This is a repeat from about one year ago - with a minor addition about the Obama presidency. The collapse of the world's financial systems, and the methods being used to revive them, are clear lessons in how Power Elites control the wealth of the world and screw the masses. Follow the news, read the facts as much as they are made available, and understand how the world works.
Power Elites, that is, those who control power, can be and often are viewed and misconstrued as the engines rather than the drivers. They are thought to be identical to those forces in societies that enhance them and empower them, such as the forces of religions, political entities, entrenched educational and indoctrination systems, armies, and other forces that enable Power Elites to retain, control, and grow their power. Those elected or dictatorial entities are the front offices and office-holders of Power Elites.
As an example, an armed force has tremendous power and is controlled by a political entity that has tremendous power that in turn is controlled by Power Elites. Building and maintaining an armed force require the expenditure of huge sums of money. Those expenditures, especially in times of war, are the troughs at which Power Elites feed and grow ever more powerful.
It is not unusual that the party in power in any society is often believed to be the Power Elite. The expression, “The power behind the throne,” grew out of awareness that the throne was the apparent but not the real power in the kingdom. Power Elites quietly control the powers that operate the machinery ostensibly held and wielded by all of the individuals and establishments in a society. Power of the magnitude described here is not the engine of societies. The engine with all its bells and whistles and moving parts is the visible motor element of any society. Power is the unseen force directing and controlling the engineers who in turn control the engine that moves the train.
The placement of George W. Bush in the presidency as their puppet was accomplished by the Elites’ legal and sometimes illegal control of the electoral process in the United States and their influence on a majority of the justices of the United States Supreme Court who created a one-time exception to electoral laws to achieve Bush’s election. Enrichment of Elites through government actions and inactions by placing friendly heads of departments and agencies began immediately. The government opened its doors to lobbyists, major contributors to the Republican Party, and upper echelon management of large corporations and influential leaders and a huge variety of emissaries of the Power Elites from financial, manufacturing, religious, educational, and business institutions.
The financial house of cards built in the United States that led to the world economic crash of 2008 had as its foundation Power Elite control of government enforcement agencies through the president and vice-president. The Securities and Exchange Commission investigations for securities fraud dropped from 69 in 2,000 to 9 in 2,007 and investigations that led to Justice Department prosecutions dropped from 437 cases in 2,000 to 133 in the first eleven months of 2008.
No president, no dictator, no king or queen, controls the power they wield. They sit on their thrones at the pleasure of the Power Elites. They are exposed and vulnerable to disenfranchisement, removal by force of revolution, and assassination.
Power Elites are impervious to assassination. Power Elites are neither crowned or elected. Power Elites are combinations of agreeing forces. They are embedded in interlocking directorates. In modern times at the upper levels of power, they appear as CEOs , CFOs, trustees of huge trusts, holders of shares in monopolies and multi-national corporations or other international conglomerates and organizations that are set up to manipulate each and every political, financial, military, and other entity that could maximize their power. Today, we see the transmogrification of the power structure through globalization. Power Elites have the wealth to play the shifting geography game. China, India, Iran, Brazil, and Russia, among other nations, are where the game is being played in the early second millennium. And the game goes on no matter who wins or loses or who gets jailed or killed.
Power seeks aggrandizement as part of its nature while it attempts or appears to attempt to retain the status quo of the society in which it is functioning. Power Elites do not wish to appear disruptive nor call attention to their existence. Power is at one and the same time revolutionary and extremely conservative. No ethics or morality is involved. Ethics and morality are humanistic concepts and humanism is the antithesis of power. Power must expand itself in whatever shape or form and by whatever means are available to it to accomplish its goal to grow or be beaten back by other powers. In this ongoing struggle between Power Elites and their front offices, humanity is used and abused. After their idealistic establishment, power structures within communist and socialist states, by allowing power to determine human existence, elevated the mechanics of power to prevail over more humane, beneficial social systems that promised, “To each according to his needs and from each according to his capabilities.” Those systems declared that ownership of wealth, natural resources and the means of production, would be communal.
The methods used to accomplish this magic elucidate one of the more fascinating examples of charlatanism. George Orwell’s, “1984,” explains the magic. Communist societies established on the ideological foundation of classless sharing and equality of the masses quickly degenerated and metamorphosed into stratified dictatorial nation-states with unassailable totalitarian Power Elites in control of all aspects of life and ready to do battle with other nation-states’ Power Elites. Capitalist powers rose up and worked assiduously to destroy the “Communist Menace” and “Godless Communism.” They succeeded in large measure because the idealism of socialism was undercut by the reality of a poverty-stricken non-socialistic life under dictatorships in closed two-class societies. Also, nothing replaced the dynamism and power of religion as a major tool for controlling the masses by the Power Elites and their front offices. The people were told by the dictatorships that there would be no pie in the sky when they died and no replacement was offered for that spiritual sustenance.
