The Right Kind of Proportionality
Just as the goal of the Hamas Covenant is the eradication of Israel, so—
The goal of the Israel Defense Forces should be the eradication of Hamas.
Anything less than this IDF goal is disproportionate.
Just as the goal of the Hamas Covenant is the eradication of Israel, so—
The goal of the Israel Defense Forces should be the eradication of Hamas.
Anything less than this IDF goal is disproportionate.
No one should be deceived by the allegedly “even-handed” reporting of the war in Gaza by any media such as FOX News.
Even-handedness between Israel and Hamas is but a euphemism for moral equivalence, since it places a civilized country like Israel on the same level as Hamas, terrorist organization whose Charter unambiguously calls for Israel’s destruction.
John Bolton, former US ambassador to the United Nations, points out in his book Surrender is Not an Option, that “moral equivalency” permeates the State Department.
To be even more accurate, the policy of the State Department, hence of the United States government, toward Israel and its enemy, the Palestinian Authority, has ever been dominated by moral reversal. (more…)
If anyone wants to know how enlightened Muslims look upon ecumenism he can hardly do better than read the works of Seyyed Hossein Nasr, perhaps the most erudite Muslim philosopher of our time.
Nasr, who received his Ph.D. in the History of Science and Philosophy at Harvard and subsequently served as Chancellor of Aryamehr University in Iran, has taught and lectured at America’s most prestigious universities.
“Ecumenism,” he writes, “is becoming an instrument for simple relativization and further secularization.” By “relativization” he means this. The tendency of ecumenism is to deny that any religion is the repository of exclusive truth. Ecumenism thus reinforces the doctrine of cultural relativism according to which there are no objective and universally valid standards by which to determine whether the beliefs and practices of one people are superior to those of another.
Moreover, because relativism denies what Nasr calls “transcendental truths,” it inevitably breeds secularism. That some religionists are also relativists or quasi-relativists is only evidence of their superficiality or desire for popularity. Many ecumenicals fit this description. (more…)
A comment on the excellent article “Still Asleep After Mumbai” by Daniel Pipes.
Islam is at war with the West. The West cannot win this war unless it defines the enemy. Europe has all but surrendered to Islam, and America is in the process of doing so because their common enemy has not been defined. The same may be said of Israel, whose leaders are afraid to name the same enemy.
Using such terms as “Islamism,” Islamic fundamentalism,” “extremist Islam,” “radical Islam,” “militant Islam,” “political Islam,” “IslamoFascism” fails to expose the unique political and theological nature of the enemy, and this failure is a strategic error.
The fact that the Qur’an exalts the Muslim who “slays and is slain” for Allah (Sura 9:111) suggests that Islam is a religion of death.
However, defining Islam exposes you to the canard of racism. It can also lead to violent backlash. But inasmuch as Islam is waging war against the West, the West will lose this war if its political and intellectual leaders fail to educate public opinion about the true nature of the enemy.
One way to avoid the issue is to speak of “Muslim moderates.” (more…)
Faith in reason is the cornerstone of Jeffersonian democracy: “Fix reason firmly in her seat and call to her tribunal every fact, every opinion.”
Jefferson’s faith in reason coincided with his faith in the common man, provided he was literate and self-supporting, in which case he would not be readily deceived by demagogues or succumb to moral relativism. Of course, television did not exist in Jefferson’s time, when Americans read the Bible and many could quote Shakespeare.
A product of the “Enlightenment”—which was nothing if not egalitarian and secular—Jefferson believed that reason, through science, would eventually triumph over force and usher in a New World Order of peace, prosperity, and democracy.
Contrast the nineteenth-century social democrat Ferdinand Lassalle, whose faith in reason is armed with a sword. In his drama Franz von Sickengen, there occurs a dialogue between a Lutheran chaplain, a pacifist, and Ulrick von Hutten, the great sixteenth-century humanist. (more…)
I am in the process of publishing a second and updated version of my book Demophrenia: Israel and the Malaise of Democracy. The updated version explains the pathological policies and statements of Israel’s current elites, including Ehud Olmert. I need to assess how many of you would be interested in purchasing this book. If you are interested, please contact us.
If you want an in-depth analysis of what ails Israel’s political and intellectual and some of its military elites, consult Chapter 5 of my book Demophrenia: Israel and the Malaise of Democracy. Here is a précis of the book’s central chapter:
From its inception in 1948, the government of Israel, regardless of which party or coalition was at the helm, has been afflicted by “demophrenia.” Demophrenia is a deeply rooted malady of national and even of world-historical significance. Demophrenia involves an illogical and compulsive application of the democratic principles of freedom and equality to moral problems and ideological conflicts which are impervious to, and even exacerbated by, those principles. This disorder is most advanced in Israel, for its government is animated by a democratic mentality in conflict with Zionism, and ineffectual against the anti-democratic mentality of Israel’s Arab enemies.
To show that demophrenia is indeed a widespread but hitherto unrecognized mental disorder, I shall first review some of the literature on schizophrenia. (more…)
Edited transcript of the Eidelberg Report, Israel National Radio, December 15, 2008.
Islam is at war with the West. The West cannot win this war unless it defines the enemy. Europe has all but surrendered to Islam, and America is in the process of doing so because their common enemy has not been defined. The same may be said of Israel, whose leaders are afraid to name the same enemy.
Using such terms as “Islamism,” Islamic fundamentalism,” “extremist Islam,” “radical Islam,” “militant Islam,” “political Islam,” “IslamoFascism” fails to expose the unique political and theological nature of the enemy, and this failure is a strategic error.
