In my regular column in The Jerusalem Post, my new article: “The Road From Liberalism To Tyranny“

Neoliberalism does not serve the interests of the whole of American society.

The bottom line is this: beneath a guise of free speech, America has become a fascist country, where only one view is permitted.

Last Thursday, Jonathan Martin wrote in The New York Times that “the blueprint has already been chosen for the [Democratic Party] – by an incensed army of liberals demanding no less than total war against President [Donald] Trump.” Couple this with the media’s slew of warped or made-up stories purporting to prove the president’s incompetence, and the army of agitators that Obama’s Organizing for Action has dispatched throughout the US to sabotage townhall meetings, it seems that the president is fighting on multiple fronts.

Why the war? Trump is not part of the ruling elite that has governed and exploited America for decades, and for whom Obama and Clinton were executors, covering up their actions behind a bogus humanistic agenda of caring for immigrants.

After World War II, numerous countries in the West adopted liberalism as a “vaccine” against fascism and Nazism. But a society cannot remain vital unless different views clash within it and in the process become polished and refined. When all the parties understand that diversity of views creates vitality, they strengthen their society and increase its ability to cope with changes.

Our own Jewish tradition encourages diversity and debate as means to enhance social cohesion. Rabbi Abraham Isaac Kook wrote that “The great rule about the war of views, when each view comes to contradict another, is that we need not contradict it, but rather build above it, and thereby ascend” (Letters of the Raiah). Likewise, Martin Buber wrote in Nation and World: “It is not neutrality that we need, but rather cohesion, cohesion of mutual responsibility. We are not required to blur the boundaries among the factions, circles, and parties, but rather share a recognition of the common reality and to share the test of mutual responsibility.”

The problem is that today’s American society denies the legitimacy of “other parties,” as Buber put it. “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely,” said Liberal MP Sir John Dalberg-Acton. Instead of creating a vibrant arena of views that invigorate one another, liberals have stifled anyone who disagreed with them. If Under Armour CEO Kevin Plank is forced to apologize for stating his mildly conservative views for fear of putting his business at risk, this is no longer liberalism and certainly not pluralism. This is tyranny.

“The inclination of man’s heart is evil from his youth” (Genesis 8:21) is not merely a verse in the Bible. It is really who we all are. This is why rulers need watchful media to monitor them, and why the media needs to be kept genuinely free and pluralistic.

Yet, this is not the situation in America. Neoliberalism has been the ruling agenda in the US for decades. It does not serve the interests of the whole of American society, but rather caters to the interests of the small elite group of magnates who control the American economy, the media, and thereby the government. They determine what is reported and what is not, who is defamed and who is glorified. By controlling the media, they have dominated public discourse and avoided criticism. This is ingenious, but deadly to society.

For this reason, I regard Trump’s victory as a sign that the American society is still alive and kicking. It gives me hope that it will also be able to go through the necessary sobering up without bloodshed and without dragging the world into another war. Had Clinton been elected, there is little doubt that a world war would have erupted. Now, at least there is a chance for peace and the correction of society.

But to correct society, all parties will need to learn from the Jewish tradition – that “love covers all crimes” (Proverbs 10:12). Rabbi Yehuda Ashlag, author of the Sulam (Ladder) commentary on the Zohar, wrote in his essay “The Freedom”: “Contradictions and oppositeness between people should remain forever, to forever secure the progress of the free society.” Liberals would do well to listen to their own “co-religionist” Nicholas Kristof of the New York Times who wrote, “We progressives could take a brief break from attacking the other side and more broadly incorporate values that we supposedly cherish – like diversity – in our own dominions.”

For America’s sake and for the sake of the world, I pray that this great nation wakes up and understands the value of diversity, the benefit of honing views through open debate, and the powerful cohesion attained when that debate yields solutions that contribute to the vitality of the whole of society.
[203090]

Filed under: New Publications - No Comments →

In my regular column in Haaretz, my new article: “The Dems Smear Campaign Can Put Us All in Trouble“

We can neither abolish conservatism nor rid ourselves of liberalism. Instead, we only need to find our unity above them!

Donald Trump lashed out at the “so-called Judge”? Obama did this before. Donald Trump signed an immigration ban? Obama did this too, and for twice as long. Donald Trump wants to build a wall? Obama did this before, too. But none of the mainstream media outlets bring these parallels to our attention. In some cases, they have even classified such information as “fake news” in order to steer us away from the facts.

Why is all this happening? Because unlike any other time in US history, the defeated party in the presidential elections refuses to accept its loss and keeps trying to find some way back to the White House. Prominent media outlets that support Barack Obama and his party have launched such a preposterous smear campaign that it can only be described as “fake news,” with the aim to defame, delegitimize, and ultimately impeach the president. On the ground, Barack Obama’s “Organizing for Action” is using an expansive network of left-leaning organizations to build the progressives’ way back to the Oval Office much sooner than 2020.

But they are playing with fire. Half the country voted for Trump. That half does not want the progressive agenda, which robs it of its jobs, values, beliefs, and eventually, its country. The forefathers and foremothers of this conservative part of America made their country a world leader. They are tough, believe in their values and in their Lord, and they have seen enough of what New World Order pundits have to offer. They do not want this. Should Trump be forced to step down, chances are that his successor will make Democrats fondly reminisce at the sound of Trump’s name.

Back in Babylon

The reactionary response to the progressive movement is a natural phenomenon that happens toward the end of every stage in human development. The liberal era is ending. It is no longer liberal; it is the rule of a small elite group that is pitting the public against anyone who dares to challenge it. Using “political correctness,” seemingly in order not to offend minorities, the ruling elite is barring free speech and free thought, and shreds our society under the guise of individuality. As we succumb to isolation and alienation, to vulgar narcissism where pop stars’ on-stage pseudo-masturbation is regarded as art, we are losing our most precious asset—human connections. When we cannot care for others and others cannot care for us, we are losing the vital force that is necessary for our mental and physical health.

The media, which tells us that individuality and free thought are all that count, while at the same time stifling our ability to think for ourselves and realize our potential, makes us all confused and frustrated. In consequence, just like our ancestors in the land of bilbul (confusion), a.k.a., Babylon, whose mindset became its namesake, we are hopeless and lost, hateful and alone. Yet, many of us are still dangerously in denial of our situation.

The Midrash (Beresheet Rabah) tells us that at the time of Babylon, two forces struggled over preeminence. The trailblazer, if you will, of one force was Nimrod, king of Babylon, and the frontrunner of the other force was Abraham. To make a gross generalization for the purpose of this column (for more details, read Like a Bundle of Reeds), we could say that both Abraham and Nimrod understood nature, and particularly human nature. They knew that reality operates according to a balanced interaction between positive and negative—two opposite forces that complement one another to create a greater whole, which we call reality. Reality cannot consist of only a negative or only a positive force. It consists of both, requires both, and only when the two work in harmony can nature thrive.

The two leaders also knew that human nature is an exception to nature’s general rule. Even then, thousands of years ago, we were not in sync with nature. We weren’t as opposed to it as we are now, but the predominance of the negative force in the psyche of our ancestors was enough to gradually disintegrate the Babylonian society. The book Pirkey de Rabbi Eliezer (Chapter of Rabbi Eliezer) describes the alienation among the Babylonians. In chapter 24, it describes how the builders of the Tower of Babylon would “push up the bricks [to build the tower] from the east, then descend from the west. If a man fell and died, they would not pay him any mind. But if a brick fell they would sit down and wail, ‘Woe unto us; when will another come in its place?’ Abraham, son of Terah, passed by and saw them building the city. He cursed them and said, ‘May the Lord swallow their tongue.’”

As the alienation of Abraham’s countryfolk deepened, his curse came true and the inevitable happened. Chapter 24 details how the Babylonians “wanted to speak to one another but did not know each other’s language. What did they do? Each took up his sword and they fought each other to the death. Indeed, half the world was slaughtered there, and from there they scattered all over the world.”

Dealing with the Law of Nature

Abraham’s curse symbolized his ideology. He maintained that the way to overcome alienation is to strive to connect above it. He understood that alienation and even hatred were natural manifestations of the negative force. Without them, there would be no way to activate the positive force of connection.

