel isn't a state, how can the Green Line have any significance?  Logically, there should be no difference between one side of the Green Line and the other.

(on the last point, we know this is what they truly believe, but they rarely come out and say it directly to a Western audience)

5) Israel is a theocracy / Israel promotes homosexuality and promiscuity

Israel bashers like the Iranian regime and others in the Middle East frequently attribute the presence of sexuality and other libertine behaviors that they don't like to the nefarious influence of Israel.  Big, bad, sinful, satanic, atheist Israel.

And yet we are regaled all the time, by their sympathizers in the West, with charges that Israel is a theocracy or religious-based state, largely from people who don't or can't grasp the concept of Jewish peoplehood.

So which is it?  Is Israel a theocracy or a decadent secular Sodom.  Cuz logically it can't be both!


--------------

So there you have it, a sampling of idiotic, inconsistent doublethink when it comes to Israel.  It is strange because there is plenty of ammo if derangers wanted to rhetorically assault Israel, which, while being incorrect and misleading, at least would not be inherently logically inconsistent.  All they would have to do is pick one item from each of the pairs I mentioned and disregard the other.  They would be wrong, but at least they would be consistent.
 
But they can't even do that.  Sometimes even the most jaded among us can be surprised by the depths of mental laxity some people are capable of.

As Yom Kippur approaches - Speak out against Pamela Gellers Racist Ad

Cross-Posted at The Progressive Zionist.

So as the day winds out and it is time for me to prepare for Yom Kippur, I want to use this time prior to my reflection to speak out against what I consider outright racism. Even though I am Pro-Israel and I strongly identify as a Zionist... I don't need "friends" like this on my side. I strongly believe that using hate to make your case de-legitimizes the message that you want to send in every case. Just as I call out anti-Semitic commentary and behavior on the part of those I disagree with, I will call out racism from my own corner and let them know that they are not welcome "on my half of the court".

Anyway, vile racist and all around crazyperson Pamela Geller decided to pay for a run a series of Racist ads in New York focused around the Mass Transit system. Here is that ad:



Now credit to the New York Transit Authority... they did try to stop these ads, but lost in court. Anyway these ads have been termed Islamophobic and racist. Geller's defenders have this to say (I won't link to this hateful site):

And just who is it that is defined as "savage"? Jihadis, that's who. You know, the same people who just slaughtered four American diplomats in Libya. Geller is absolutely correct. Jihadis are savages. They are people who are willing to use extreme violence in order to promote the Sharia, the genocide of the Jews, the murder of Gay people, and the oppression of women. Sounds pretty savage to me.

You know who the ad does not refer to?

Muslims.

It is the people who insist that the advertisement is "Islamophobic" who are conflating savage Jihadis with ordinary Muslims.  And that, my friends, truly is racism.  When they claim that this advertisement is "Islamophobic" the clear implication is that Muslims, in general, are Jihadis.

 They aren't.

In this instance it is not Geller who is being racist, but those who object to the advertisement on grounds of racism who are being racist.

So... Gellers defenders are too ashamed of their own racism to admit what they really believe and they feel the need to say that those objecting to her vile racism are really the true racists.

 Only thing is they are contradicted by Pamela Geller herself. She is honest in her hatred (which is not a positive btw). Here is how she uses the term "Jihad", From the SPLC

"Hussein [meaning President Obama] is a muhammadan. He's not insane … he wants jihad to win."
— Pam Geller, AtlasShrugs.com, April 11, 2010

and...

"Islam is not a race. This is an ideology. This is an extreme ideology, the most radical and extreme ideology on the face of the earth."
— Pam Geller On Fox Business' "Follow the Money," March 10, 2011

or this:

"I don't think that many westernized Muslims know when they pray five times a day that they're cursing Christians and Jews five times a day. … I believe in the idea of a moderate Muslim. I do not believe in the idea of a moderate Islam."
— Pam Geller, The New York Times, Oct. 8, 2010

Apparently according to Geller followers of Islam (better known as Muslims) are now part of the Jihad including President Obama. So actually though her batshit insane defenders say she is not talking about Muslims... as the quote above shows, she most certainly is talking about Muslims. I mean the woman mentions that the simple act of prayer is an insult to Christians and Jews. 

Just to be clear on what we are dealing with here. This "person" claims that Anders Brevik (the man who murdered 77 Norwegians - mostly teens) was:

Geller couldn’t help displaying some sympathy for Breivik’s actions against the young multiculturalists. “Breivik,” she wrote, “was targeting the future leaders of the party responsible for flooding Norway with Muslims.”

and this:

Geller uses her website to publish her most revolting insults of Muslims: She posted (and later removed) a video implying that Muslims practiced bestiality with goats and a cartoon depicting the Muslim prophet Mohammad with a pig's face (observant Muslims do not eat pork). Geller also has denied the genocide of Bosnian Muslims by Serbian forces in Srebrenica – calling it the "Srebrenica Genocide Myth," even though the Serbian government itself issued a state apology for the massacre. She wrote, "Westerners are admitting to their role in something that didn't happen, and digging their own graves."

And the liars that support her think she is merely talking about a small subset of Muslims. 

Well, speaking as a Pro-Israel partisan - WE don't need these kinds of friends and their lies and poisonous racism. I can make my arguments just fine without this bullshit. For those that support this, you should be ashamed and for those that are Jewish, I hope that you will use the time of reflection that Yom Kippur offers to look deep within yourself and see just how awful this is.

I urge people to make their voices heard regarding this hateful ad and the person behind it. Say "NO" to racism and hatred on all sides. People can disagree, but, when you make alliances with racists you are no better than the trash you associate with no matter what cause you may support.

I just wanted to say something before I begin my personal reflection and prayers for forgiveness. I cannot stand to let this go by without raising my voice of objection.

Republicans Play Racist Dual Loyalty Card - A personal perspective

This has been a big week for news concerning President Obama, Israel and the Middle East in general. A lot of what happens really bothers me as a Jewish American and in particular as a Jewish American who supports President Obama. SO... let's go down the list....