Henri Boulad, an Egyptian Jesuit and specialist in Islam, boldly states, “Islamism is Islam.” This statement, he says,
is perfectly consistent with history and geography, with the Qur’an and the sunna, with the life of Muhammad and the evolution of Islam, with what Islam says about itself. I reject the position of people—Muslims or Christians—who bury their heads in the sand like ostriches … refuse to see the situation objectively, or take their wishes for realities, on behalf of dialogue and tolerance.
The Qur’an exalts the Muslim who “slays and is slain” for Allah (Sura 9:111). Islam, therefore, is a religion of death. (more…)
Religious pluralism has become the banner of Reform and Conservative Jews. These Jews have joined forces with secularists in Israel who are trying to diminish if not nullify the political power of the Orthodox.
This is not simply a sectarian or partisan conflict. For pluralism, properly understood, is a philosophical doctrine that denies objective truth or standards by which to determine whether the values or way of life of one individual, group, or nation is intrinsically preferable to that of another.
Religious pluralism therefore undermines belief in the Sinai Covenant, and this has profound consequences for Israel’s ability to persevere in the Islamic Middle East.
Pluralism, as defined above, conforms to multiculturalism, the secular religion of post-Christian Europe. In fact, multiculturalism is eroding the ethnic heritage of various European countries, in danger of succumbing to Arab culture or Islamic imperialism. (more…)
1. America is threatened by two enemies: one internal, the other external. America needs a non-governmental organization consisting of the finest minds to formulate and implement a comprehensive strategy to overcome these two enemies.
2. The internal enemy is the university-bred doctrine of moral relativism also known as multiculturalism. Relativism is demoralizing the American people; it is eroding their heritage, their sense of national pride and purpose. Relativism permeates every level of American education. It infects the news and entertainment media. It influences all three branches of American Government. It therefore corrupts the opinion-makers and policy-makers of the United States. (This same doctrine has emasculated England and Europe.)
3. America’s external enemy is Islamic imperialism. This enemy has two power centers: Iran and Saudi Arabia, the former involves Shi’ite Islam, the latter Sunni Islam. These two countries control most of the oil flowing through the Persian Gulf—the energy sources on which the American and the world economy largely depends. Petrodollars have built thousands of mosques in the United States and Europe. These mosques propagate ideas and values subversive of civilization: respect for human life and individual freedom as well as humane desire to resolve differences through speech and moral suasion as opposed to force and violence.
4. We cannot expect the Government of the United States to initiate and pursue the policies required to overcome its internal and external enemies, if only because the Government has been corrupted by moral relativism. (more…)
Israel today is in a state of political disarray. Established political parties like the National Religious Party are dissolving. Other parties like Labor have become politically comatose. The ruling Kadima Party, formed by political opportunists from other parties, has no ideology apart from multiculturalism. This essentially anti-Jewish party wants to dissolve the State of Israel into “a state of its citizens.”
So does a new left-wing coalition emerging from the ruins of Labor and Meretz. Also emerging is a hodgepodge of reputedly right-wing groups opposed to any further territorial withdrawal, but like others, it lacks a national strategy.
Meanwhile, the Likud, which spawned Kadima, has opened its doors to various national figures to secure its chances of winning the February election. Lacking, however, is confidence that the Likud, under Benjamin Netanyahu, will withstand U.S. pressure to withdraw from Judea and Samaria. After all, the Likud voted against abrogation of the Oslo Accords, and Netanyahu, in addition to surrendering part of Judea and Samaria to the Palestinian Authority at the Wye Summit, also voted for “disengagement” when he was a minister in the Sharon government. So, while he is preferable to Tzipi Livni, serious people wonder whether he has the spine or the stamina to stand up to the United States and its bipartisan support for a Palestinian state?
The preceding is a small fraction of the political chaos now reigning in Israel. (more…)
In II Samuel 12:1-4, the prophet Nathan teaches the following parable:
There were two men in one city: the one rich, and the other poor. The Rich man had exceeding many flocks and herds; but the poor man had nothing, save one little ewe lamb, which he had bought and reared; and it grew up together with him, and with his children; it did eat of his own morsel, and drink of his own cup, and lay in his bosom, and it was unto him as a daughter. And there came a traveler unto the rich man, and he spared to take of his own flock and of his own herd, to dress for the wayfaring man that was come unto him, but took the poor man’s lamb, and dressed it for the man that was come unto him.
The emotions normally evoked by this parable are anger and compassion: anger toward the rich man, compassion for the poor man.
Suppose, however, that upon hearing Nathan’s parable, a person were to evince anger toward the poor man and compassion for the rich man. (more…)
“Labor, Kadima: ‘Republican’ Bibi can’t be Obama’s counterpart”
The Jerusalem Post, November 6, 2008
It is unquestionably legitimate for any native-born American, be he or she black or white, Hispanic or Asian, Christian or Jewish or Muslim, to become the country’s president. Indeed, some wonder whether one need any longer be an American to become the nation’s Chief Executive.
Be this as it may, if all nations were to imitate multicultural America, all would cease to have any distinct national identity. This is the malaise of multicultural democracy, where moral and cultural relativism flourish. This malaise is evident in Israel.
Israel’s left-wing parties, Labor and Kadima, like America’s left-wing dominated Democratic Party, are committed to multiculturalism. This attitude cannot but eventuate in the extinction of their respective country’s heritage. We see this in Europe, with Sweden as the trend-setter. Sweden’s left-wing government recently renounced the country’s Swedish nationality by enacting multiculturalism into law in recognition of Sweden’s East Asian minority.
To appreciate the ascendancy of multiculturalism in Israel, consider the titles of its advocates: (more…)