stay tuned

The blog will resume on 6 January 2018.

Image source: http://rideforlifechallenge.com.au/stay-tuned-for-2017-news/

Haaretz: The Israeli Settler Elite's Fake Libertarian Agenda

The love affair of the settler elite with libertarianism of the American Tea Party type did not begin with the Shaked family’s Italian vacation. Dozens of institutions across Israel – think tanks, journals, training programs – are engaged in imparting the doctrine of the unrestrained market to the young generation of the national-religious public. More often than not, their funding derives from conservative American Jews and evangelical Christians. For Shaked and her party’s leader, Education Minister Naftali Bennett, that imported worldview is particularly profitable. [...]

Let’s begin with the self-evident: A party whose basic principle is the perpetuation of military rule over millions of people cannot evoke the concept of freedom as the rest of humanity understands it. The economic thinkers of the right whom Shaked quotes would, if forced to choose, probably prefer to sing the “Internationale” in the town square than to validate the occupation project, which undermines all rights that underlie the principle of Western liberty. Friedrich Hayek lauded the free market not out of concern for the right of hoteliers trying to save a few shekels on lifeguards, but because they wanted to protect citizens from the unlimited power of the state.

But the absurdity goes deeper than that. An examination of the record of Habayit Hayehudi reveals that the party is an enemy not only of the principle of freedom, but also of the free market that Shaked purports to sanctify. As minister of economy, whenever a factory in the Negev or Galilee ran into difficulties, Bennett declared that the government must not support a workplace that cannot stand on its own feet. But for some reason, when it comes to the settlement project – another enterprise that is unable to stand on its own without assistance – his approach is the polar opposite.

read the article

Haaretz: Right-wing Dissent Against Netanyahu Is Growing, but They’re Not Turning on Him Just Yet

On Saturday night, an assorted group of right-wingers, settlers and religious folk will gather in Jerusalem’s Zion Square for a rally in support of the rule of law and against corruption. It is intended as a riposte to the now weekly anti-corruption Saturday rallies in Tel Aviv, which are largely dominated by left-wingers and open calls for the removal (and imprisonment) of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. [...]

Their comments echoed similar recent sentiments written by other leading right-wing journalists, including Kalman Liebskind and Yoaz Hendel, who is one of the organizers of the Jerusalem rally and also served as Netanyahu’s communications director from 2011 to 2012. Without necessarily targeting Netanyahu, they have served as a counterpoint to the regular right-wing rhetoric that attacks the police, the prosecutors, the left and the media for unfairly persecuting the prime minister. 

The most powerful voice so far has been that of Rabbi Yuval Cherlow, who’s one of the more mainstream rabbis on the religious right. Defying his own public, he appeared at the Tel Aviv rally last Saturday, where he said “corruption is a strategic threat to Israeli society. The meaning of corruption is abuse of power by those who have been given it – power that is used for the wrong reasons. Power is essential, but it is dangerous and can topple the state into the depths.” [...]

The trauma of 1992 is still deeply felt within the Israeli right. Yitzhak Rabin won that election, even though the religious and right bloc received more votes than the center-left parties. Fragmentation on the right led to the ultranationalist Tehiya party not crossing the electoral threshold, with its votes rendered useless.

read the article

America Magazine: The Editors: Pope Francis needs to restore trust in response to sex abuse crisis

It is typical protocol for the pope to offer the final commendation at the funeral of a cardinal in Rome, and long waits for official Vatican actions and announcements are nothing new. But the juxtaposition of these events is jarring to the world outside Rome. As attention is again focused on Cardinal Law, a symbol of the church’s abject failure during the sex abuse crisis in the United States, many survivors of abuse and other Catholics are wondering when the church will publicly hold bishops accountable for misdeeds and inaction in responding to sex abuse.