Today we know that atoms exist through the balance of these two forces, which maintain the electrons at a relatively steady distance from the nucleus. If either of these forces were absent, there would be no atoms and our universe would not exist. This same balance exists between the atoms that make up molecules, the organs that make up organisms, and so on throughout the chain of existence through its final link—man.

The human psyche is different from the rest of nature in that “the inclination in the heart of man is evil from his youth” (Gen 8:21). We lack the natural balance and conduct ourselves by limping along only on the negative force, as though we only have one leg. Is it any wonder that human society is lame?

Abraham maintained that if what we are missing is the positive force then we should activate it by ourselves. He realized that negative feelings in and of themselves are not a curse, but a necessary basis on which to add the positive force and thus create the same balance that exists in all of nature. Abraham cursed the builders of the tower not because they did not like each other, but because they made no effort to connect above their alienation. When he saw this, he knew that there was no hope for Babylon.

Nimrod refused to go by Abraham’s way. He chose the easy way, seemingly saying, “If we can’t get along, let’s go our separate ways.” Nimrod was the king and his ideology prevailed. Over time, Babylon indeed dispersed and the great civilization sank.

Nowhere to Go

Today, we are once again in Babylon: confused and alienated. But unlike ancient Babylon, we have nowhere to go. We have surrounded the world with billions of people who cannot understand each other and cannot stand each other. We have tried to build a modern Tower of Babylon, thinking that science and technology can make us happy. But science cannot change human nature—the cause of our misery. As a result, our two choices now are the same as those of the builders of the tower: We can each take our sword and fight to the death, or “hammer our swords into plowshares and our spears into pruning hooks” (Isaiah 2:4), and work together to build a new, united humanity.

Should we choose to take the path of unity, then as with Abraham, the swords and spears—our hatred of each other—will be our tools for building our cohesion. We cannot abolish conservatism nor rid ourselves of liberalism. On the contrary, our individualism will only grow and make society even more diverse and splintered. However, if we take Abraham’s way, these new perspectives will only strengthen our society and enrich it, making everyone’s view of life more complete.

The Difference between Self-Entitlement and Ego

Last week, we saw what happens when a healthy ego turns into the monster known as self-entitlement. This NYU professor thought that she was justified in hurling profanities and abusive language, and nearly physically attack NYPD officers whose only “crime” was guarding peaceful Republican demonstrators from the psychoses of “progressive liberals” like her. When a person feels that only his way is the right way, his ego wishes to annihilate all other ways. This is how a healthy ego becomes self-entitled and narcissistic.

A view, any view, is not meant to be the only view. It is intended to be a building block in the structure that creates what we call “humanity.” We are all parts of it. If any of us were missing, it would not be the same; it would not be whole. We become humanity only when we unite our different viewpoints into a complementary whole. When we do not, we are merely a collection of egos vying for control and power. This is why when we unite above our egos we feel whole and happy, and when we fight each other we feel insecure and depressed.

My teacher, RABASH (Rav Baruch Ashlag), wrote in a special notebook titled Shamati (I Heard) what he had heard from his father, Rav Yehuda Ashlag, the great commentator on The Book of Zohar. Article (or perhaps it should be called excerpt) no. 82 described Abraham’s pondering how he would reveal the positive force. The Rav Ashlag explained that Abraham realized that it would happen through revealing his own egoism, above which he would rise, and that only when Abraham realized that he would have an ego above which to rise he was satisfied and confident about his success.

This is the essence of Abraham’s teaching. This is why King Solomon said, “Love covers all crimes” (Prov 10:12). The book Shem Mi Shmuel writes that “The correction of the hatred began in the generation of Babylon, when there was separation in humanity. That is, the correction of gathering people together began by Abraham and his disciples… and the end of the correction will be when everyone becomes one bundle.” In that regard, the great Rav Kook wrote (Letters of the Raiah), “The great rule about the war of views, when each view comes to contradict another, is that we need not contradict it, but rather build above it, and thereby ascend.”

Time to Act

The “trick” of rising above differences to create a higher whole is unique to Abraham’s descendants. It is also the key to our happiness today. In order to untie the entanglement within American society, Americans must take action and unite above their differences! There is no point in throwing dirt at the other side or trying to prove your righteousness and the other side’s wickedness. Anything that promotes separation is inherently evil. So right now, all sides are wrong.

Now it is up to the entire American nation to take up the common ancestor’s legacy, the method of uniting above differences, and implement it among all of Abraham’s descendants—Jews, Christians, and Muslims. If America wants to be great again, this is the only way to do this. The road to turning self-entitlement back into a healthy ego that contributes to a healthy society is not by separation, but by union above our unique individualities, just as Abraham’s students did back in the days of Babylon.
[202255]

Filed under: New Publications - No Comments →

The Jerusalem Post published my new article “American Society Headed Toward a Breaking Point“

If business people such as Under Armour CEO Kevin Plank must apologize for their conservative views for fear of losing business, this is not liberalism and certainly not pluralism. This is tyranny.

A little over a week ago, Bill O’Reilly of The O’Reilly Factor on Fox News slammed the twisted reporting of the deportation of illegal immigrants who were convicted felons, showing how the media portrayed them as innocent “maids, moms, and shopkeepers.” He said that this exemplifies how the media coverage of President Trump is beyond biased; it is “blatant dishonesty.” Mr. O’Reilly, whose program is “routinely the highest-rated show of the three major US 24-hour cable news television channels,” concluded the item declaring, “There is a radical element [the radical left] in this country that wants to destroy it. If this continues, there will be a breaking point.”

As harsh as this threat sounds, judging by the relentless attempts of the Democrats to sabotage Trump’s efforts to man key positions, the media’s slew of warped and made up stories purporting to prove the president’s incompetence, through the army of on-the-ground agitators that Obama’s Organizing for Action has dispatched in order to disrupt every town-hall meeting in the country and create the pretense that the nation is with the Democrats, it seems that there is indeed a war against the president on multiple fronts.

It is not a question of policy; it is a question of identity. Donald Trump recently deported 680 convicted criminals, and the media was up in arms over the deportation of “innocent people,” as they called them. Where was the media when Obama, to whom immigrants referred as “Deporter-in-Chief,” drove out 2.5 million people during his tenure, the majority of whom were without any criminal record? And where was the outcry when it became known that Hillary Clinton, as Secretary of State, sold one fifth of US uranium to Russia, and that she and her husband, Bill Clinton, personally profited from the deal?

The media were silent because Obama and Clinton were the guardians of power for a small ruling elite that wants to dominate the US. A president who does not comply with their dictates does not serve their interests and there is no telling what they will do to remove him from office. For now, they are using a bogus, humanistic agenda such as caring for the immigrants and backing the Obamacare program to promote their goal of ousting Trump, but there is no reason to believe that they will stop there.

The Necessity of Diversity

Liberalism in itself is a noble idea. Following World War II, numerous countries in the West adopted the Liberal agenda as a “vaccine” against fascism and Nazism. However, a society cannot be vital and vibrant unless many different views vie against one another and in the process become polished and refined. When all the parties understand that diversity of views creates vitality, they strengthen their society and increase its ability to cope with changes.

Our own Jewish tradition encourages diversity and debate as a means to enhance social cohesion. Martin Buber wrote in Nation and World: “It is not neutrality that we need, but rather cohesion, cohesion of mutual responsibility. We are not required to blur the boundaries among the factions, circles, and parties, but rather share a recognition of the common reality and to share the test of mutual responsibility.” Likewise, the great Rav Kook wrote (Orot Hakodesh), “Near the end of days, the quality of unity will surface in the nation… This quality is immersed in pool of strife and discord, but its content is paved with love and wondrous unity.”

For generations, Jewish leaders taught their disciples that conflict of views is a means for finding the ideal solution and strengthening social cohesion. The Talmud writes that “A father and son who engage in Torah become each other’s enemies, yet they do not move from there until they return to loving one another” (Kidushin 30b). The Zohar, too, writes (Aharei Mot), “Behold, how good and how pleasant it is for brothers to also sit together. These are the friends as they sit together, and are not separated from each other. At first, they seem like people at war, wishing to kill one another. Then they return to being in brotherly love. …And you, the friends who are here, as you were in fondness and love before, henceforth you will also not part … And by your merit there will be peace in the world.”