Power Elites operate outside of moral and humanitarian imperatives. Power Elites have only the one goal of maximizing their power by any means and at whatever cost to mankind and nature. If the outcome is beneficial to the masses, so be it. If the outcome is disastrous to the masses, so be it. Elites attempt to operate with, and control the forces that, move men and mountains without regard to good or evil, however good and evil are defined by those who claim to know what is good and what is evil. Oligarchic and fascistic states are the ideal settings for Power Elites to function optimally. I use “fascism” to mean rigid autocratic governmental economic regimentation and suppression of political opposition. But Power Elites can and do function well at the opposite extreme of human political constructs, in near anarchic national or cultural configurations of any size. They are often the only regimented controlling force in such chaotic political and economic situations. (A prime example of this exercise of power is Robert Mugabe’s control of Zimbabwe.) The racist element of fascism is unimportant to Power Elites except as a tool to fulfill their destinies. The people and their surrogates who function in Power Elite frameworks are the strongest, the brightest, the most opportunistic, the most ruthless and the least humane of their contemporaries in every milieu. That is not to say they do not necessarily love their countries, their families and their dogs.
The perfect analogy for Power Elites, their position in the world and their modus operandi, is the game of chess. The pieces on the board are either black or white. They know who they are for and who they are against. And they never change color. They also do not set the rules nor can they change the rules of the game. They neither gain power nor lose power. And the pieces are always available for the next game.
The pawns are the masses, the peons, the foot-soldiers. There are hosts of them and they are expendable and have the least value. They go into battle and are sacrificed most readily.
The rooks or castles as they are also known are the builders and managers of the world, They are straightforward, can-do, engineering and science types. They are strong and their point valuation in the game is higher than the other functionaries on the back line.
The knights are the military. They are capable of moving short and long as well as long and short and to the sides. They are ponderous but when called into action, yield often unexpected results. Not only must they be fed but their horses must also be fed, a most expensive proposition.
Then we have religion’s bishops. How appropriate that they move at an angle to the truth of a straight up and down board. While you are concentrating on getting to where you are going in a straightforward manner, they attack you obliquely, unsupported by the reality of life.
The queen, in all her regal majesty, is able to move in sweeping manner up and down the board and able to go with the rooks and with or against the bishops. The queen is the most powerful player on the board because of her mobility, intuition and strong will.
Finally, the figurehead is the king, about whom the whole game rises and falls. When he falls, the game itself falls. He himself is weak but his power is immense because he is the apparent Power Elite. He is like the president of the United States or the Queen or King of England.
But how about the Power Elites? Where are they? They are not on the board. They are not either black or white – and they can change color at will and even become colorless. They are not displayed for all to see. They are hidden from the pawns, the rooks, the knights and bishops, from the queen and from the king himself. They are manipulators but are not themselves manipulated except by competing Power Elites.
“Manipulated” according to Webster is, “to manage or utilize skillfully – to control or play upon by artful, unfair, or insidious means, especially to one’s own advantage.” Power Elites move the pieces on the board of the world, unseen, planning and plotting, strategizing and devising traps into which may fall opposing manipulators and their minions. And when they move their pieces about the battlefields, the how, when, where and why of life and death are in their hands. In this game please note, the manipulators only take; they never give. And win or lose, another game is set up and the manipulators continue according to their rules of the game. And those rules are hidden from the pieces on the chess board except for when the king is dethroned.
Now we will see the impact of Power Elites on the Obama presidency. How will they control him and his appointments and appointees to assure their continued control of the wealth of the United States.
Look carefully.
Saturday, February 7, 2009
RESPECT - A FOUNDATION OF PEACE
WITHOUT CONQUEST, PEACE WITHOUT RESPECT IS UNATTAINABLE.
I wish to explore one of the foundations of life on earth, “Respect.” I write here of man’s relation to man although, man’s respect for nature and the world will ensure a harmonious life for himself with the earth, its foliage and its creatures that provides sustenance for his body and his sense of beauty.
Webster’s: Respect: to consider worthy of high regard, esteem, to refrain from interfering with. Though there are more meanings to the word, these three relationship definitions are the essence of this essay.
To respect another person requires each of us to hold each other in high regard. The simplest way of assuring that relationship requirement is hold others in the same regard as we wish to be held. Just as we do not wish to be judged by our clothing, our speech, our ethnicity, our beauty, our posture, our knowledge or intelligence, or any other quality that is different from the person judging us, so too, we must not judge others. The simple fact of another’s existence demands respect, demands high regard. And, as in so many aspects of life, give and ye shall receive.
To esteem another brings emotion and judgment into the equation. We all start with our own very fundamental personal perceptions of life in general when we are called upon to judge another. More easily we can say that we like someone at first sight, or the opposite, we are put off or even repelled by another at first sight. But that is our individual response to an individual and says nothing about the quality of the other. The quality of the other remains inviolate just as our own quality remains inviolate regardless of anyone else’s opinion of us. Just as the wealthy person is put off by one of meager means, the poorer person is not diminished any more than the wealthy person by this perception. And of course, the opposite is true. Each, in fairness, mandates respect equally from the other.
To refrain from interfering with another covers a broad range of behavior by each individual. Generally, it is the more powerful that interferes with the less powerful. Each of us in any relationship generally knows who is the more powerful. The boss over the employees, the teacher over the students, the parents over the children, knows. However, the master over the slave is not a comparable relationship. That last relationship is an excellent measuring device when we evaluate whether we are interfering with another and therefore, not respectful of the other.