Pope Francis’ apparent lack of urgency in re-appointing members of the sex abuse commission and the lack of clarity about how survivors will be represented among those members is alarming. Confidence in the commission was already damaged earlier this year when Marie Collins, the only survivor of sexual abuse still active on the commission, resigned in protest against curial opposition to the process of reform. Healing and reconciliation within the church would be assisted immeasurably by a clear papal statement recognizing the need for transparency around the work of the commission and the reforms it proposes.

Catholics are called to trust the church and its leaders, and they want to respond to that call generously. But in its handling of sex abuse, the church spent decades squandering that trust. Continued bureaucratic delay on the renewal of the commission further erodes that trust. The lack of clear public action to hold church leaders accountable for their role in allowing sex abuse to happen damages that trust as well. Pope Francis should recognize that, for the world outside the Vatican, much greater transparency is necessary. He should act swiftly to establish it.

read the article

Haaretz: What Really Happens to U.S. Orthodox Jews When They Come Out

According to Mordechai Levovitz, the co-founder and executive director of Jewish Queer Youth, a group supporting and empowering LGBT young people in the Jewish community, over 70 percent of drop-in participants report suicidal thoughts or past suicide attempts. [...]

Upon realizing he wasn’t “any less of a man for being gay,” and in retrospect understanding the harms of conversion therapy, Penner returned to the United States and told his Modern Orthodox parents he would live as a Jewish gay man. “Having a gay son in the Orthodox community is considered anywhere between shameful and a failure – it was at the time, at least – and it took them a while to get over that,” he says. [...]

Levovitz says one of the main obstacles LGBT Orthodox youth face today is a “strange form of homophobia,” expressed in the pressure the family applies once someone comes out. “Their family will say, ‘We don’t have a problem with you being gay, but the community has a problem and they will punish your brother and your sister, and your father’s job will be in jeopardy.’”

Kicking children out of the house is less common in Modern Orthodoxy, Levovitz says, though it’s still prevalent in the ultra-Orthodox community. But he sees the predominant issue within Orthodoxy today in the cop-outs of parents, schools and “well-meaning rabbis.”

read the article

The Atlantic: Nikki Haley's New Best Friends at the UN

The invite list includes seven countries, mainly on Pacific islands and in Central America, plus one in Africa, that joined the U.S. and Israel in voting “no.” That’s not necessarily the set of guests one would expect at an American influence party, since America’s main treaty allies in Europe and Asia didn’t vote with Washington. (Also invited were the 35 countries that abstained, even though some, like Canada, reportedly abstained as a snub to the U.S. One hundred and twenty-eight countries voted “yes” and will not be invited.) But the friends list may not be so much a reflection of American influence as Haley’s invitation would suggest. In most of the cases, Israeli diplomacy has been softening the ground for this decision for years, even as President Donald Trump’s America First policy alienates world leaders. The vote, in other words, may say more about Israel’s global standing than America’s. [...]

Three of the Pacific island states almost certainly would have been invited to the friendship party in any case. The Marshall Islands, Micronesia, and Palau have historic relationships with the U.S. dating back to the period after World War II, when they were under formal American control. They are now sovereign countries, but they have kept up close ties with the U.S. under “Free Association” agreements with Washington. Those countries get U.S. aid and other benefits, and in exchange, they vote in near lock-step with Washington at the UN. Those agreements have been in place for decades and, for the most part, still have years to run. In other words, it would have been remarkable had any of those three countries not voted with the U.S. [...]

Israel’s outreach includes the fourth Pacific state to vote “no,” Nauru, which doesn’t have the formal ties to the U.S. that its Pacific neighbors share. Nauru has only about 10,000 people and few natural resources. Its best strategic asset, arguably, is its seat at the UN. In U.S. terms, Nauru having the same UN vote as every other big country is like Wyoming having the same number of senators as California. That lets Nauru monetize its sovereignty by offering diplomacy in exchange for aid. It is one of a handful of countries that still recognizes Taiwan instead of China, a relationship that wins it badly-needed development aid. It hosts a detention camp for refugees that Australia would prefer stay outside its borders, also in exchange for aid. It recognized Russian-occupied territories in Eastern Europe as sovereign states, and gets Russian money. As of May, that put Nauru afoul of a new American law that forces the U.S. government to cut off aid to any country that recognizes those territories. Meanwhile, Israel is reaching out. Netanyahu hosted Nauru’s president in June, which is like hosting, not a senator from Wyoming, but the mayor of Cheyenne—a city that, incidentally, has six times the population of Nauru. A friendly relationship with Israel, in other words, is no surprise. [...]