1. The Republicans play the dual loyalty card.... For anyone not familiar with the "dual loyalty" card it is an old anti-Semitic meme that Jewish citizens of a given nation are more loyal to their fellow Jews or to Israel than they are to their own nation. This used to be a Right Wing meme but it has recently also been co-opted for use by the far left looking to justify their bigotry. Anyway... the latest ad that the Republicans are running in Florida and swing states with large blocs of Jewish voters is the following:

http://youtu.be/rJdH-PgmeK8

This ad is a failure on a number of levels. First, it presents a message from Benjamin Netanyahu, Prime Minister of Israel seemingly endorsing Mitt Romney's candidacy. Now while it is true that Netanyahu has been rumored privately to be supporting Romney this ad forced him to distance himself from that position. How? Well the Prime Minister does not want to be seen as meddling in American politics as this would be something that could negatively affect American-Israeli relations should President Obama win re-election.
Netanyahu or the Israelis were never told about this ad nor did they endorse it. So Secure America Now ran this but didn't understand that the PM was going to disavow the ad. Rather than let what was going to be a silent endorsement these morons forced the Israeli leader to say the following:

"Asked by Meet The Press moderator David Gregory on Sunday if he thought "Governor Mitt Romney as President Romney make Israel safer," Netanyahu demurred.

I'm not going to be drawn into the American election. And what's guiding my statements is not the American political calendar, but the Iranian nuclear calendar," the Israeli leader replied. "I'm talking to [President Obama]. I just talked to him the other day. We are in close consultation. We're trying to prevent that. It's really not a partisan issue. It's a policy issue, not a partisan issue."

Oh well, there goes that... Hoping for a ringing endorsement they got instead a complete non-endorsement under the Headline: "Netanyahu: I'm Not Backing Romney".

BUT more than that they and unfortunately their Jewish Supporters in the RJC (Republican Jewish Coalition) play to the old anti-Semitic meme of "dual loyalty" where they make the assumption that American Jews will vote for Mitt Romney simply because they think that he will bomb Iran right away (something he has said he wouldn't do) at the behest of Israel. Of course this assumes that Jewish voters (traditionally a liberal voting bloc) would simply forget about things that are important to America like healthcare, the social safety net, the state of American education, the environment, civil liberties, voting rights and other issues and simply go all in for Romney because he has the support of Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu.

All this Jewish American (and strong Zionist) voter is can say is "F-U... RJC and Secure America Now. How do I say that.... Well first of all, F-U for thinking I care what Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu says more than I care about my fellow Americans. Second, F-U for even assuming that the President who has been termed an "exceptional friend to Israel" by Israeli President Peres AND Israeli Defense Minister Barak would after years and years of support would let Israel down. Just because the President doesn't buy the Right Wing Israeli / American line on the Middle East does not mean he is not a friend to Israel.

But this assumption that I would vote solely based on this line by the Israeli and American Hard Right is disgusting. The fact that Republicans got some fellow Jews to buy into this dual loyalty is even more disgusting. It just pisses me off. My Israeli friends (and I have a number of them) can't understand why anyone would vote for the interests of another country over their own. I agree with them. How they can think that this would work is beyond me particularly when all polls show that only 15% of Jewish voters list American - Israeli relations as Prime voting factors in their voting preferences (6% for prime factor and 9% for second to the top factor).

But not to be outdone, the wingnuts set up failure #2 in trying to create an incident portraying President Obama "snubbing" or "standing up to" Benjamin Netanyahu with a meeting regarding the U.N. Of course the fact that the Netanyahu Government never asked for a Washington (an official meeting) with the President shouldn't get in their way. Nor should the fact that they were on different schedules. Forget that the President is campaigning for re-election against forces that want to take the country and destroy all of the social progress we have made over the last 170 years and he needs to speak to the American people and can through popular venues. OH NO... he should have meeting number 3214 (snark) with PM Netanyahu so they can once again issue a rejection of Iranian nuke policy.

So am I as a Jewish American voter to now say... "Well the President, who constantly talks to Prime Minister Netanyahu, needs to sit down to say exactly the same thing as he has said a hundred other times rather than talk to the people of America thru some popular venues". Seriously? The President and PM spoke on the phone for an hour. The President has constantly stood by Israeli security through both word and deed. Not only that but, he plans (according to Jay Carney's press brief today) to present a serious warning to Iran about Nukes.

The fact is that a State visit was not asked for and that President Obama IS NOT at the beck and call of the Prime Minister of Israel (who did not demand that of him in the first place) or Republican claims that Jewish voters are more concerned with Israel than anything else. He neither "stood up to" nor "snubbed" Netanyahu, he other things planned at the time.

Again Republicans and their RJC lunatics buy into the fact that Jewish voters are more concerned with Israel than they are with their own country. And with these arguments they fail on two levels. The first and foremost is that they promote the racist meme that Jews are somehow more loyal to Israel than America. The second is that they assume in the first place that the hard line Rightist plans for Israel are the only way to even be Pro-Israel.

While this pisses me off to a great degree, I am heartened by the fact that as of the latest polls 70% of American Jewish voters are supporting President Obama. I have confidence that as the rolling train wreck better known as the Romney campaign rolls on AND as this campaign continues to alienate everyone with it's destructive kowtow to the Hard Right and their Randian fantasy of a "free for all" society, that this number will grow.

My advice to the Republicans and their lunatic fringe supporters... Try assuming that we as American - Jewish Voters vote American values first. Voting to deny American women fair pay, voting to deny children quality education, voting to deny Gays and Lesbians equal rights, voting strip the EPA of any power, voting to deny millions of Seniors a safety net for their old age, and voting to deny Americans health care are all against the interests of America. You want our vote. Assume we pay attention to making our country better.

CNN: Girls Beat Up Iran Cleric Over Dress Code

POSTED BY IAN REIFOWITZ at DAILY KOS

I have to say that that's a headline I didn't expect to see featured at CNN this morning, but there it was.
The article gives the details, but the headline tells the story.