Respect of the parent for the child is the most transparent relationship that exists that shows whether respect at all exists in the powerful person. The parent always falls back on the excuse that he is doing what he or she believes to be best for the child. “Sit up” and “Stand straight” and “Speak respectfully” and “Use your napkin,” are intended to be educational statements by parents. Generally, however, they show an interference with the inferior’s, the child’s personhood. Respect of the parent for the child is a marvelous window into the awareness of those people into the meaning of “Respect.”
We all need respect. Sadly, we often repeat the ill-informed functional aspects of respect that we learned from our parents who demanded respect without giving it. And so I go back to the original definition; “Respect: to consider worthy of high regard, esteem, to refrain from interfering with.” If we can give and hold each other to that same standard of respect that we wish for ourselves, we will live in a happier world.
I wish to explore one of the foundations of life on earth, “Respect.” I write here of man’s relation to man although, man’s respect for nature and the world will ensure a harmonious life for himself with the earth, its foliage and its creatures that provides sustenance for his body and his sense of beauty.
Webster’s: Respect: to consider worthy of high regard, esteem, to refrain from interfering with. Though there are more meanings to the word, these three relationship definitions are the essence of this essay.
To respect another person requires each of us to hold each other in high regard. The simplest way of assuring that relationship requirement is hold others in the same regard as we wish to be held. Just as we do not wish to be judged by our clothing, our speech, our ethnicity, our beauty, our posture, our knowledge or intelligence, or any other quality that is different from the person judging us, so too, we must not judge others. The simple fact of another’s existence demands respect, demands high regard. And, as in so many aspects of life, give and ye shall receive.
To esteem another brings emotion and judgment into the equation. We all start with our own very fundamental personal perceptions of life in general when we are called upon to judge another. More easily we can say that we like someone at first sight, or the opposite, we are put off or even repelled by another at first sight. But that is our individual response to an individual and says nothing about the quality of the other. The quality of the other remains inviolate just as our own quality remains inviolate regardless of anyone else’s opinion of us. Just as the wealthy person is put off by one of meager means, the poorer person is not diminished any more than the wealthy person by this perception. And of course, the opposite is true. Each, in fairness, mandates respect equally from the other.
To refrain from interfering with another covers a broad range of behavior by each individual. Generally, it is the more powerful that interferes with the less powerful. Each of us in any relationship generally knows who is the more powerful. The boss over the employees, the teacher over the students, the parents over the children, knows. However, the master over the slave is not a comparable relationship. That last relationship is an excellent measuring device when we evaluate whether we are interfering with another and therefore, not respectful of the other.
Respect of the parent for the child is the most transparent relationship that exists that shows whether respect at all exists in the powerful person. The parent always falls back on the excuse that he is doing what he or she believes to be best for the child. “Sit up” and “Stand straight” and “Speak respectfully” and “Use your napkin,” are intended to be educational statements by parents. Generally, however, they show an interference with the inferior’s, the child’s personhood. Respect of the parent for the child is a marvelous window into the awareness of those people into the meaning of “Respect.”
We all need respect. Sadly, we often repeat the ill-informed functional aspects of respect that we learned from our parents who demanded respect without giving it. And so I go back to the original definition; “Respect: to consider worthy of high regard, esteem, to refrain from interfering with.” If we can give and hold each other to that same standard of respect that we wish for ourselves, we will live in a happier world.
Saturday, January 31, 2009
TO MY FELLOW MIDEAST PEACENIKS
I sent to my mailing list a satirical mock-up of the front page of the New York Times depicting the Warsaw Ghetto uprising as a disproportionate response of Jews to the Nazi holocaust. A number of respondents castigated me for making light of the holocaust and for the disgrace of mis-using the highly regarded Times to create this ironic piece.
If the point of my sending you the piece was not clear and if the irony of the piece was adumbrated by use of the renowned New York Times front page for the message, I point you to most of the world's news coverage of the Gaza War and the casting of Israel by all Muslim countries and many if not most of the other U.N. members, as the perpetrator of a holocaust while denying the fact of the Holocaust of the Jews. I do not believe this piece was a "disgrace" to the memory of the murdered Jews by the Nazis in the past and by the Arabs in the present.
I think the point of the piece was well taken. Did it deprecate the newspaper or disgrace the memory of the Holocaust? Not one jot or tittle!
The fact that there were and are "good" Germans and that there are "good" Arabs/Muslims does not mitigate or belittle the existential threat posed by the world of Islam to Israel and the Jewish People. When I see the grade-school textbooks in the Arab world teaching other than hatred of the Jews, and when I hear the Imams in their mosques preaching peace, I will have greater hope that one-on-one peace efforts will have meaningful weight for the future lives of my progeny and my People.
Perhaps you also may feel that Israel's response to the Hamas rocket attacks was, is, and will be, "disproportionate," and Hamas' use of civilians and civilian structures as strategic and tactical sacrificial lambs, and its continued rocket attacks despite its "truce" agreement, its holding a kidnapped soldier for over two years, its continued importation of war materielle rather than food and building materials, and its stated goal of Israel's destruction with the aid of Iran and Syria for sure and the surreptitious aid of other Muslim countries, is not disproportionate because unintentionally fewer Jews were killed.