The Inevitable Evil

Yet, the American society has denied the legitimacy of “other parties,” as Buber put it. “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely,” said British Liberal MP Sir John Dalberg-Acton. Liberalism has been the sole “legitimate” agenda for decades now, but instead of using it to create a vibrant arena of views that invigorate one another, it has become a stifling mechanism by which anyone who contradicts what the media deems true is shamed and bullied. If business people such as Under Armour CEO Kevin Plank feel that they must apologize for stating their honest, very mildly conservative views for fear of losing business, this is no longer liberalism and certainly not pluralism. This is tyranny. Beneath a guise of free speech, America has become a fascist country, where only one view is permitted.

But if “absolute power corrupts absolutely,” then this is to be expected. “The inclination of man’s heart is evil from his youth” (Gen 8:21) is not merely a verse from the Torah. It is who we all are. This is why rulers need the media to monitor them, and why the media needs to be kept genuinely free and pluralistic.

This is not the situation in America. Neoliberalism, which has destroyed Europe through immigration, and nearly destroyed the US by eliminating its middle class, has been the sole ruling agenda in the US for decades. It serves the interests of the small elite group of magnates who control the American economy, the media, and thereby the government, all the way up to the White House. They determine what is reported and what is not, who is defamed and who is glorified. By controlling the media, they have dominated public discourse, public opinion, and have avoided criticism. This is ingenious, but deadly to society.

Their best interest is not the best interest of the American people. They aspire for world domination. Through proxies such as Obama and Clinton, they “removed” Arab leaders such as Muammar Gaddafi, Saddam Hussein, and Bashar Assad, destroyed their countries, and created an influx of migrants into Europe. It is not that these Middle Eastern tyrants are or ever were anything to admire, but if you look at Iraq, Libya, and Syria today, would it not have been better for their people if their tyrants had remained in place, rather than the ruin, death, hunger, and terrorism that is their daily reality today?

If the people driving the “liberal” agenda in Europe maintain control over their governments, it will not be long before Europe accepts Sharia law. As this sad story of a forced child marriage shows, this is already happening, but it will spread much faster if they succeed.

And what they have done to Europe, they will continue in America: This same group will allow unchecked influx of migrants into the US, who will drain the already overstretched welfare system, create an impossible conflict of cultures and faiths, which will result in extremism and subsequent bloodshed on both sides. And all this will be done in the name of liberal thinking, pluralism, humanism, and democracy.

On the Side of Correction

It may appear as though I am in complete support of President Trump and against the Democratic Party. In truth, I have no personal affinity for any particular person or agenda. I do have great affinity for diversity above which people can connect since diversity keeps society cohesive, agile, and healthy, and keeps the country strong. At the moment, President Trump represents this view quite well, and the Democratic Party, with its undisputed monarch Barack Hussein Obama, absolutely does not.

I regard Trump’s victory as a sign that the American society is still alive and kicking. It gives me hope that it will also be able to go through the necessary sobering up without bloodshed and without dragging the world into another war. If Clinton had been elected, there is no doubt that war would have erupted. Russia, America, and Europe were already making preparations on the ground. Now, at least there is a chance for peace and the correction of society.

But to correct society, all parties will need to learn from the Jewish tradition—that “love covers all crimes” (Prov 10:12). Rav Yehuda Ashlag, author of the Sulam (Ladder) commentary on The Book of Zohar, wrote in his essay, “The Freedom”: “Just as people’s faces differ, so their views differ. Therefore, society is cautioned to preserve the freedom of expression of the individual. Each individual should maintain his integrity, and the contradiction and oppositeness between people should remain forever, to forever secure the progress of the free society.” Liberals would do well to listen to their own “coreligionist” Nicholas Kristof of The New York Times who wrote, “We progressives could take a brief break from attacking the other side and more broadly incorporate values that we supposedly cherish—like diversity—in our own dominions.”

At the moment, Trump cannot end the war with the media and the Democrats because he is not the one waging it. For things to calm down, the media and the Democratic Party must decide that the best interest of their country comes before that of their party, or even that of their financiers. If this war does not stop, then either the media will be severely restricted going forward and American democracy will be hampered, or the next leader America’s political right sends forward will likely be one who will truly galvanize the conservatives in America, and “there will be a breaking point,” as O’Reilly put it.

For America’s sake and for the sake of the world, I pray that this great nation wakes up and understands the value of diversity, the benefit of honing views through open debate, and the powerful cohesion attained when that debate yields solutions that contribute to the thriving of the whole of society.
[202655]

Filed under: New Publications - No Comments →

My new article: “Ruling Elite and Pseudo-Liberalism—an Explosive Combination” in my column in Haaretz.

Beneath a guise of free speech, America has become a fascist country, where only one view is permitted.

During the weekend, President Trump held a campaign style rally in Melbourne, Florida, where he called the media “the enemy,” “fake news,” and stated, “They’re part of a corrupt system.” Judging by the relentless attempts of the Democrats to sabotage Trump’s efforts to man key positions, the media’s slew of warped or made up stories purporting to prove the president’s dishonesty, through the army of on-the-ground agitators that Obama’s Organizing for Action has dispatched in order to disrupt every town-hall meeting in the country and create the pretense that the nation is with the Democrats, it seems that the president is right: There is a war against him on multiple fronts.

In such a case, the logical thing for Trump to do is indeed to go directly to the people. Sadly, the American president cannot expect to receive fair coverage from the American media. Worse yet, because of the way that the media is built, the president cannot rely on the media to change its tone toward him.

It is not a question of policy; it is a question of identity. Donald Trump is not part of the ruling elite that has governed and exploited America for decades, and for whom Obama and Clinton were the executors. But because they must hide their intentions, they cover it with a bogus humanistic agenda such as caring for the immigrants and backing the Obamacare program.

The Necessity of Diversity

Liberalism in itself is a noble idea. Following World War II, numerous countries in the West adopted the Liberal agenda as a “vaccine” against fascism and Nazism. However, a society cannot be vital and vibrant unless many different views vie against one another and in the process become polished and refined. When all the parties understand that diversity of views creates vitality, they strengthen their society and increase its ability to cope with changes.

Our own Jewish tradition encourages diversity and debate as means to enhance social cohesion. The great Rav Kook wrote (Letters of the Raiah), “The great rule about the war of views, when each view comes to contradict another, is that we need not contradict it, but rather build above it, and thereby ascend.” Likewise, Martin Buber wrote in Nation and World: “It is not neutrality that we need, but rather cohesion, cohesion of mutual responsibility. We are not required to blur the boundaries among the factions, circles, and parties, but rather share a recognition of the common reality and to share the test of mutual responsibility.”

For generations, Jewish leaders indoctrinated their disciples into a mindset that promotes conflict of views as a means for both finding the ideal solution, and strengthening social cohesion. The Talmud writes that “A father and son who engage in Torah become each other’s enemies, yet they do not move from there until they return to loving one another” (Kidushin 30b). The Zohar, too, writes (Aharei Mot), “Behold, how good and how pleasant it is for brothers to also sit together. These are the friends as they sit together, and are not separated from each other. At first, they seem like people at war, wishing to kill one another. Then they return to being in brotherly love. …And you, the friends who are here, as you were in fondness and love before, henceforth you will also not part … And by your merit there will be peace in the world.”

The Inevitable Evil

The problem with American society today is not that liberalism is wrong. The problem is that it has denied the legitimacy of “other parties,” as Buber put it. “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely,” said British Liberal MP Sir John Dalberg-Acton. Liberalism has been the sole legitimate agenda for decades now, but instead of using it to create a vibrant arena of views that invigorate one another, it has become a stifling mechanism by which anyone who disagrees with what the media deems true is shamed and boycotted. When business people feel that they must apologize for stating their honest, very mildly conservative views for fear of putting their business at risk, this is no longer liberalism and certainly not pluralism. It is tyranny. Beneath a guise of free speech, America has become a fascist country, where only one view is permitted.