They may be a far cry from their Western counterparts fighting for the acceptance to breast-feed -- or go topless -- in public, but two girls clobbered a cleric recently in a small town in Iran when he admonished one of them to cover herself more completely.

The article describes how the cleric approached the two women in the town of Shahmirzad and, when he saw that they were not dressed modestly enough, told them to "cover up."

The woman responded by telling him to cover his eyes, which the cleric described as "very insulting to me." When asked her again to cover up, and to watch her mouth, she and her friend began, well, pummeling him. The cleric spent three days in the hospital and was released.

The closing paragraph contains a pun that was new to me, and so I'll share it here:

The girls may have put the "jab" into "hijab," but fighting with morality police or private individuals telling women to cover up is rare in small towns. It's more common in larger cities, where women are more likely to take a stand.

I do not advocate violence, unless one is being directly threatened and must respond violently to defend oneself of course. However, I can't help but applaud people standing up for freedom and against oppression.

And how can you not like the idea of putting the "jab" into "hijab"? That's inspired writing, folks.

Israel: The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly

I'm back from my long overdue trip to Israel.  It was easily the most fascinating two weeks of my life, made possible, I now know, because Israel is the most fascinating country - at least the most fascinating per unit area - in the world.

I saw, I am proud to say, basically the entire country and now there are faces and places to so many of the things that were previously just concepts in my mind.  I saw it all, from Acre to Eilat, from Tel Aviv to Mea Shaarin, from the Dead Sea to the Golan Heights, from Jews to Arabs to Bedouin to Circassians, from secular to fundamentalist - from 2000 BC to the 21st century.

I am still processing everything I took in, and I think I will be for weeks.  Here, though, is what I can conclude so far about this wonderful, enigmatic, magical, controversial land, that has haunted my imagination for so long:

The Good:

The first thing to say in praise of Israel is the most obvious, so obvious, in fact, that we sometimes forget it:  Israel is the Jewish state!  After 2000 years the Jewish people have a nation-state, and it is a strong, prosperous, vital, gorgeous one at that!

It is the one nation in the world where Jewish people are a majority, and where Jewish culture and the Hebrew language have their full expression.  When the original Zionists came up with the idea of a reborn Jewish modern nation state not so much more than 100 years ago, it would have been hard to imagine their project would be as successful as Israel has actually become.

In spite of incredible obstacles that it has had to face, from genocidal neighbors to a tiny crowded space, Israel prospers as the home of 6 million Jewish people and 2 million others, whose origins are from all over the world, who come in all shades, and all opinions.

The Jewish state is home to some of the finest educational and scientific institutions in the world, a top-rate military, a robust parliamentary democracy, a vibrant culture with contributions from the four corners of the Earth, and one of the best economies around. 

In Israel, one can see Jewish people performing every role in society.  Yes, they are the professors and the artists, the doctors and the politicians, but they are also the soldiers, the policemen, the taxi drivers, the models, the chefs, the waiters, and everything else.  Jewish people, so long without a homeland, now have a state of their own just like other peoples.  This alone is an amazing accomplishment.

As the Jewish state, Israel is fascinatingly diverse.  In its tiny area you can find every color of person, and every possible opinion.  There are secular leftists, secular nationalists, religious nationalists, religious non-nationalists, Arab Muslims, Arab Christians, Druze, Circassians, Armenians, foreign priests, and thousands of workers from Africa and Asia, all in the same space.

  

  

This is why I just have to roll my eyes when I see bashers refer to Israel and "Apartheid", or frame the Arab-Israeli conflict as something involving white people on one side and brown people on the other side.  In reality, Israel is the opposite of Apartheid.  All of these different groups - many of which don't get along - nonetheless inhabit the exact same space, shop in the same stores, drive on the same packed roads, and sit at the same beaches, one on top of another in one of the smallest, most densely populated countries in the world.  And both Jews and Arabs come in a variety of colors.  This is one of those things where those who criticize Israel really need to perform a reality check - go there themselves or listen to people who have.  

Moving on, Israel is a wonderfully cultured society.  The museums and universities are top notch.  Israel has the best universities in the world outside of North America, Europe, and Japan, and it shows.  Easily half the population is fluent in English, and another quarter could get by.  It is perhaps the most English-proficient non-Anglophone country in the world.  This country has its intellectual and educational act together.

 

It is also remarkable that Israel has achieved what it has being in the neighborhood that it is.  It felt to surreal to be, for instance, when I was in the Golan Heights, about 10 miles from a literal civil war across the border in Syria, and yet there I was driving on a normal nice road surrounded by tour buses.  Or in Eilat, where you can be drinking a beer surrounded by half naked people, and literally right across the bay you can see Saudi Arabia. 

And I have to mention that the hummus is really good.  They do a version that for some reason is not available anywhere else I've been, called hummus masabacha.  It is served warm, and is not blended smooth but rather has whole chick peas in tahini, with the a lemon and garlic sauce on the side, along with a raw onion.  

The Bad:

This is the point where most people of my political bent would move on from all of those accomplishments to say "yeah but, the occupation..."   

But I'm not going to do that.  I'm not going to do that because, for one thing, I did not venture very far into the West Bank  - although I did travel through East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights, but, more importantly, because the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict is so complicated and nuanced that I cannot simply just say "occupation bad."  The Israeli occupation of the West Bank, as well as the Golan and East Jerusalem, have to be understood in the context of the entire conflict, such as absolutely genocidal intent of Israel's neighbors against it from the very start, and the way that, before 1967, every single Jew living in these areas that Israel now controls was kicked out or killed (now that's Apartheid).  Since this is primarily a report of my observations on the ground there, I'll leave it at that.  

The famous separation barrier in the distance.  Every other country gets to put a fence along its border without complaints.

Instead, I'm going to report on the thing that I think has the potential to truly destroy Israeli society and everything that has been accomplished:  The rise of the Haredim.