I can tell you this from personal knowledge; Gaza civilians were the targets that Hamas set up to draw Israeli fire. Wherever and whenever possible, the Israeli army avoided civilian casualties. The army is trained that way. But shit happens, intentionally and unintentionally.
This struggle that you and I and many others are engaged in, has many faces. You may be on the cleanest end of it. That does not provide the same protection that kibbutz air raid shelters do. Nor does it save a life that the assassination of a terrorist does. Nor does it make the massive destruction of smuggling tunnels, rocket factories, terror cells, and rocket launching platforms more evil because it kills the population that willingly and enthusiastically supports Jew-killing and accidentally kills the civilians who are not involved directly or indirectly in the killing of Israelis.
I am not on the side of those who act to bring peace by deportation of Arabs and theft of Arab lands and destruction of Arab property. I am a realist and a pragmatist. As you perform to achieve the highest level of success you can in bringing peace to Jews and Arabs, so do I. And so do all my family and friends who have been and are in the Defense Army of Israel. And so do all the people who argue with me about the best means to achieve the impossible dream. Sadly, none of us have yet found the road to peace. But just as there are killers on both sides of the divide, I look for the moral people on both sides of the divide. I find a monstrously great difference between the way the Jews have been raised and the way the Muslims and specifically, the Palestinians, have been raised and educated. That foundational difference lies at the heart of our struggle for peace.
And equally important, the goals and interests of the many countries involved in the Middle East and its future may not be compatible with peace between the Palestinians and Israel.
If the point of my sending you the piece was not clear and if the irony of the piece was adumbrated by use of the renowned New York Times front page for the message, I point you to most of the world's news coverage of the Gaza War and the casting of Israel by all Muslim countries and many if not most of the other U.N. members, as the perpetrator of a holocaust while denying the fact of the Holocaust of the Jews. I do not believe this piece was a "disgrace" to the memory of the murdered Jews by the Nazis in the past and by the Arabs in the present.
I think the point of the piece was well taken. Did it deprecate the newspaper or disgrace the memory of the Holocaust? Not one jot or tittle!
The fact that there were and are "good" Germans and that there are "good" Arabs/Muslims does not mitigate or belittle the existential threat posed by the world of Islam to Israel and the Jewish People. When I see the grade-school textbooks in the Arab world teaching other than hatred of the Jews, and when I hear the Imams in their mosques preaching peace, I will have greater hope that one-on-one peace efforts will have meaningful weight for the future lives of my progeny and my People.
Perhaps you also may feel that Israel's response to the Hamas rocket attacks was, is, and will be, "disproportionate," and Hamas' use of civilians and civilian structures as strategic and tactical sacrificial lambs, and its continued rocket attacks despite its "truce" agreement, its holding a kidnapped soldier for over two years, its continued importation of war materielle rather than food and building materials, and its stated goal of Israel's destruction with the aid of Iran and Syria for sure and the surreptitious aid of other Muslim countries, is not disproportionate because unintentionally fewer Jews were killed.
I can tell you this from personal knowledge; Gaza civilians were the targets that Hamas set up to draw Israeli fire. Wherever and whenever possible, the Israeli army avoided civilian casualties. The army is trained that way. But shit happens, intentionally and unintentionally.
This struggle that you and I and many others are engaged in, has many faces. You may be on the cleanest end of it. That does not provide the same protection that kibbutz air raid shelters do. Nor does it save a life that the assassination of a terrorist does. Nor does it make the massive destruction of smuggling tunnels, rocket factories, terror cells, and rocket launching platforms more evil because it kills the population that willingly and enthusiastically supports Jew-killing and accidentally kills the civilians who are not involved directly or indirectly in the killing of Israelis.
I am not on the side of those who act to bring peace by deportation of Arabs and theft of Arab lands and destruction of Arab property. I am a realist and a pragmatist. As you perform to achieve the highest level of success you can in bringing peace to Jews and Arabs, so do I. And so do all my family and friends who have been and are in the Defense Army of Israel. And so do all the people who argue with me about the best means to achieve the impossible dream. Sadly, none of us have yet found the road to peace. But just as there are killers on both sides of the divide, I look for the moral people on both sides of the divide. I find a monstrously great difference between the way the Jews have been raised and the way the Muslims and specifically, the Palestinians, have been raised and educated. That foundational difference lies at the heart of our struggle for peace.
And equally important, the goals and interests of the many countries involved in the Middle East and its future may not be compatible with peace between the Palestinians and Israel.
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
KILLERS NEED PEOPLE TO KILL
* OPINION EUROPE
* JANUARY 12, 2009
Ending the West's Proxy War Against Israel
Stop funding a Palestinian youth bulge, and the fighting will stop too.
By GUNNAR HEINSOHN |
From Wall Street Journal Europe
Mr. Heinsohn heads the Raphael Lemkin Institute at the University of Bremen, Europe's first institute devoted to comparative genocide research.