But if “absolute power corrupts absolutely,” then this was to be expected. “The inclination of man’s heart is evil from his youth” (Gen 8:21) is not merely a phrase in the Bible. It is really who we all are. This is why rulers need watchful media to monitor them, and why the media needs to be kept genuinely free and pluralistic.

This is not the situation in America. Neoliberalism, which has destroyed Europe through immigration, and nearly destroyed the US by eliminating its middle class, has been the sole ruling agenda in the US for decades. It serves the interests of the small elite group of magnates who control the American economy, the media, and thereby the government, all the way up to the White House. They determine what is reported and what is not, who is defamed and who is glorified. By controlling the media, they have dominated public discourse, public opinion, and have avoided criticism. This is ingenious, but deadly to society.

Their best interest is not what is in the best for the American people. Their interest is world dominance. Through proxies such as Obama, Clinton, and Bush before them, they “removed” Arab leaders such as Muammar Gaddafi, Saddam Hussein, and Bashar al-Assad, destroyed their countries, and created an influx of migrants into Europe. It is not that these Middle Eastern tyrants are or ever were anything to admire, but if you look at Iraq, Libya, and Syria today, would it not have been better for their people if their tyrants had remained in place, rather than the ruin, death, hunger, and terrorism that is their daily reality today?

If the people driving the “liberal” agenda in Europe maintain control over their governments, it will not be long before Europe accepts Sharia law. As this sad story of a forced child marriage shows, this is already happening, but it will spread much faster if they succeed.

And what they have done to Europe, they will continue to do to America: This same group will allow unchecked influx of migrants into the US, who will drain the already overstretched welfare system, create an impossible conflict of cultures and faiths, and will result in extremism on both sides, which will lead to bloodshed. And all this will be done in the name of liberal thinking, pluralism, humanism, and democracy.

On the Side of Correction

It may appear as though I am in complete support of President Trump and against the Democratic Party. In truth, I have no personal affinity for any particular person or agenda. I do have great affinity for diversity above which people can connect, since diversity keeps society cohesive, agile, and healthy, and keeps the country strong. At the moment, President Trump represents this view quite well, and the Democratic Party, with its undisputed monarch Barack Hussein Obama, absolutely does not.

I regard Trump’s victory as a sign that the American society is still alive and kicking. It gives me hope that it will also be able to go through the necessary sobering up without bloodshed and without dragging the world into another war. If Clinton had been elected, there is no doubt that war would have erupted. Russia, America, and Europe were already making preparations on the ground. Now, at least there is a chance for peace and the correction of society.

But to correct society, all parties will need to learn from the Jewish tradition—that “love covers all crimes” (Prov 10:12). Rav Yehuda Ashlag, author of the Sulam (Ladder) commentary on The Book of Zohar, wrote in his essay, “The Freedom”: “Just as people’s faces differ, so their views differ. Therefore, society is cautioned to preserve the freedom of expression of the individual. Each individual should maintain his integrity, and the contradiction and oppositeness between people should remain forever, to forever secure the progress of the free society.” Liberals would do well to listen to their own “coreligionist” Nicholas Kristof of The New York Times who wrote, “We progressives could take a brief break from attacking the other side and more broadly incorporate values that we supposedly cherish—like diversity—in our own dominions.”

At the moment, Trump cannot bury the hatchet and make peace with the media because he is not the one raising it. It is up to the media and the Democratic Party to decide that their country comes before the interests of their party, or even the interests of their financiers. If they do not stop their war on Trump, they will force him to fight back. If Trump wins, they will be severely restricted going forward and American democracy is likely to be hampered. But if Democrats succeed in taking Trump down, the likely scenario is that the next leader America’s political right sends forward will be one who will truly galvanize the conservatives in America, and all hell will break loose.

For America’s sake and for the sake of the world, I pray that this great nation wakes up and understands the value of diversity, the benefit of honing views through open debate, and the powerful cohesion attained when that debate yields solutions that contribute to the thriving of the whole of society.
[202820]

Filed under: New Publications - No Comments →

In my regular column in Haaretz, my new article: “The Trump-Netanyahu Meeting and the Chance for Peace”

Shalom (peace) means hashlama (complementing), as vying parties complement each other to make something new and complete.

Last week, US President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu met for the first time after Trump’s inauguration. The two have known each other a long time and had no qualms about showing that they share a personal friendship beyond the cordial formalities required at such events. If peace had to be negotiated between Prime Minister Netanyahu and President Trump, they would probably sign, seal, and deliver the deal before the first press conference.

But Trump is not a party in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The two parties are, well, Israelis and Palestinians, and the Palestinians have a very different take on the desirable solution than we do.

At the press conference following the meeting, President Trump said that he didn’t mind which solution was reached, as long as it was agreed upon by both sides. In his words: “I’m very happy with the [solution] that both parties like. I can live with either one. …If Israel and the Palestinians are happy, I’m happy with the one they like the best.” A little while later he added, “As with any successful negotiation, both sides will have to make compromises,” [turning to Netanyahu], “You know that, right?” To this, Netanyahu quickly replied, “Both sides!”

From Labels to Substance

Later in the press conference, Netanyahu mentioned that he would like to switch from “labels to substance,” meaning to talk about the actual implementation of peace rather than sticking to slogans such as a “two-state solution.”

But how can you talk about peace with a partner who does not want to reconcile with you? In truth, and we should recognize this by now, the only peace that the Palestinians want is the peace of mind of having driven the Jews out of Israel and into the Mediterranean, or to another country, or to another world. Three times they have been offered statehood, one of which included withdrawal from 97 percent of the territories occupied in 1967, as well as the right of return to thousands of Palestinians. To justify their rejection of this offer, Abbas stated, “The gaps were wide” (May 29, 2009).

Indeed, as Netanyahu said, what we are lacking is substance. But substance must begin with understanding the meaning of peace prior to attempting to achieve it. In fact, compromise is not peace; it is merely a cessation of hostilities until one side feels strong enough to completely annihilate the other side.

Instead of compromise, we should look for the real meaning of peace. To most people, “peace” is just a word, a fantasy of slightly “unhinged” youngsters, or a required platitude of politicians during election campaigns and pageant contestants when asked about their vision for a better world. But in reality, as I just showed, there is no peace.

And yet, when we look at nature, we see that despite the constant struggles for survival, nature maintains a balance that fosters growth and prosperity. Surprisingly, the struggles actually contribute to the healthy evolution of species. Rival species complement one another, and by feeding off each other they maintain one another’s health and vitality. The existence of predators guarantees the prosperity of the entire food chain. In some cases, the removal of one species of animals damages not only the ecosystem’s fauna, but also its flora and even the topography of that system.

The Hebrew word for peace, shalom, has nothing to do with compromise. It comes from the word “hashlama,” which means complementing and pertains to a state where contradicting parties complement one another, thereby creating a new and complete creation, which would be lacking without their individual contributions, as portrayed by the example in the link above.

The Primordial Peace Maker

Curiously, the first person to understand the essence of peace was Abraham the Patriarch. Maimonides describes in detail how he searched in nature until he discovered that all forces and all of nature’s seemingly conflicting elements complement each other (Mishneh Torah, Chapter 1).

Abraham did not begin his search out of scientific curiosity; he was troubled by the hatred that erupted among his people and wanted to understand its cause and work out a solution. Abraham observed the builders of the Tower of Babel and realized that their hatred of each other would destroy them. The book Pirkey de Rabbi Eliezer (Chapter 24) writes that “If a man fell and died, they would not pay him any mind. But if a brick fell they would sit down and wail, ‘Woe unto us; when will another come in its place?’” The alienation among the builders got so bad that they “wanted to speak to one another but did not know each other’s language. What did they do? Each took up his sword and they fought each other to the death. Indeed, half the world was slaughtered there, and from there they scattered all over the world.”

Seeing all this hatred, Abraham developed an ingenious method of connection. Instead of forcing people to connect despite their odium, he encouraged them to remain individualistic, and connect with others above their separateness. He didn’t ask anyone to make any compromises. He simply said that our uniqueness complements the uniqueness of everyone else. Others are not rivals, as we think, and together our unique selves make up a whole that is the joint creation of us all. It is like a child, who is the beloved creation of both parents.