The Haredim are the extremely religious Jews, often called "ultra-orthodox".  As with everything else in Israel, there is much nuance in the situation, and there are many groups of Haredim all with different attitudes and positions.  So, anything I could say does not apply to all of them.  

But, that having been said, in general, a large number of the Haredim are religious extremists, and don't contribute to society by having careers, serving in the army, paying taxes, or otherwise engaging with the state or the economy. Many of them live in their own towns and neighborhoods, and have their own religious school systems.  

The Haredim tend to wear black coats and often black hats, in the manner of stereotypical religious Jews, and should not be confused with the religious nationalists, who also have extremist elements but are a different segment of Israeli society.

I walked through the most notorious, extremist Haredi neighborhood, Jerusalem's Mea Shaarim, and it was the stuff of nightmares.  It resembled the most disgusting third world hovel, with trash piled everywhere, the streets unpaved, a cacophony children screaming, and the putrid smell of rot and too many people filling the air.  It was truly, truly disgraceful.

There was a sign that boasted of "saving Jewish children from foreign education."  These people are certainly ignoring a very crucial part of Jewish culture and heritage if they think that anyone needs to be "saved" from education.

At the extreme end of their spectrum, some Haredim, such as the Satmar and Nuturei Karta Hasidic Jews, are actually opposed to the state of Israel itself.  They view Zionism as incompatible with their religion, which  presumably mandates that Jews should always be in danger.  

Perhaps the most offensive sign that has ever existed.  Do they really think that adding the Arabic text at the bottom is helping their credibility?

These are the most extreme examples, but there is certainly a disconnect between Haredim and the mainstream of Israeli and Jewish society.  The mainstream participates in one of the most advanced economies in the world, serves in the army, and generally exists within larger Western Civilization.  The Haredim, by and large, do not.  

When the state of Israel was founded, in a bargain struck between the secular leadership and the religious sector, there were around 400 individuals who were granted exemptions from military service and stipends in order to undertake religious study.  Big mistake, because 400 quickly turned into tens of thousands.

Currently, the Haredim are about 7% of the Israeli population.  However, in common with religious fundamentalists of many stripes, they have absolutely huge families, and they start them young.  It is not rare for a Haredi family to have 14 children, while secular Jewish Israelis often have two or three.

The long-term demographic forecast, therefore, is not good.  Reasonable predictions, for instance, say that by the year 2050 Israeli society will be roughly divided into thirds: One third Arab, one third Haredi, and one third secular and religious nationalist Jews.  That means that only one third of society will be participating in the economic and political mainstream - getting educations, having professions, serving in the army, shouldering the tax burden, and so on.  

That is a recipe for societal decay and collapse.  Everything I talked about above, how Israel is the Jewish state, a nation-state of the Jewish people but like any other, and how it has a successful economy, wonderful institutions, and a great culture, will be in jeopardy.  There is even the possibility of theocracy, with so much potential political power wielded by a large, fundamentalist segment.  

It seems to me to be an almost intractable problem.  What can be done about such unreasonable birth rates?    Clearly, the Haredim - and Arabs - need to be more integrated into the mainstream of Israeli society, and there needs to be a reform of the state benefits system so that these groups have to work in the real economy.  That is just at a minimum, and even that may be hard to accomplish given political forces.  

I tried to ask people about this issue, and they tended to shrug it off, usually after expressing some disdain for those Haredim who don't have jobs and live off state benefits.  But there didn't seem to be many answers.  For one thing, it is easy to ignore at the present, because a secular Israeli can live his or her life where the skirts are short and the food is good, and there are so many more immediate threats such as Iran.  A postdoc at Hebrew University told me that everyone knows it is a huge problem, but they try not to think about it.  

I certainly don't have any answers, and I hope someone is working on it, but it seems to be that in 40 years Israeli society will likely be radically different than it is today, and probably not for the better.

The Ugly:

Israel is not only incredible history, nature, and beautiful sunbathing people.   And it is not only looming demographic doom.

There is also a more mundane, ugly side that I saw, made possible since my goal was to see everything and all sides.  To me, the ugly basically consists of 1) poor urban planning, 2) trash, and 3) shameless commerce.

Let's start with the poor urban planning.  Outside of the center of major cities, Israel has adopted a haphazard development model, where towns and suburbs spring up out of the blue with little regard for quality of life or aesthetics.

The basic town or suburb consists of a cluster of high rise residential buildings, separated by large fields from the next town or cluster.  There seems to be little provision for commercial areas in these developments, which end up being concentrated at road intersections, and little provision for public transportation, which leads to a high density of cars.  It is like a high density version of American suburbia.

Typical residential cluster.  In any given location you may see several of these in different directions.

No stores, or places to walk

 The architecture in these blocks is not very appealing.  For instance, developers seem enamored of a style of high rises connected by high bridges of apartments, which are very bizarre looking.

And they are building them everywhere.  One consequence of the rapidly expanding population is the need for ever more housing.  Unfortunately, the development style does not seem to be changing.

 Moving on, Israel has a big problem with litter.  It is everywhere.

And not just trash, but dog crap too.  It seems like everyone owns a dog there.  And if there are two things in this world that should not be combined, it is dog ownership and small apartment living.  Nonetheless, Israelis love their dogs, and don't seem to want to clean up after them.

Lastly, I'd like to complain about the excess of stores selling crap to tourists.  It is really too much.

Equal opportunity tourist fleecing, regardless of ideology

Changing your money?  Why not get a tattoo while you're at it?

Need a Houston Astros logo kippah?

When I think of Jerusalem's ancient streets,. I think of Garfield the cat.

Some shirts in here depict Obama as a caricature of a Jew, others as a caricature of a Muslim.

So there it is, the good, the bad, and the ugly.  It is clear and obvious that Israel is not what its detractors usually say it is.  It is something else entirely, something endlessly fascinating, exotic, and yet familiar.  It has profound challenges, none greater, in my opinion, than the demographic one posed by the ultra-religious.  Time will tell if the Jewish state will overcome this obstacle like it has so many others.