As the world decries Israel's attempt to defend itself from the rocket attacks coming from Gaza, consider this: When Hamas routed Fatah in Gaza in 2007, it cost nearly 350 lives and 1,000 wounded. Fatah's surrender brought only a temporary stop to the type of violence and bloodshed that are commonly seen in lands where at least 30% of the male population is in the 15-to-29 age bracket.
In such "youth bulge" countries, young men tend to eliminate each other or get killed in aggressive wars until a balance is reached between their ambitions and the number of acceptable positions available in their society. In Arab nations such as Lebanon (150,000 dead in the civil war between 1975 and 1990) or Algeria (200,000 dead in the Islamists' war against their own people between 1999 and 2006), the slaughter abated only when the fertility rates in these countries fell from seven children per woman to fewer than two. The warring stopped because no more warriors were being born.
In Gaza, however, there has been no demographic disarmament. The average woman still bears six babies. For every 1,000 men aged 40-44, there are 4,300 boys aged 0-4 years. In the U.S. the latter figure is 1,000, and in the U.K. it's only 670.
And so the killing continues. In 2005, when Israel was still an occupying force, Gaza lost more young men to gang fights and crime than in its war against the "Zionist enemy." Despite the media's obsession with the Mideast conflict, it has cost many fewer lives than the youth bulges in West Africa, Lebanon or Algeria. In the six decades since Israel's founding, "only" some 62,000 people (40,000 Arabs, 22,000 Jews) have been killed in all the Israeli-Arab wars and Palestinian terror attacks. During that same time, some 11 million Muslims have been killed in wars and terror attacks -- mostly at the hands of other Muslims.
What accounts for the Mideast conflict's relatively low body count? Hamas and their ilk certainly aim to kill as many Israelis as possible. To their indignation, the Israelis are quite good at protecting themselves. On the other hand, Israel, despite all the talk about its "disproportionate" use of force, is doing its utmost to spare civilian deaths. Even Hamas acknowledges that most of the Palestinians killed by Israeli air raids are from their own ranks. But about 10%-15% of Gaza's casualties are women and minors -- a tragedy impossible to prevent in a densely settled area in which nearly half the people are under 15 and the terrorists hide among them.
The reason for Gaza's endless youth bulge is that a large majority of its population does not have to provide for its offspring. Most babies are fed, clothed, vaccinated and educated by UNRWA, the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East. Unlike the U.N. High Commission for Refugees, which deals with the rest of the world's refugees and aims to settle them in their respective host countries, UNRWA perpetuates the Palestinian problem by classifying as refugees not only those who originally fled their homes, but all of their descendents as well.
UNRWA is benevolently funded by the U.S. (31%) and the European Union (nearly 50%) -- only 7% of the funds come from Muslim sources. Thanks to the West's largesse, nearly the entire population of Gaza lives in a kind of lowly but regularly paid dependence. One result of this unlimited welfare is an endless population boom. Between 1950 and 2008, Gaza's population has grown from 240,000 to 1.5 million. The West basically created a new Near Eastern people in Gaza that at current trends will reach three million in 2040. Within that period, Gazans may alter the justifications and directions of their aggression but are unlikely to stop the aggression itself.
The Hamas-Fatah truce of June 2007 allowed the Islamists again to direct all their energy on attacking Israel. The West pays for food, schools, medicine and housing, while Muslim nations help out with the military hardware. Unrestrained by such necessities as having to earn a living, the young have plenty of time on their hands for digging tunnels, smuggling, assembling missiles and firing 4,500 of them at Israel since 2006. While this gruesome activity has slowed the Palestinian internecine slaughter, it forced some 250,000 Israelis into bomb shelters.
The current situation can only get worse. Israel is being pushed into a corner. Gazan teenagers have no future other than war. One rocket master killed is immediately replaced by three young men for whom a martyr's death is no less honorable than victory. Some 230,000 Gazan males, aged 15 to 29, who are available for the battlefield now, will be succeeded by 360,000 boys under 15 (45% of all Gazan males) who could be taking up arms within the coming 15 years.
As long as we continue to subsidize Gaza's extreme demographic armament, young Palestinians will likely continue killing their brothers or neighbors. And yet, despite claiming that it wants to bring peace to the region, the West continues to make the population explosion in Gaza worse every year. By generously supporting UNRWA's budget, the West assists a rate of population increase that is 10 times higher than in their own countries. Much is being said about Iran waging a proxy war against Israel by supporting Hezbollah and Hamas. One may argue that by fueling Gaza's untenable population explosion, the West unintentionally finances a war by proxy against the Jews of Israel.
If we seriously want to avoid another generation of war in Gaza, we must have the courage to tell the Gazans that they will have to start looking after their children themselves, without UNRWA's help. This would force Palestinians to focus on building an economy instead of freeing them up to wage war. Of course, every baby lured into the world by our money up to now would still have our assistance.
If we make this urgently needed reform, then by at least 2025 many boys in Gaza -- like in Algeria -- would enter puberty as only sons. They would be able to look forward to a more secure future in a less violent society.