Nimrod, King of Babylon, did not agree with Abraham’s notion of connection above hatred and drove him out of Babylon. Abraham set out to Canaan and along the way spoke to anyone who would listen. “Since [people] gathered around him and asked him about his words,” writes Maimonides, “he taught everyone. …Finally, thousands and tens of thousands assembled around him, and they are the people of the house of Abraham.”

The group that Abraham developed lived by a simple principle: They did not try to uproot the hatred between them, but strove to connect above it. This remained the motto of “the house of Abraham,” which later became the Jewish people, until their exile after the ruin of the Second Temple. The wisest of all men, King Solomon, succinctly described this principle in Proverbs (10:12): “Hate stirs strife, and love covers all crimes.”

For Israel, Peace Has Always Been About Complementing

“The essence of vitality, existence, and correction in creation is achieved by people of differing opinions mingling together in love, unity, and peace” (Likutey Halachot [Assorted Rules]). “The Essence of peace is to connect two opposites. Hence, do not be alarmed if you see a person whose opinion is completely opposite to yours and you think that you will never be able to make peace with him. Or, when you see two people who are completely opposite to each other, do not say it is impossible to make peace between them. On the contrary, the essence of peace is to try to make peace between two opposites” (Likutey Etzot [Assorted Counsels]). These and numerous other texts written throughout Jewish history exemplify the idea that peace in Judaism is not the mere absence of war, but is a means to achieve greater unity on a higher level of connection among people.

At the foot of Mt. Sinai, we attained the first level of unity and became a nation after committing to be “as one man with one heart.” Immediately after, we were instructed to be “a light unto nations,” namely to pass on that method for achieving unity to the rest of the world. In essence, that method was the same one that Abraham had developed and intended to share with his countryfolk, the Babylonians. It is therefore not surprising that once the Jews achieved unity, the first thing that they were instructed to do was to share that unity. This is why “Moses wished to complete the correction of the world at that time. … However, he did not succeed because of the corruptions that occurred along the way” (The Ramchal Commentary on the Torah).

Peace in the Time of Hatred

Abraham could not share his wisdom with the Babylonians, and they vanished. So did all other empires that built their might on self-centered might. Only the Jews, though few in number, survived for many centuries through their ability to unite above their hatred. But when they abandoned the law of covering hate with love, they also lost their land and were scattered around the world. To this day, there is not a single Jewish text that attributes the exile of the Jews from the land of Israel to any other reason but internal hatred.

Today, we are back in our land, but we have been given our state by the nations; we did not “earn” it. That is, we did not restore the principle that love covers all crimes, and so internally, we are still in exile. Peace and security will come only when we restore this modus operandi among us. “The prime defense against calamity is love and unity. When there are love, unity, and friendship between each other in Israel, no calamity can come over them,” writes the Maor VaShemesh (Light and Sun). “When Israel have unity, there is no end to their achievements,” adds Noam Elimelech.

We may think that we are few and weak because we are vastly outnumbered against the Arab world. But if we unite, we will overcome all enemies—not through war, but by covering the hatred with love.

Therefore, the first, and most important peace treaty we must sign is not with our Arab neighbors, but with our Jewish neighbors. Here lies the key to solving the Middle East conflict. When we unite, we will truly become “a light unto nations.” All people and all the nations will want to learn the method of connection that Abraham developed, and his disciples and descendants polished and perfected precisely so that today we may come and use it for our benefit.

Once we unite among ourselves, all the nations’ hatred toward us will vanish as though it never existed. For now, the nations’ hatred keeps us from completely dispersing among them. But once we unite among ourselves, we will not need anti-Semitism to keep us together and it will vanish.

This week, thousands of people from all over the world and from all nationalities and faiths will gather at Ganei Hataarucha, Tel-Aviv to unite above their differences. Each and every one of them is a living proof that Abraham’s method works, if you only make a tiny effort to connect. I invite everyone to see this miracle for yourselves. Call 1-700-509-209 and you will find out for yourself what happens where “love covers all crimes.”
[202377]

Filed under: New Publications - No Comments →

Donald Trump vs. ‘Liberalism,’ round 1

Unsettling “Liberal” Behavior Calls For A New Socio-Political Order

Within our lifetime, we can rise to the next level of existence by connecting with others above ourselves. Our body will die anyway.

Opposites come together at a level that’s higher than their own. When everyone asks for the well-being of OTHERS – they all rise.

In nature, life is created precisely when + and – are unified above their differences. Humans have to do this by themselves.

Gradually, nature develops all its parts towards total interconnection. The time has come for us to participate in this consciously.

From Twitter, 2/9/17

Related Material:
My Thoughts On Twitter, 2/8/17
My Thoughts On Twitter, 2/7/17
My Thoughts On Twitter, 2/5/17

Filed under: Kabbalah Study, New Publications, News, Perception, Thoughts on Twitter - No Comments →

In my regular column in Haaretz, my new article: “Why Jewish Political Activism Leads to Anti-Semitism“

For centuries, we have been told that our unity will save both us and humanity. We won’t listen and the world hates us for it.

In the aftermath of the US elections, the voices of many prominent Jews are heard aloud and almost always with the same refrain: “Trump is a bigot, a racist, and is unfit to be our President.” Comedian Sarah Silverman called for a military coup to overthrow President Trump. Israeli singer Noah, called the President Hitler. Other Jews have called on Americans “to mobilize in solidarity against Trump.” Likewise, Jewish Voice for Peace launched a campaign offering “Tools to Resist Trump’s Islamophobia.” As Tablet magazine put it, “From the Orthodox Union to the Reform Movement, and ‘Commentary’ to J Street, American Jews speak out in defense of refugees and Muslims,” and against President Trump.

At face value, it is perfectly legitimate and democratic to protest what you think is wrong. It is a right enshrined in the First Amendment. But things are different when it comes to Jews. We want to fit in; we want to belong, but no one treats us like ordinary people.

“If you prick us, do we not bleed? If you tickle us, do we not laugh? If you poison us, do we not die?” asks Shylock the Jew in Shakespeare’s The Merchant of Venice. Today, we are all like Shylock—ever trying to prove our sameness, ever encountering disbelief. Even if we are met with favorable declarations, such as those recently made by British Premier Theresa May, when it comes to actions, such as at the UN Security Council, the UK votes against us.

As in the US, Jews in Europe have been voting for liberal democratic parties for decades. Yet, precisely these parties have become hotbeds for Europe’s most sinister anti-Semitism. European Jewry has woken up, but it is too late. They can either leave Europe or stay and expect matters to grow much worse and much more physically dangerous.

The US is traversing the exact same route. Academia, which is dominated by a leftist oppressive mindset, has used the slick tool of political correctness to perform ideological cleansing of any idea that is not ultra-liberal. The media, much like academia, has been performing character assassination against Trump since the day he announced his intention to run for President. Together, the media and academia present a false image of a President who does not have the support of the American people. This orchestrated smear campaign against a legally and honestly elected president has deepened the divide within American society to a level that looks too much like riots, and too little like legitimate protests.

It is one thing for Jews to choose sides. It is another thing altogether for Jews to vigorously condemn the other side by using vulgarity, profanity, and baseless delegitimization, as in the heated debate currently unfolding in the US. Just as it happened after Sarah Silverman’s tweet, when we Jews incite for separation, we invoke anti-Semitism.

What’s Wrong with Jewish Activism?

The answer to the question in the subtitle is that there is nothing wrong with Jewish activism, as long as it promotes unity rather than division. The Jewish peoplehood was forged through unity when millions of individuals of different descents committed themselves to one another by pledging to be “as one man with one heart.” Once they made that vow, they were tasked with passing unity on to the rest of the world, thereby becoming “a light unto nations.” It may not appear so on the surface, but as long as Jews maintain their unity, they are appreciated. When they disassociate and thereby abandon their commitment to humanity, they cease to be a light unto nations and in so doing invoke hatred toward them.

I have been frequently criticized for expressing this view. However, this is not my personal view but the view of our sages throughout the generations. In that sense, I am only the messenger.