Breaking: President Obama Gains with Jewish Voters - Now at 70%

While perusing stories over at Haaretz (an Israeli Daily) I came across this happy news:

According to the polling data taken between July 1 and September 10th, 70 percent of registered Jewish voters plan to vote for President Obama. Only 25 percent of voters stated they were planning to vote for Mitt Romney, with 5 percent undecided. These results indicate a decline from earlier this spring, when 64 percent of registered Jewish voters said they would vote for Obama and 29 percent said they would support his Republican contender

and at Buzzfeed:

President Barack Obama is closing extending his lead with Jewish voters, leading among registered voters 70-25 percent according to unreleased Gallup daily tracking poll data . The data, obtained through a Democratic source, shows Obama up from leading 64-29 in polling this spring — and on par with his 2008 performance at this point when he led 69-25 over John McCain in Gallup polling. The data is drawn from tracking polls taken between July 1 and September 10th.

Despite a heated debate on Israel, most Jewish voters are Democrats and align closely with the Democratic Party on domestic issues from abortion to taxes and spending, and Republicans have tried without success for years to pry the group away from the Democratic Party. The Israel debate, meanwhile, often aims at a broad national audience that sees Israel as an ally, rather than specifically at American Jews.

As the Haaretz article goes on to state...

The rise in Jewish support for Obama, seems to indicate that the American Jews are less concerned with Israel than might be thought as accusations Romney has been making charging Obama with "throwing allies like Israel under the bus," and with failure in dealing with Iran's nuclear program don't seem to be helping garner Jewish support for the Republican candidate.

Two things:

The first is that first and foremost American Jews are American citizens. We vote for things that are in the interests of America. A more fair tax system, better education, better infrastructure, a better environment, a social safety net that works are in the interests of all Americans Jewish or otherwise. Also, the Presidents support for the Jewish community here as well as in Israel has been exemplary.

Second, the assumption that only the Hard Right in Israel represents Jewish interests in the U.S. is nonsense. Thinking that not agreeing to the YESHA policy and the concept of an Israeli One State solution is somehow against Israel is complete and utter bullshit. Just because President Obama doesn't subscribe to that doesn't mean he is "rolling Israel under the bus", it means that he (and most American and Israeli Jews) don't buy into a meme promoted by right wingers - and that is pretty much it.

The Republicans and their supporters just don't get this. At worst they assume (like many on the Far-Left as well) that Jewish Americans hold some sort of loyalty to Israel above all else and vote only that way. AND it is true that there are a small minority of people that do feel this way, but they are only a small minority. I personally resent this implication.

Well here is some cold hard advice. We are Americans, not Israelis and while we overwhelmingly support (and I think love) Israel and it's people we vote on issues that primarily serve Americans (both Jewish and non-Jewish). This poll and others like it show that the Israeli Right and Christian Zionists ARE not speaking in American Jewish interests but rather their own.

Until the Republicans can realize that their reactionary and heartless economic, social, and destructive environmental policy positions are at odds with American Jewish voters, they will never, ever, ever earn our votes.

Shabbat Shalom and Shana Tova!

Please Hold with the Victory Dance - GOTV!

Okay, I get that we are all very excited about the President's (and Democratic) bounce after a wonderful convention. Moreover, it's amazing that Mitt Romney and fellow Republicans continue to shoot themselves in the foot while attempting to stuff both feet into their mouth at the same time.

SO... it's not hard to imagine that people would be excited to get out and say - "Well we have this one, now let's go pile-on for the victory". I get that. To be honest, I like that feeling. I enjoy feeling like we are in a good place and that we will see not only a victory for President Obama but for a Democratic Hold on the Senate and a possible recapture of the House (though I personally think that's unlikely).

Now I realize there is some truth to the phrase "Everyone Likes a Winner". I get that too. But with that confidence comes a certain amount of complacency. The election is still a little less than two months away (a lifetime in Presidential politics). And while we are leading this thing at this point, we need to be mindful that we need to continue to understand that this is and will be a "dog fight" until the end.

Not to be a "downer" but... I decided to take a look at the last three elections to see where candidates were in September.

In 2000, Newsweek was predicting an Eight point blowout for Al Gore while CNN had Bush up by 1% and the WaPo had both candidates even. We all know what happened in 2000 where the election was stolen, however we also know that this shouldn't have even come down to this in the first place.

In 2004, RCP had then President Bush with a 6.3% lead on this date in 2004. The Final election results were Bush by 2.4% (with some questions about what went down in Ohio - but that is not for this diary).
In 2008, on this date, John McCain led by 2.1% in composite polling and of course we all know what happened following the crash in the economy.

As of today, composites show the President leading by 3.6 points (with Rasmussen being the one poll that has Mitt Romney ahead by One point).

Anyway, as we can see nothing is particularly reliable at this point, and if Mitt Romney could ever stop making mistakes (which may not be possible) he could have a chance to change the dynamics of the race. Further, he has a base which WILL turn out for him even if they thought a walnut would do a better job. One Right wing nutjob was quoted as saying that he would rather vote for a Pastrami and Cheese sandwich than vote for the President's re-election (I have heard variations on this theme from nutters throughout various in person and social media conversations).

This election is going to be about our turnout. WE need to get people out and registered and voting. A Republican victory for our country would be a disaster for everyone. This is no time to be crowing about what we have. This is a time to be pushing, and pushing hard for people to GOTV.

We cannot afford complacency. We cannot afford to be self-satisfied. What we need is a call to the electorate to reject the attempted Republican push to bring us back to 1845, and rather we need to keep moving forward.

I think it is too early to start crowing about what we see as a "cakewalk". It is. We can't win if we don't get people to the polls. We can't win if people don't vote. With all the attempts at voter suppression as well as other shenanigans the Republicans will try to pull, we cannot take anything for granted.