If the West prefers calm around Gaza even before 2025, it may consider offering immigration to those young Palestinians only born because of the West's well-meant but cruelly misguided aid. In the decades to come, North America and Europe will have to take in tens of millions of immigrants anyway to slow the aging of their populations. If, say, 200,000 of them are taken from the 360,000 boys coming of age in Gaza in the next 15 years, that would be a negligible move for the big democracies but a quantum leap for peace in the Near East.
Many of Gaza's young -- like in much of the Muslim world -- dream of leaving anyway. Who would not want to get out of that strip of land but the international NGOs and social workers whose careers depend on perpetuating Gaza's misery?
Copyright 2008 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved
* JANUARY 12, 2009
Ending the West's Proxy War Against Israel
Stop funding a Palestinian youth bulge, and the fighting will stop too.
By GUNNAR HEINSOHN |
From Wall Street Journal Europe
Mr. Heinsohn heads the Raphael Lemkin Institute at the University of Bremen, Europe's first institute devoted to comparative genocide research.
As the world decries Israel's attempt to defend itself from the rocket attacks coming from Gaza, consider this: When Hamas routed Fatah in Gaza in 2007, it cost nearly 350 lives and 1,000 wounded. Fatah's surrender brought only a temporary stop to the type of violence and bloodshed that are commonly seen in lands where at least 30% of the male population is in the 15-to-29 age bracket.
In such "youth bulge" countries, young men tend to eliminate each other or get killed in aggressive wars until a balance is reached between their ambitions and the number of acceptable positions available in their society. In Arab nations such as Lebanon (150,000 dead in the civil war between 1975 and 1990) or Algeria (200,000 dead in the Islamists' war against their own people between 1999 and 2006), the slaughter abated only when the fertility rates in these countries fell from seven children per woman to fewer than two. The warring stopped because no more warriors were being born.
In Gaza, however, there has been no demographic disarmament. The average woman still bears six babies. For every 1,000 men aged 40-44, there are 4,300 boys aged 0-4 years. In the U.S. the latter figure is 1,000, and in the U.K. it's only 670.
And so the killing continues. In 2005, when Israel was still an occupying force, Gaza lost more young men to gang fights and crime than in its war against the "Zionist enemy." Despite the media's obsession with the Mideast conflict, it has cost many fewer lives than the youth bulges in West Africa, Lebanon or Algeria. In the six decades since Israel's founding, "only" some 62,000 people (40,000 Arabs, 22,000 Jews) have been killed in all the Israeli-Arab wars and Palestinian terror attacks. During that same time, some 11 million Muslims have been killed in wars and terror attacks -- mostly at the hands of other Muslims.
What accounts for the Mideast conflict's relatively low body count? Hamas and their ilk certainly aim to kill as many Israelis as possible. To their indignation, the Israelis are quite good at protecting themselves. On the other hand, Israel, despite all the talk about its "disproportionate" use of force, is doing its utmost to spare civilian deaths. Even Hamas acknowledges that most of the Palestinians killed by Israeli air raids are from their own ranks. But about 10%-15% of Gaza's casualties are women and minors -- a tragedy impossible to prevent in a densely settled area in which nearly half the people are under 15 and the terrorists hide among them.
The reason for Gaza's endless youth bulge is that a large majority of its population does not have to provide for its offspring. Most babies are fed, clothed, vaccinated and educated by UNRWA, the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East. Unlike the U.N. High Commission for Refugees, which deals with the rest of the world's refugees and aims to settle them in their respective host countries, UNRWA perpetuates the Palestinian problem by classifying as refugees not only those who originally fled their homes, but all of their descendents as well.
UNRWA is benevolently funded by the U.S. (31%) and the European Union (nearly 50%) -- only 7% of the funds come from Muslim sources. Thanks to the West's largesse, nearly the entire population of Gaza lives in a kind of lowly but regularly paid dependence. One result of this unlimited welfare is an endless population boom. Between 1950 and 2008, Gaza's population has grown from 240,000 to 1.5 million. The West basically created a new Near Eastern people in Gaza that at current trends will reach three million in 2040. Within that period, Gazans may alter the justifications and directions of their aggression but are unlikely to stop the aggression itself.
The Hamas-Fatah truce of June 2007 allowed the Islamists again to direct all their energy on attacking Israel. The West pays for food, schools, medicine and housing, while Muslim nations help out with the military hardware. Unrestrained by such necessities as having to earn a living, the young have plenty of time on their hands for digging tunnels, smuggling, assembling missiles and firing 4,500 of them at Israel since 2006. While this gruesome activity has slowed the Palestinian internecine slaughter, it forced some 250,000 Israelis into bomb shelters.
The current situation can only get worse. Israel is being pushed into a corner. Gazan teenagers have no future other than war. One rocket master killed is immediately replaced by three young men for whom a martyr's death is no less honorable than victory. Some 230,000 Gazan males, aged 15 to 29, who are available for the battlefield now, will be succeeded by 360,000 boys under 15 (45% of all Gazan males) who could be taking up arms within the coming 15 years.
As long as we continue to subsidize Gaza's extreme demographic armament, young Palestinians will likely continue killing their brothers or neighbors. And yet, despite claiming that it wants to bring peace to the region, the West continues to make the population explosion in Gaza worse every year. By generously supporting UNRWA's budget, the West assists a rate of population increase that is 10 times higher than in their own countries. Much is being said about Iran waging a proxy war against Israel by supporting Hezbollah and Hamas. One may argue that by fueling Gaza's untenable population explosion, the West unintentionally finances a war by proxy against the Jews of Israel.