The Midrash (Beresheet Rabah, 66) writes about the Jews: “This nation, world peace dwells within it.” The Talmud writes in Masechet Yevamot: “No calamity comes to the world but because of Israel.” Midrash Tanhuma (Devarim, Portion, Nitzavim) writes, “Israel will not be redeemed until they are one bundle.” The Mishnah (Okatzin 3:12) asserts, “The Lord did not find a receptacle that holds a blessing for Israel but peace, as it was said (Psalms 29), ‘The Lord will give strength to His people, the Lord will bless His people with peace.’”

The Book of Zohar writes in the portion, Aharei Mot: “‘Behold, how good and how pleasant it is when brothers sit together.’ These are the friends as they sit together and do not part from one another. At first, they seem like people at war, wishing to kill one another. Then, they return to being in brotherly love. And you, the friends who are here, as you were in fondness and love before, henceforth you will also not part. And by your merit there will be peace in the world.”

Not only our ancient sources spoke of the importance of unity for the people of Israel and for the entire world. Our sages continued to talk about it throughout the generations.

“When Israel have unity, there is no end to their attainment,” writes the book, Noam Elimelech (The Pleasantness of Elimelech). “The prime defense against calamity is love and unity. When there are love, unity, and friendship between each other in Israel, no calamity can come over them,” adds Rabbi Kalonymus Halevi Epstein in Maor VaShemesh (Light and Sun). “We are commanded at each generation to strengthen the unity among us so our enemies do not rule over us,” wrote Rabbi Eliyahu Ki Tov in The Book of Consciousness. The Ramchal also wrote in The Commentary of Ramchal on the Torah: “Moses wished to complete the correction of the world at that time. … However, he did not succeed because of the corruptions that occurred along the way.”

In the previous century, the two greatest spiritual leaders of the generation, Rav Kook and Rav Yehuda Ashlag, author of the complete Sulam (Ladder) commentary on The Book of Zohar, wrote extensively about the role of Israel toward the world and the vital part that Israel’s unity plays in carrying out its task. In Orot (Lights), Rav Kook wrote, “The construction of the world, which is currently crumpled by the dreadful storms of a blood-filled sword, requires the construction of the Israeli nation … in anticipation of a force full of unity that is found in Israel.” Similarly, Rav Ashlag asserted, “It is upon the Israeli nation to qualify itself and all the people of the world to develop until they take upon themselves that sublime work of the love of others, which is the ladder to the purpose of Creation” (“The Arvut” [Mutual Guarantee]).

Returning to The Book of Zohar, the famous Tikkun no. 30 stresses that when Israel are not united, they “bring about the existence of poverty, ruin, and robbery, looting, killing, and destructions in the world.”

Establishing Constructive Activism

If we Jews want to help heal American society, certainly a commendable aspiration, we must return to our roots. Only unity above our differences—without suppressing any view but rather by embracing diversity above disputes and mutual disdain—will serve as an example worth following. Hurling abuse at people for their political views will not award us esteem. It will also not make us more acceptable in American society. What the nations want from us is leadership by way of example, not by way of retribution.

Surprisingly, some of the worst enemies of the Jewish people were keenly aware of the power of Jewish society and our role toward humanity. The famous anti-Semitic industrialist, Henry Ford, wrote in his infamous book, The International Jew—the World’s Foremost Problem: “Modern reformers, who are constructing model social systems on paper, would do well to look into the social system under which the early Jews were organized.” Elsewhere in the book, Ford wrote, “Society has a large claim against the Jew … that he begin to fulfill … the ancient prophecy that through him all the nations of the earth should be blessed.”

Rav Yehuda Leib Arieh Altar (the ADMOR of Gur) wrote in Sefat Emet (Language of Truth): “Because they sinned, that force of unity was taken from the wicked and was given to the children of Israel… We should trust it for because our intention is good, we are certain to succeed, since the force of unity assists us.” Rav Yehuda Ashlag added similarly in his essay, “The Arvut” (Mutual Guarantee), when he explained the meaning of being “a light unto nations”: “You shall be My Segula [remedy/virtue] from among all peoples. This means that sparks of purification and cleansing [from unfounded hatred] shall pass through you onto all the peoples and the nations of the world.”

Eliezer Ben Yehuda, reviver of the Hebrew language, wrote in The Complete Writings of Eliezer Ben Yehuda (Vol. 1): “We have yet to open our eyes and see that only unity can save us. Only if we all unite … to work in favor of the entire nation, our labor will not be in vain.” Likewise, A.D. Gordon, the chief ideologist of Zionism, asserted in Light of Life on the Day of Smallness: “‘All of Israel are responsible for one another’ … Only where people are responsible for one another there is Israel. Moreover, all the people are responsible for one another, and only where people are responsible for one another there are people (and there is a nation, a humane nation). If there are none who are responsible for one another, what is there? We, who are coming to build [the State of Israel], will certainly not build on the basis of relations of the generation of separation [generation of Babylon, when people were separated].”

And finally, David Ben Gurion, the first Prime Minister of Israel, stated the following in Revolution of the Spirit: “Love your neighbor as yourself is the superior commandment in Judaism. With these three words, the eternal, human law of Judaism was formed… The state of Israel will be worthy of its name only if its social, economic, political, and judicial structure are based upon these three eternal words.”

With these few quotes out of many others found in numerous writings of our sages, I tried to convey their simple message that the role of the Jewish people is not to be political activists. Rather, it is to be a role model of unity. If we do this, we will bring peace upon ourselves and upon the world, since we will be “a light unto nations.”
[201643]

Filed under: New Publications - No Comments →

World Kabbalah Convention 2017 in Tel Aviv

The surrounding world is a projection of our egoism. Don’t like the world? Then correct your own ego – not your shadow!

Instinctively, Trump opponents understand the need for change. They’re not ripe for it psychologically, and desperately cling to the old.

Reality check: when Trump calls a spade a spade, not being politically correct, could it be that we’re just not ready for it?

Liberalism led to Political Correctness. Since it’s feeding on our egoism, it is now overblown. It hinders us and needs to be replaced.

In the old world we used to lie to each other and not call a spade a spade. Trump reveals who we really are—that’s why we don’t like him.

Society’s development is driven by egoism, so contradictions will intensify. Kabbalah teaches how to connect in spite of contradictions.

Trump undermines the old world management system, which is dying, rather than being temporarily replaced. That’s why it keeps resisting.

Michael Laitman: Ultra “Liberal” Self-Righteousness, Or, How Jews Invoke Anti-Semitism

Ultra “Liberal” Self-Righteousness, Or, How Jews Invoke Anti-Semitism Antisemitism:

Michael Laitman: A Sober Look at Trump’s Immigration Ban and Its Protest MuslimBan

A Sober Look At Trump’s Immigration Ban And Its Protest MuslimBan

The world doesn’t realize: social development can’t be stopped. Trump might just be replaced by one who’s even more right & anti-liberal.
[201536]
From Twitter, 2/5/17

Related Material:
My Thoughts On Twitter, 2/4/17
My Thoughts On Twitter, 2/3/17
My Thoughts On Twitter, 2/2/17

Filed under: Egoism, Kabbalah Study, New Publications, News, Thoughts on Twitter - No Comments →

From my column in Ynet: “The Day Robots Take Over The Labor Market”

Autonomous cars that are driven by themselves, three-dimensional printers, and computerized supermarkets without cashiers, what will taxi drivers, salespeople, and all the other people do who have professions that are going to disappear? How will we fill our day after we discover that our workplace has been shut down? Rav Laitman presents the expected scenario of changes in the future society that we should prepare for.

In 2025, the world will be totally different. Sophisticated machines and computers will take over the labor force. Robotic cars that drive by themselves will replace truck drivers, taxi drivers, and bus drivers. We will not need banks either, and professions such as cashiers and other service providers will likely perish from the world. We will still need personnel to operate computerized systems, but will require very few people. The conclusion is simple: most of today’s workers will find themselves without a livelihood.