SO, please.... I ask that rather than congratulate ourselves for a race won, we push and push to make sure that we do win it. We will only push if we have a sense of urgency and we will only have a sense of urgency if we believe we need to have one. Please volunteer, donate, put up a lawn sign but do something... to help GOTV.

Obama's America vs. Romney-Ryan-Rand's America: Citizenship vs. Selfishness

FROM IAN REIFOWITZ AT DAILY KOS

I know President Obama's acceptance speech was a week ago. I've been thinking since then about how it fits into both the broader, philosophical debate over the role of government, and into his larger worldview expressed over a career. The most important thing the President did in Charlotte was offer a specific definition of what it means to be an American. That definition centered on one word:

Citizenship

But we also believe in something called citizenship – a word at the very heart of our founding, at the very essence of our democracy; the idea that this country only works when we accept certain obligations to one another, and to future generations.

Obama argued that citizenship – being an American – means being profoundly connected to every other American alive today, as well as to those who came before us and those not yet born. This is what he means when he speaks, as he has over and over again through the years, about us being "one American family." In Charlotte, the President also described how Americans have “responsibilities as well as rights.” He added:

“a freedom which only asks what’s in it for me, a freedom without a commitment to others, a freedom without love or charity or duty or patriotism, is unworthy of our founding ideals, and those who died in their defense.” In language that evoked JFK’s inauguration, Obama then asserted: “America is not about what can be done for us. It’s about what can be done by us, together, through the hard and frustrating but necessary work of self-government.”

Here Obama introduced a crucial aspect of his conception of our national identity. We succeed both by accomplishing great things as individuals and by building things collectively, through our democratic institutions of government. He believes in balancing our individual freedom with our responsibilities to our country and our mutual obligations to our fellow Americans.

Without mentioning his name, the President was countering Paul Ryan, who offered his own definition of our national identity at the Republican National Convention. Ryan described as his ideal:

“an American journey where I could think for myself, decide for myself, define happiness for myself. That's what we do in this country. That's the American Dream. That's freedom.”

For Ryan, being an American is about freedom, but a very limited, narrow freedom, a freedom based solely on self. There's a reason why he repeated "myself" three times. The American Dream, to Ryan, is about being able to do whatever you want whenever you want. Barack Obama’s robust, civic nationalism offers a powerful, direct rebuke to the hyper-individualism of Ayn Rand, as channeled by Paul Ryan.

Obama also asserted in Charlotte:

“we don’t think that government is the source of all our problems – any more than are welfare recipients, or corporations, or unions, or immigrants, or gays, or any other group we’re told to blame for our troubles.”

Here the President made clear the difference between saying that we are – all of us – one American family, and actually meaning it. Meaning it requires us to practice and preach inclusion. It means no one, especially politicians, should gin up anxiety or hate toward one group of Americans, whether that group is defined by class, race, country of origin, sexual orientation, religion, or anything.

Was that statement political? Sure. It was a subtle but strong criticism of Mitt Romney's campaign ads that, playing on racial stereotypes held by some whites about black Americans and welfare, falsely accused the President of weakening welfare’s work requirements.

But Obama’s statement represents far more than just the back and forth of a campaign. It is central to his entire approach to American national identity and national unity. Obama believes that this civic nationalism, a sense of being part of a community defined by citizenship – not blood, culture or religion – is at the core of who we are, and who we must be.

This is something that Barack Obama has consistently placed at the center of his rhetoric for two decades. In 2008 he said he has:

“spent [his] entire adult life… insist[ing] that we all share common hopes and common dreams as Americans.”

And at the same press conference, he highlighted the:

“need to all recognize each other as Americans, regardless of race, religion, or region of the country.”

For the President, that idea is at the core of his approach to politics and to his broader philosophy of empathy, of being able to identify with the concerns and understand the perspective of a fellow American different from oneself. That’s Obama’s America.

PS-For much more on this, please take a look at my book, Obama's America: A Transformative Vision of Our National Identity, published recently by Potomac Books.

Mitt Romney Now Has Less Foreign Policy Credibility Than Sarah Palin

FROM IAN REIFOWITZ OVER AT DAILY KOS

Think about that. But after Mitt Romney's stupendously stupid, not to mention patently false attacks on President Obama and the U.S. response to the violence in Egypt and Libya, I don't see how we can say different.

Even a Romney campaign adviser who had served in the White House under George W. Bush said:

“[Romney] had forgotten the first rule in a crisis: don’t start talking before you understand what’s happening.”  

That's from a Romney adviser! 

Mitt Romney -- the Republican nominee for President -- now has less foreign policy credibility than Sarah Palin. And that's saying something.

Remember what she said?:

http://youtu.be/JXL86v8NoGk


Compared to the cringe-inducing remarks from Gov. Palin, what Romney said was far worse because it revealed him not just as someone ill-prepared for the presidency, but someone willing to score political points during a foreign policy crisis, no matter the effect on our country's material interests.
Sarah Palin aside, that's no joke.

President Obama and PM Netanyahu... Much Ado about NOTHING

So, we had a day of diaries and articles decrying Israeli Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu for his supposed challenges to U.S. Electoral Procedures which elicited claims of dual-loyalty of Jewish Americans, bashing of Israel for trying to control the U.S. and other nonsense. We even had one anti-Semitic troll flip out over a movie that he thought was an Israeli/Jewish made film when it turns out that the apparent film-maker is neither Jewish nor Israeli.

Even a diarist here that has a ton of support from the community jumped in and completely messed up the story with a sensationalized headline and commentary to match. BUT... alas for those fired up about this issue. This is simply "Much ado about Nothing".
In brief we had this....

1. Reports yesterday which had President Obama "snubbing" Israeli PM Benyamin Netanyahu from a meeting in NY

2. The Americans saying there is no "snub", the leaders simply weren't in NY at the same time, however, that SoS Clinton would meet with the Prime Minister and they would discuss what was needed to be discussed.