If we seriously want to avoid another generation of war in Gaza, we must have the courage to tell the Gazans that they will have to start looking after their children themselves, without UNRWA's help. This would force Palestinians to focus on building an economy instead of freeing them up to wage war. Of course, every baby lured into the world by our money up to now would still have our assistance.
If we make this urgently needed reform, then by at least 2025 many boys in Gaza -- like in Algeria -- would enter puberty as only sons. They would be able to look forward to a more secure future in a less violent society.
If the West prefers calm around Gaza even before 2025, it may consider offering immigration to those young Palestinians only born because of the West's well-meant but cruelly misguided aid. In the decades to come, North America and Europe will have to take in tens of millions of immigrants anyway to slow the aging of their populations. If, say, 200,000 of them are taken from the 360,000 boys coming of age in Gaza in the next 15 years, that would be a negligible move for the big democracies but a quantum leap for peace in the Near East.
Many of Gaza's young -- like in much of the Muslim world -- dream of leaving anyway. Who would not want to get out of that strip of land but the international NGOs and social workers whose careers depend on perpetuating Gaza's misery?
Copyright 2008 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Friday, January 23, 2009
INTERESTS OF HISTORY
WHAT IS "HISTORY" AND HOW IS IT MADE?
Tracing any human institution from its inception to the present, or to its demise if that is the case, is simply a study of history and the impact the institution had on its times.
To fully comprehend any human institution, it is essential to find and evaluate the interests that brought it into being. What is meant here by the term, “interests,” is benefit, participation, welfare, good, influence, partiality, and a variety of situation-specific meanings such as wealth, power, position, and the like.
Probably the most wide-spread institution is that of “family.” The underlying interests are apparent. Sexual gratification, safety in numbers, economic need fulfillment and stability, procreation, two heads are better than one, companionship and psychological support, and other individualistic interests that are fulfilled by the family at all levels and by all its members.
Guarded financial and political institutions of power are the most difficult to enter and institutions that need members, volunteer workers, and money donors are the easiest to enter. The interests of the first are to guard and maximize their power. The interests of the second are to gain and expand power. All human institutions, in varying degrees and kinds, hold the same interests. And all of them want to leave their mark on history.
Dynasties, nations and kingdoms, ethnic groupings, families, political parties, religions, corporations, sport teams, universities, and other institutions of all kinds, when studied by themselves or in the context of their kind or in the context of their time of existence, open windows on history.
Competition between and among institutions leads to the windows on history being manipulated, generally by the stronger of the competitors or the winners of the competitions. Historians, being human and springing from their own histories, themselves manipulate the windows of history to achieve egocentric, ethnocentric, religious and other predetermined or desirable views of the particular era and area of study.
However researched and annotated, however impartial the historian, the resulting history is his story or her story.
Tracing any human institution from its inception to the present, or to its demise if that is the case, is simply a study of history and the impact the institution had on its times.
To fully comprehend any human institution, it is essential to find and evaluate the interests that brought it into being. What is meant here by the term, “interests,” is benefit, participation, welfare, good, influence, partiality, and a variety of situation-specific meanings such as wealth, power, position, and the like.
Probably the most wide-spread institution is that of “family.” The underlying interests are apparent. Sexual gratification, safety in numbers, economic need fulfillment and stability, procreation, two heads are better than one, companionship and psychological support, and other individualistic interests that are fulfilled by the family at all levels and by all its members.
Guarded financial and political institutions of power are the most difficult to enter and institutions that need members, volunteer workers, and money donors are the easiest to enter. The interests of the first are to guard and maximize their power. The interests of the second are to gain and expand power. All human institutions, in varying degrees and kinds, hold the same interests. And all of them want to leave their mark on history.
Dynasties, nations and kingdoms, ethnic groupings, families, political parties, religions, corporations, sport teams, universities, and other institutions of all kinds, when studied by themselves or in the context of their kind or in the context of their time of existence, open windows on history.
Competition between and among institutions leads to the windows on history being manipulated, generally by the stronger of the competitors or the winners of the competitions. Historians, being human and springing from their own histories, themselves manipulate the windows of history to achieve egocentric, ethnocentric, religious and other predetermined or desirable views of the particular era and area of study.
However researched and annotated, however impartial the historian, the resulting history is his story or her story.
GOLDA MEIR SAID
Golda Meir (former Prime Minister of Israel) said, "We can forgive the Arabs for killing our children. We cannot forgive them for forcing us to kill their children. We will only have peace with the Arabs when they love their children more than they hate us."
There will never be sulcha - forgiveness - without learning that we are all children, Jews and Arabs. And there will never be learning so long as the people are exploited by their political and religious leaders to go out and "Kill the other!"
The world must know the difference between aggressive killing and killing in self defense. Since Israel evacuated Gaza, more than 6,000 rockets have been fired into Israel with aggressive intent to kill. Arab terrorist groups have sent suicide bombers into Israel on "Holy" missions to become martyrs by killing Jews.