If such scenarios sound like a science fiction movie trailer, here is some data. The research institute Gartner predicts that by the end of 2020, about 50 billion tools, objects, and people are expected to be connected to the Internet. The world will be connected by formats similar to smart cities; we will all live in smart houses, and machines that know how to transmit information between them and give orders to each other without any human contact will be part of our daily lives. This technological revolution is called the Internet of Things (IoT).

Along with the work place, which is like a second home for us today, wages in their familiar form will disappear, money, which gives us an incentive to get up in the morning, glues us together, and compels us to make a living through the connections between us. What will our future source of income be? What will happen to our wages?

It’s All About Relationships

The Americans have great hopes for a better future with the election of Trump. They expect him to create tens of thousands of new jobs and to make America great again. Other people are hoping that salvation will come from science and that scientists will offer a new socio-economic approach. In both cases, it is about covering up the problem, about providing patches that will not last long. Eventually, we must face the growing problem of global unemployment.

You might try to bury your head in the sand like many do or to ignore the enormous changes that are coming, but you should take one thing into account: man’s egoistic nature. It will continue to grow and develop, will become increasingly more ferocious, and might eventually lead puzzled humanity to choose between two familiar options: a Marxist-style socialist revolution or a nationalistic regime with Nazi/Hitler-style characteristics.

According to the wisdom of Kabbalah, the solution is in building the right relationships between people. It is the different social connections throughout history that have formatted different new regimes. Even back in the Middle Ages, different social eras like slavery and feudalism based on agriculture divided society into two major classes: the nobility and the vassals. The egoistic nature in humanity grew stronger at that time and led to the search of crooked ways to profit more, and people began to develop new means that led to great changes.

At the end of the 18^th century, the gradual transition to the modern world began. The industrial revolution developed very rapidly and led to urbanization, a process in which the masses in Europe and the US left pastoral villages and moved to big cities that developed around the new factories that were being built. Society gradually changed, and two new classes emerged: the working class and the bourgeois class.

In the middle of the 19^th century, the egoistic nature of relations in society became more extreme and took on a new socio-economic format called capitalism. The method was good at first, but the 2008 economic crisis illustrated briefly how far things can go, and generally speaking, few know how to play by the rules of capitalism, and they are the ones who determine the game, and the others, who are the silent majority, lose big time.

Economy or Corruption

Although the economy helps us live, it isn’t life itself. The increasing activity in the model of universal basic income (UBI), according to which the state pays every citizen a daily allowance regardless of his employment status, disconnecting work from pay, is no coincidence. It reflects the awkward attempts to prepare for an era in which there will be no work, but there will be plenty to live on thanks to advanced robotics. This is the reason that, in a digital era that threatens to change jobs as we know them today, we must engage in building a new social structure. As soon as society changes, the economy will change.

How will we bring about the change? Just as we are all products of the public education system that was founded with the acceleration of the industrial revolution in the 19^th century in order to train skilled workers for the professional work on the assembly lines of the factories, we also must bring about an unprecedented educational revolution in the 21^st century. This means that we must adapt the relationships between us through educating the masses to live in a new society.

What is the first step? It is to attend school once again, to study about the global world and about human nature, and to discuss how we can tighten the positive relationships between us at a roundtable. The positive force of connection we will create and establish between us will balance the negative force of our egoistic nature, restrain it from disintegrating relationships, and will provide every individual with an income in the emotionally and psychologically in the form of happiness, joy, peace, and tranquility.

Homemade

Such an educational initiative is based on the laws of global nature, which is taught by the wisdom of Kabbalah. Unity is the most basic, natural structure. Nature aspires for balance, equality, and wholeness, and since people are part of the circle of nature, we, too, are obliged to operate in equality and mutual consideration. The only difference is that in our case, we must do it consciously through an educational process. We will put an end to the problem of growing unemployment by promoting an ideology that calls for unity. New jobs will be created for many and their only goal will be generating the positive energy of connection. This will be our production, an income of nobel human value, a pay we will work for.

What will be our work? We will be busy developing a society that encourages closeness between people. We will focus on the improvement of skills such as patience, concession, and restraint in our relationships with others and will increase awareness of social relations hidden from view. We will not be required to change any of the natural attributes we were born with or those we have acquired during our lifetime, but we must learn how to establish nice mutual relationships between us that will guarantee a good and happy life.

What about the basic necessities such as food, clothing, housing, transportation, and other social services like healthcare and education? We will leave that to robots and smart machines. The enormous surplus in manpower will operate the advanced equipment, and wherever manpower is needed, we all will work together in rotation and with great will to serve all of society.

Robots gradually will replace our technical contribution to humanity, but not the human part, which we have not developed yet. When we connect a bit more, the social atmosphere will bring us together and create a new socio-economic structure that we have never known before. The state will become a big communal family, national and personal problems will be solved from a new perspective, and the force of connection will heal society and bring it to its full recovery. The new social economy will finally free us from the continuous worry about making a living and an exaggerated engagement in materialism, and will leave us spare time in order to develop individually, socially, and spiritually.
[200199]
From Ynet article 1/5/17

Filed under: Crisis, Economy, Globalization, New Publications - No Comments →

In my regular column in Haaretz, my new article: “Good Luck Donald, Because We All Need to Trump the Ego“

We can make Donald Trump’s inauguration the start of a new future, now all it takes is our determination.

Today, Donald Trump becomes the 45th President of the United States. But I am still not sure if we should congratulate him or comfort him on his inauguration. Wherever you look, there are chaos, helplessness, and hopelessness. In the 20th century, humankind’s unalloyed egoism has brought nature to its knees. In the 21st century, it is bringing humankind to its knees.

Since September 11, 2001, when al-Qaeda terrorists hijacked four passenger jets, demolished the World Trade Center and part of the Pentagon, and killed 3,000 people, the US has been at war with Islamist terrorism. Since 2011, when the Arab Spring broke out, the Arab world has been devastated as regimes all over the Near and Middle East collapsed and entire nations lapsed into deadly chaos that has claimed the lives of millions of civilians. To date, with the exception of Israel and partially Jordan, no country in the Middle East enjoys stability and relative normalcy.

The wave of migrants following the collapse of governance all over the Muslim world has prompted a tsunami of migration into Europe. The Europeans, who were already struggling to recover from a financial crisis—a ripple effect of the US 2008 near meltdown of Wall Street—found themselves overwhelmed and literally raped by unabashed, predominantly male swells of vociferous Muslim migrants demanding to be treated as proprietors, not as refugees.

As the European mayhem unfolded, the US did not lag far behind. Violence has spread throughout the country, Muslim terrorism has struck hard several times, racial tensions have intensified significantly leading to frequent aggression, and anti-Semitism, which was already terrifying Europe’s Jews, has spread throughout US academic institutions and has begun to spill over to the streets.

And as if all this is not enough, nature has begun to avenge man’s abuse through massive earthquakes and tsunami in Japan, Haiti, and other places, record setting worldwide temperatures three years in a row, and a general sense of helplessness before the ire of nature. Who would have thought that in the 21st century, Parisians, once the dwellers of the capital of “good life,” would be told “not to fear wolves roaming Paris streets as they only eat four-legged animals.” Let’s face it; the world’s a mess.

Even at Davos, Forbes Magazine concluded that “It appears that a dramatically new world disorder … has begun to emerge, calling into question the viability of the post-war, liberal international order.” And so, before Chinese fake food factories manage to poison their entire nation out of sheer greed, before Europe plunges into total disarray as the EU crumbles, before the US army declares martial law within the United States to curb violent riots, and before the Jews are slaughtered the world over, let’s stop for a moment. Instead of panicking, let’s climb aboard an imaginary plane and look at our reality from a bird’s eye view.

We really, really need to make some sense of the new world disorder

That Sweet and Evil Nectar

Rav Yehuda Ashlag, known as Baal HaSulam (author of The Ladder) for his Sulam (Ladder) commentary on The Book of Zohar, was the greatest kabbalist of the 20th century. He was also the father of my teacher, Rav Baruch Ashlag (RABASH), who continued his father’s teachings and inherited his manuscripts. One night, as I was sifting through letters that Baal HaSulam had written to his students, I came across an allegory that had touched me very deeply. Baal HaSulam wrote there that egoism is like a sweet, yet poisonous nectar placed on the tip of a sword. The nectar is so sweet and so addictive that anyone who finds it is compelled to lift the sword up to his mouth, stretch out his tongue, and let the nectar drop onto it, drop by drop, by drop, until the poison overcomes him and he dies.