Of course this prompted cries from the Wingnut Right (paraphrased) of; "SEE the President hates PM Netanyahu and he is friends with Iran"as well as the Paulista Rightist crowd with their babbling about how it was about time that the U.S. stood up to the Israelis.

It also prompted cries from the far-left saying: "HA! way to stand up to TEH EBILZ IZRAILEES" and how President Obama was really gonna show the Israelis "whatfor" in his second term.
Only problem... It was all just nothing.

As Haaretz reports:

Overnight, Netanyahu had held an hour-long telephone conversation with U.S. President Barack Obama, calming things down following reports that Obama had rejected Netanyahu's request to meet when the prime minister visits the United States later this month...... 

.....The White House said both leaders were determined to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons and had agreed to continue "close consultations going forward." White House spokesman Tommy Vietor denied reports that Obama had rejected Netanyahu's request to meet in Washington, since "no such request was made or rejected."

And at the same time Prime Minister Netanyahu played down this supposed rift by saying:

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu adopted a conciliatory tone one day after his attack on the United States' Iran policy, noting that Israel's "leaders are tested at times of differences with our allies, even our closest allies."

Now... Personally, I am not a supporter of Prime Minister Netanyahu. I support the Opposition Labor Party, but, I don't really see a need for everyone to get all worked up before the whole story came out. How about this... for the supposedly reality based community that we are... we actually base our stories in,.... you know... reality.

We still don't know what really happened though we have both the Israeli and American Administrations saying the same thing. Could this have been a failed attempt by Republicans and those sympathetic to them in Israel to "gin up" a story. Absolutely. It could have. BUT that story has been quickly discredited. So, I would ask could we please just get on with dealing with what actually has happened, particularly in this election season.

Thanks very much.

Featured Story on Red State: "Quote a Fact Checker, Earn a Ban"

ep... that is the exact wording (WARNING: LINK TO REDSTATE.COM - only follow if you have a strong stomach)
Here is title of this advocacy "masterpiece": Quote a Fact Checker, Earn a Ban from this morning.
Great Headline. Fits in with the Conservative Lie machine that seems to now a 24/7/365 operation.
But then the articles author goes on to state this:

I’ve pretty much had it with the grotesque turn the various “fact checking” organizations have taken. “Politifact” is little more than a bunch of shills, devoid of even the vestiges of integrity, that sling about “pants on fire” ratings to any GOP or conservative politician.

While, I can't totally disagree with him about Politifact although with a very different perspective, there is a reason that Politfact and every other fact checker are nailing Conservatives and Republicans for lying. You know why? Because THEY ARE INDEED LYING. As Robert Reich wrote:

"We're not going to let our campaign be dictated by fact-checkers," says Neil Newhouse, a Romney pollster.....

.......Most political campaigns are guilty of exaggeration. Some distort the truth. But rarely if ever has one resorted to such bald-faced lies - even after they're shown to be lies.

Presumably the Romney campaign continues to make these and other false claims because they're effective, swaying previously undecided voters Romney's way. But this raises a more basic question: How can these false claims remain effective when they've been so overwhelmingly discredited by the media?

According to Reich (and I think he is correct here) the Republicans are hard at work to "bypass" (his word) fact checkers from both the MSM and blogosphere by using three tactics (and read the article linked in SF Gate):

1.Constantly Repeating Lies in T.V. and Media Spots

2. "Shoot the Messenger" - Discredit your critics no matter what so that no one listens to the message in the first place.

3. Use your own Media to produce it's own facts.

All of this we have seen over and over again. Rather than simply facing up to facts Republicans and Conservatives seem to want to do everything they can to avoid them. Now, one of the more well known elements of the Conservative Blogosphere has decided that using fact checkers should get you banned from their site. That in itself is a pretty damning comment. Why don't they simply admit they want free rein to lie about everything at any time?

What is truly baffling to me is how anyone can actually stand up and say that they plan to intentionally lie and 40-45% of the American public will simply vote for them no matter what. I mean I get that most politicians make a habit out of "shading" the facts and I understand how partisan politics make one blind to the realities of one's own side. That said, what I don't get is that when a person tells you that they are going to lie, then lies, that people actually will promote that.

While RedState may not have adopted this policy yet, the fact that a mainline Conservative website is actively considering (it was the "featured story" on the FrontPage this A.M.) banning people for quoting fact checkers is a sad indicator of today's conservative movement.

Today We Had A Rocket Attack

My Israel journey continues.  I am staying for two days in an Air BNB rental that is almost a palace, in the Old City of Beersheva.  I think it was built during Turkish times.

Today was my first experience on Israeli roads, as I rented a car and drove to the Dead Sea and Masada.  It was around 110 degrees F at the Dead Sea, hot even for me.  I did the usual floating, and then enjoyed the spectacular views from Masada.  I also drank, by my count, a gallon of water.

-----------------

Upon my return to Beersheva this evening, I was unpacking the car and had awkward hands full of empty water bottles and receipts when I heard the incoming rocket siren.  It is really loud and there is no mistaking what it is.  Then I heard what sounded like a higher pitched wail from farther away.  I stood there and thought 'well, what does one do in this situation'?

I looked around frantically and the only other person on the block was an older man.  He started walking relatively fast - but not running - down toward the corner.  He was still playing with his cell phone while walking.  I had no ideas of my own so I followed him.  At the corner he ducked down and sat at the foot of a concrete retaining wall.  I did the same.

I asked him if he spoke English and he said yes.  I asked what should we do.  He said "You wait 40 seconds after the siren, and then you hear the boom.  It is good to be by a wall."

I crouched with my fingers in my ears and my arms over my head like they taught us in tornado drills in school.  The man was just texting away on his phone.  There was also a car with a Haredi family right on the street in front of us, and they pulled over to the side and sat.

After about 60 seconds where we heard nothing, he said "It is ok - it must have exploded far from here."  I thought to myself that maybe the Iron Dome got it.