Imams, Kadis, "Holy" men, preach death to the Jews as a holy mission. More than 70,000 Iranis volunteered to become martyrs by killing Jews in Israel when their president declared that Israel should be wiped off the face of the earth.
How can peace be achieved in the face of this holy war against a People whose crime is existence? How can the children of Jews and Arabs be saved from the slaughter of these religionists? Where in the Koran can be found the solution to this enigma?
If history teaches a lesson here, there is no solution based on anything that is presently being done. Teaching our children to make war no more is not happening. Until that teaching takes place, they will die ever more excruciating deaths, as will their parents and their children.
There will never be sulcha - forgiveness - without learning that we are all children, Jews and Arabs. And there will never be learning so long as the people are exploited by their political and religious leaders to go out and "Kill the other!"
The world must know the difference between aggressive killing and killing in self defense. Since Israel evacuated Gaza, more than 6,000 rockets have been fired into Israel with aggressive intent to kill. Arab terrorist groups have sent suicide bombers into Israel on "Holy" missions to become martyrs by killing Jews.
Imams, Kadis, "Holy" men, preach death to the Jews as a holy mission. More than 70,000 Iranis volunteered to become martyrs by killing Jews in Israel when their president declared that Israel should be wiped off the face of the earth.
How can peace be achieved in the face of this holy war against a People whose crime is existence? How can the children of Jews and Arabs be saved from the slaughter of these religionists? Where in the Koran can be found the solution to this enigma?
If history teaches a lesson here, there is no solution based on anything that is presently being done. Teaching our children to make war no more is not happening. Until that teaching takes place, they will die ever more excruciating deaths, as will their parents and their children.
Wednesday, January 21, 2009
BARACK LINCOLN OBAMA
BARACK LINCOLN OBAMA - January 20, 2009
It is time!
The ghost of Abraham Lincoln stood next to Barack Obama at Tuesday’s inauguration of the 44th president of the United States. He saw the bible on which Obama’s hand rested as he swore to uphold the Constitution of the United States, his bible.
It is time.
He saw the 43rd president nearby and the assembled dignitaries and the assembled predators. He looked out to see the people massed past George Washington’s monument and uncounted hundreds of thousands more breathing the cold winter air as they listened to old words and new promises from the man, Barack Obama who was chosen, miraculously as he was, to lead his country at a time of parlous danger.
It is time.
Lincoln shrugged and wondered how this compleat man, experienced as he was and inexperienced as he is, would pilot his time’s ship of state through monstrous heaving seas of testing and peril. Lincoln felt he was father to this man as indeed he was in many ways. Would that he could stay the hand of Obama as was Abraham’s at his testing on Mount Moriah. Would that he could instill in this Goliath the wisdom to dodge David’s smooth stone and instill in this David the capacities to chasten the giants of war around him and lead them to peace to spare the killing of the small people of the earth.
It is time.
Would this man, President Barack Obama, see the dangers of hidden powers surrounding him, infiltrating the ranks of trusted advisors, influencing slyly small numbers to join forces to become the movers and shakers, observe the tactics of skilled manipulators of the People’s representatives in the halls of government, and having seen them, maintain the solid ramparts of honesty, fairness, humaneness, and equality to prevent the dam-bursting flood of evil where once stood good and good intentions?
It is time.
Lincoln himself also knew that if this man, President Barack Obama, succeeded, he would face mortal danger, and he shuddered. And if lightening were to strike,
it would not be time.
It is time!
The ghost of Abraham Lincoln stood next to Barack Obama at Tuesday’s inauguration of the 44th president of the United States. He saw the bible on which Obama’s hand rested as he swore to uphold the Constitution of the United States, his bible.
It is time.
He saw the 43rd president nearby and the assembled dignitaries and the assembled predators. He looked out to see the people massed past George Washington’s monument and uncounted hundreds of thousands more breathing the cold winter air as they listened to old words and new promises from the man, Barack Obama who was chosen, miraculously as he was, to lead his country at a time of parlous danger.
It is time.
Lincoln shrugged and wondered how this compleat man, experienced as he was and inexperienced as he is, would pilot his time’s ship of state through monstrous heaving seas of testing and peril. Lincoln felt he was father to this man as indeed he was in many ways. Would that he could stay the hand of Obama as was Abraham’s at his testing on Mount Moriah. Would that he could instill in this Goliath the wisdom to dodge David’s smooth stone and instill in this David the capacities to chasten the giants of war around him and lead them to peace to spare the killing of the small people of the earth.
It is time.
Would this man, President Barack Obama, see the dangers of hidden powers surrounding him, infiltrating the ranks of trusted advisors, influencing slyly small numbers to join forces to become the movers and shakers, observe the tactics of skilled manipulators of the People’s representatives in the halls of government, and having seen them, maintain the solid ramparts of honesty, fairness, humaneness, and equality to prevent the dam-bursting flood of evil where once stood good and good intentions?
It is time.
Lincoln himself also knew that if this man, President Barack Obama, succeeded, he would face mortal danger, and he shuddered. And if lightening were to strike,
it would not be time.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)