That sweet and evil nectar is our ego. The ego promised us that capitalism would make everyone rich. But once people became rich, the ego made them snatch everything for themselves and leave nothing for others. The ego also promised us that communism would make everyone equal and ensure that everyone were well-fed, well-clothed, and healthy. But once the champions of communism became rulers, the ego took over and equality and well-being for the people went out the window and into the Siberian permafrost. The ego also promised us that liberalism would guarantee our freedom of speech and freedom of thought, but once it took the reins, it alienated us from one another through political correctness. In the name of the First Amendment, the ego has driven us so far apart that people feel that it’s okay to ban family members just because they aren’t liberals, too.

All of these false promises of the ego are the poisonous nectar. They are all sweet when we first taste them, but they all turn out sour and leave us hungrier and sicker than before. We need the real cure!

When Life Serves You Lemons…

“When life serves you lemons,” goes the saying, “turn them into lemonade.” The ego is a huge lemon. No other species has been dealt this type of snag. All other parts of nature—animals, plants, and even minerals—run merrily along with nature’s perfect balance between the positive and negative forces that create ebb and flow, day and night, summer and winter, and life and death. We, on the other hand, have been given only the negative—an ever growing desire to take, and no desire to give (unless we can receive more in return).

Thousands of years ago, our ancient Hebrew sages noticed this and noted, “The inclination of a man’s heart is evil from his youth” (Gen 5:21). However, they did not settle for pointing out the problem; they devised a recipe for turning sour lemons into sweet lemonade.

The first to do this was Abraham the Patriarch, whose legacy of mercy set the foundation of what was later to become the law of Israel: “Love your neighbor as yourself.”

But the ego did not rest; it kept on growing. Maimonides tells us (Mishneh Torah) that Abraham bequeathed his teaching to his sons and his disciples, who continued to develop it over the years. Finally, under Moses’ leadership, Abraham’s group was told that they could either unite “as one man with one heart,” and thereby become a nation, or the mountain of Sinai (from the Hebrew word, sinaah [hatred]), which had been turned over them like a vault, would be their tomb (Masechet Shabbat). They chose unity.

At that moment, the lemons had turned into lemonade. The people of Israel discovered that if they did not suppress the mountain of hatred that arose between them, but covered it with love, then this unleashed the positive, balancing force that exists everywhere in nature but in humanity. The book, Likutey Etzot (Assorted Counsels), describes this process in the following way: “The essence of peace is to connect two opposites. Hence, do not be alarmed if you see a person whose view is the complete opposite of yours and you think that you will never be able to make peace with him. Also, when you see two people who are completely opposite to each other, do not say that it is impossible to make peace between them. On the contrary, the essence of peace is to try to make peace between two opposites.”

Between Right and Left

Kabbalah likes to use a term called “three lines,” which it divides into “right,” “left,” and “middle” line. The left line is the ego. We have plenty of this. The right line is the desire to give, Abraham’s quality of mercy. The middle line doesn’t exist independently; it is the result of well-maintained balance between the ego and the quality of mercy, between the right and left lines.

When you look at nature, you do not see three lines; you see harmony. This harmony is the result of the perfect balance that exists between the two desires in nature. Because we humans are devoid of the right line, the quality of mercy, it is very easy to distinguish the ego, and it is very clear that we must supplement it with the quality of mercy. The bigger the ego, the more mercy it requires in order to balance it and create a sustainable middle line. It turns out that the intensification of the ego is happening precisely so we will add the quality of mercy and cover our egos with it.

Our sages knew this wisdom and therefore never tried to crush the ego or suppress it. They knew it was a necessary basis upon which to build the quality of mercy. And in the process of building it, they grasped the secret of nature’s harmony—the perfect balance between the right and left lines.

As the ego kept evolving, so did the methods of supplementing it. The Book of Zohar writes in the portion, Aharei Mot: “Behold, how good and how pleasant it is for brothers to also sit together. These are the friends as they sit together, and are not separated from each other. At first, they seem like people at war, wishing to kill one another. Then they return to being in brotherly love. …And you, the friends who are here, as you were in fondness and love before, henceforth you will also not part … And by your merit there will be peace in the world.”

Making Lemonade in the 21st Century

What worked for the authors of The Zohar would not work for us. We are simply too selfish to be able to introduce the right line in the same way the authors of The Zohar did it.

To counterweigh the ego, we first need to balance the intolerable inequality in our society. Data revealed just recently shows that inequality in the United States has increased so much that today’s top one percent “earn 81 times more” than the bottom 50 percent. (Note, not the poorest, but the bottom fifty percent of the American population.) “This ratio of 1 to 81 is similar to the gap between the average income in the United States and the average income in the world’s poorest countries,” such as “the war-torn Democratic Republic of Congo, Central African Republic, and Burundi.”

Among many opinion leaders and politicians, there is a growing realization that some form of basic income must be guaranteed to all. They realize that in a world of growing income-insecurity due to automation and globalization, the risk of social instability will grow the more permanent joblessness becomes ubiquitous. When people have no way of providing for their families and for themselves, they become desperate, and therefore dangerous. One way or another, governments will have to find a way to guarantee that entire populations do not go hungry.

However, giving away money without any strings attached will not taper the risk of civil unrest. If people have nothing to do all day and no commitment to anyone, they will become loose cannons that will undoubtedly explode. Considering that our self-absorption does not stop growing just because we aren’t employed, it is not hard to imagine what city streets will look like a few years from now.

In light of all this, what we can and must do is stipulate participation in “connection trainings” as a precondition for reception of the basic income. In these trainings, people will learn about nature’s balance, human nature’s imbalance, and the need to supplement the ego with mercy to create harmonious balance. In other words, they will learn about the three lines.

But they will not only learn; they will participate in introducing the quality of mercy to humanity, just as the ancient Hebrews did more than two millennia ago. Throughout the world, my students conduct what they have termed “connection circles.” In these circles, strangers, people of different backgrounds, and even people engaged in active conflicts, learn to care for one another in ways they never thought possible.

The circle is used to indicate that everyone is equal. When this is so, no one dominates or imposes his or her view, and everyone listens to everyone else. The goal of the circle is to strive to connect people by trying to rise above the ego. As people do this, they release the quality of mercy that exists everywhere in nature but in us, which then covers our selfishness with care for others. There is no delay; participants feel within a few minutes the impact of the right line—the positive force—and how it balances the left line, the ego. Allegorically, you could say that in the circle, we take the lemon from the left, the sugar from the right, and in the middle, we make the lemonade. The above link demonstrates how this is done, as does this clip, and this (the latter is Hebrew speaking; make sure the Subtitles option is switched on), even among Arabs and Jews. In these circles, people can rise above their hatred and release the quality of mercy (or the right line) into the circle.

Such circles can also be conducted over the internet. Already, some countries conduct online connection circles with dozens, sometimes hundreds of people simultaneously, grouped into circles of 8-10 people, though the participants may be in different places and even different countries. If such techniques were to be employed en masse, it would change the atmosphere throughout the world. People would become geared toward connection rather than confrontation. The streets would be safer, families calmer, and people would actually smile at each other on the street.

If we do this right, people will understand that the ego is a part of who we are, and that it is not meant to be used as a means for overcoming others, but for connecting with them on a higher level. When people grasp that this is how nature’s forces work, they will know how to direct their lives appropriately going forward.

As time goes by, people will need to develop new methods to connect themselves above their growing egos. But since they will have grasped life’s fundamental principle of right, left, and middle line, they will find new ways to connect, rather than turn back to violence. The three lines principle, if implemented, will guarantee peace, prosperity, and happiness on Earth.

I do hope that the inauguration of Donald J. Trump will also be the beginning of a new future for humanity, one where sour lemons immediately turn into sweet and healthy lemonade. We have the knowledge; we have the means; all it takes is our determination.
[200919]

Filed under: New Publications - No Comments →