He then stood up, and taking the cue, I did too.  He asked where I was from and I said the US.  He said something like 'Every country has dangers, hurricanes, tsunamis - Israel is still a great place to live'.  He also mentioned that there may be more tonight and that they may be ramping up because of the Jewish holidays coming. Then he said "I will call my daughter" which finally broke the facade of nonchalance.

And that was pretty much it.  I picked up my stuff and headed for the house.

It seems that it becomes pretty much part of the background, and people don't let it affect them too much.  Rationally I know that my chance of suffering death or injury from any given rocket is miniscule, and I really do try to adjust my fears to statistics.

One thing is for sure though.  If some harm were to come to me, I would most certainly not be seeking to forgive and embrace whatever Hamas yahoo is responsible for this - like a certain pathetic lying wuss I could mention.

Israel - What About The Haredim?

Since my last report from Israel, I had a wonderful day and two nights at the Weizmann Institute, and another in Tel Aviv including meeting a distant relative.   All the while, I've enjoyed amazing food, great scenery, and intense heat.

Everyone I have talked to in Israel mentions the Haredim (ultra-orthodox religious Jews), and the problem they pose in terms of lack of assimilation, lack of military service, massive state subsidies they recieve, and failure to shoulder the tax burden.

My first real encounter with them has been in Jerusalem.  Unfortunately, they ruined my first visit to the Kotel, and confirmed any negative impressions I might have had of them.   This is simply a report of my experiences around that.

---------------------

Yesterday I arrived in Jerusalem and made for the Old City.  Photographs of lost relatives in hand, I purchased knitted kipa - one in the style of Religious Zionists - at the very last minute before the Judaica stores closed for Shabbat.

I made it to the wall at about 3 pm.  It wasn't very crowded at that point, and I made my way towards the men's area.  Almost everyone there was haredi.  No sooner did I approach then a haredi man came up to me and said something in Hebrew.  In my naivite I thought he might be offering to say a prayer.  So I said "ata medaber anglit?" and he said "charity, charity" and stuck out his hand.  I didn't know what to do.  I just shook my head. 

I tried to have a moment and figure out where to stand and what to say with my pictures of my father and grandparents, but just a few seconds later another man came up to me and said the same thing.  I said "I'll give you something if you say a prayer for my relatives" so he muttered something in Hebrew.  Then I returned to face the wall and try to concentrate on what I was doing, and he just started asking me questions about my nationality and ethnicity.  "You are American?  Italian?  Ashkenazi?"  It was exceedingly inappropriate given the situation.  He was like a fly that would not go away.

I was really open to having a spiritual-ish moment at the Kotel with my pictures but it was clear it wasn't happening.  So I found a spot to leave them and started to walk around.  Only a few seconds later another Haredi man came up to me with his hand out and said "Charity, please, I have 11 children and they are starving."  I couldn't believe it.  In any other situation I would have said "Why the fuck did you have 11 kids if you couldn't feed them?" but I couldn't there, so I just tried to walk away, but he just followed.  And then another man came up to me, shoved his hand at me, same thing.

I couldn't get a moment's peace there, so I left.

I explored the rest of the Old City, and walked up to the Mount of Olives to an overlook.

Later after sundown I returned to the Kotel.  Now it was much more crowded, and there were a ton of Religious Zionists in the mix too.  They were dancing around and chanting loudly, in full military uniforms with giant rifles at their side, some with the clips in.  As excessively nationalistic as it seemed, at least it was a joyous moment for them, and they were doing their own thing and not bothering others.

----------------------

I was quite jarred by my experience at the Kotel yesterday.  My Air BNB host, a lovely Yemeni man who lives in West Jerusalem, voiced his concern that the Haredim are taking over the country, and that he is considering leaving Jerusalem for Tel Aviv because he is afraid they will try to institute restrictions in Jerusalem.

As with anything involving Israel, the situation with the Haredi is quite complicated and nuanced.  Some are more assimilated than others, some are more Zionist than others, and so on.

Today I set out to see for myself the most notorious of their areas, the Mea Shaarim neighborhood of Jerusalem.  At the entrance there are signs demanding that tour groups not come through and that women dress modestly.  All well and good.

But inside, it is one of, actually probably the, most disgusting, decrepit, disgraceful place I have ever seen.  In my entire life.  Mounds of trash are piled everywhere.  The streets are barely paved.  It smells terrible.  It looks, no exaggeration, like the kind of places they film when celebrities ask you for money for starving children.  And people are walking around in the hot sun in outfits that were developed for the winter in 17th century Northern Europe, stockings, collared shirts, and black wool coats and hats.  According to my Air BNB host, they actually have a huge problem with skin infections because of this.

One of the only English signs was on a building, proclaiming it was "Saving Jewish children from foreign education"  What Jewish tradition saves children from education?  There was also a big anti-Zionist poster, saying "Zionism - Holocaust of the Jewish Nation."

--------------------

One could dismiss these Mea Shaarin residents as kooks in ridiculous outfits.  But they are having a ridiculous number of children.  People throw around stats like 50% of all births in Israel are now to Arabs or Haredi.  With these numbers, it won't be long until Haredi are a majority of the Jewish population.

What will this mean for the Jewish state, a state founded on secular principles of Jewish peoplehood?  What will it mean for a state which has thrived, survived wars, and built a modern economy on the basis of science, capitalism, and modernity?  Who will pay the taxes?  Who will serve in the army?  Will a majority of its own citizens think it is "a Holocaust"?

Once out of Mea Shaarin, even elsewhere in Jerusalem, one can be lulled into a sense that everything is ok, that Israel is a beautiful, modern, prosperous nation, full of sun bronzed warrior scientists and incredibly hot women in incredibly short shorts. 

But Edward Teller said that humanity's undoing will be its inability to emotionally comprehend the exponential function.  How will Israel survive the Haredi demographic challenge?

Will the Haredim assimilate and change?  Zionism has, against all odds at times, built an incredibly successful society and nation state, which I have been seeing this entire week.  Will it survive this?