But what about Togo? There too, the vote seems to be more about Israel than the U.S. Togo’s authoritarian ruler, Faure Gnassingbé, has been outspoken about his love for Israel. “I am dreaming of Israel's return to Africa and Africa's return to Israel,” he wrote in a guestbook on a visit to Israel in August, a fact that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu proudly tweeted. Netanyahu has supported Gnassingbé through a period of political turmoil, a decision that led to the embarrassing scene of having to cancel a planned Israel-Africa summit in Togo after pro-democratic protests against Gnassingbé got out of hand. And though the U.S. provides aid to Togo as well, the Togolese were apparently frustrated by American threats to “take names” of anyone who voted yes on the measure. Togo voted no—in support of Israel—but released a statement saying it had done so “despite the threats” from Washington

read the article

Al Jazeera: Interpreting the Catalan elections

This was a landslide win, in votes (over 1.1 million and 25.3 percent) and seats (37), for pro-Spain Ciudadanos (liberals). This is no doubt a historic win for many reasons. It is the first time since 1980 that a non-nationalist party clearly wins elections in Catalonia. [...]

Led by the young Ines Arrimadas, the party ran a clear anti-secessionist campaign and endorsed the Mariano Rajoy government's application of temporary direct rule. So, while the secessionists claim that the "Catalan Republic defeated the tripartite of article 155" (Ciudadanos, PSC and Rajoy's Popular Party), the biggest advocate together with the Popular Party(PP), of article 155 (even of harsher forms of federal coercion than the one finally agreed to), actually won elections in Catalonia, somewhat denting the secessionists' narrative. A pyrrhic victory nevertheless, as Arrimadas will be unable to get enough votes in Parliament to be elected the next Catalan premier.

This was a severe blow to Prime Minister Rajoy's PP and the government. The PP has gone from 19 seats in the Catalan Parliament just five years ago to 11 seats in 2015, to a meagre 3 seats this year, and will have to humiliatingly join their foes from the anti-establishment, secessionist CUP (the other loser last night, from 10 seats to just 4) in the parliament's Mixed Group. [...]

This was a severe blow to the leftist Podemos (Podem). Podemos is a Pablo Iglesias-led coalition of leftist parties in Catalonia, based on a rejection of independence (especially the unilateral independence pursued by Puigdemont's bloc) and rejection of Rajoy's policies too. It has also failed in these elections, further weakening Podemos in Spain as a whole.

read the article

Politico: 3 ways the election changed Catalan politics

The three pro-independence parties won 47.5 percent of the votes in this week’s regional election, compared to 47.8 percent in 2015. Meanwhile, the unionists increased their share from 41.6 percent to 43.4 percent. Support for a third option— a scattering of leftist parties that refuse to be considered as part of either of the two other blocs — dropped from 8.9 percent to 7.4 percent.

One of the most remarkable aspects of the election was a truly exceptional turnout. Some 82 percent of the electorate cast a ballot — the highest level of participation in any electoral contest in Catalonia since the restoration of democracy after the death of Francisco Franco in 1975.  [...]

The second fundamental change regards the unionists. The party that received the most votes was Ciudadanos, a center-right, liberal upstart that opposed independence. Meanwhile, support for Mariano Rajoy’s Popular Party plunged, cutting its seats in parliament from 11 to three. [...]

On the pro-independence side, the most important difference in this election is the decline of the radical, anti-capitalist Popular Unity Candidacy party, which saw its share of votes drop from 8.2 percent to 4.5 percent and its representation in parliament cut from 10 to four deputies.

read the article