Gorlin, everything okay??

Thank God, Tzachi. How are you?

Benjamin said—

After you taught us the essential distinction between “Hareidim” and “Haredim,” and helped us understand the extra severity of a “double yud,” we may learn from this that among the children of Nazis too there is a distinction: the descendants of Hitler, Himmler, Goering, and Goebbels may be accepted; but the descendants of Eichmann, Heinrich, Heydrich, Seyss-Inquart, and the like—Heaven forbid that we accept them.

This is the rule: anyone with a “double yud” in his name shall not enter the congregation of the Lord forever, and he is “treif pasul” 🙂

Regards, Shimshuyin Leitz

I’ll just add and say that although indeed the children of the Nazis bear no responsibility whatsoever for their fathers’ deeds (despite the inferiority complexes and unjustified guilt feelings many of them have), the German nation does bear responsibility—for the deeds of the Nazis were in fact the deeds of the German nation itself, insofar as they still see themselves as a nation. And it still has a debt toward the Jewish people. But one of the lessons of the Holocaust, in my opinion, is that we need to stop being a victimized, self-pitying people, and stop dealing with the sins and debts that the rest of humanity owes us. That’s one side of the equation. The other side is that we learned from the Holocaust that human beings, nearly all of them, are like animals, and human morality is not worth much without fear of God (it has value as an opinion, but it doesn’t hold up in a real test). And also that no one in the world will help us in time of trouble, and that we must not rely on anyone (and this was also learned from the period of the Six-Day War, and indeed we see it clearly with our own eyes). On the other hand, that also allows us not to feel that we owe anyone anything, but only to take care of ourselves (and mainly ourselves) without unnecessary guilt feelings.

Strong words. How did you get from here to the absence of guilt feelings, and if you can, please give an example. (Assuming you’re not just claiming that unnecessary feelings are unnecessary.)

I’ll just note in passing that fear of God doesn’t help much either.

And one more small thing: “the world” definitely does help us in times of trouble, and not only France, Russia, and Germany in the past (Germany recognizes the collective debt. But it should be added that because of that debt it is not supposed to allow harm to others, God forbid—the Palestinians). I really wonder whether the State of Israel would survive without the evangelicals in the United States and the general Christian roots there (there’s no need to spell out the reliance on the U.S., but for example in the Yom Kippur War, without an American airlift, we very likely would have come to the destruction of the Third Temple. Of course they too had interests among other things, but it’s really not only that). In addition, the notion that all that stops Israel from “succeeding” are moral shackles it places on itself (rather than international political constraints) seems to me fundamentally mistaken. And apart from the security situation, we leverage the U.S. for very important economic matters too (like joining the OECD, which Olmert explained very nicely succeeded only thanks to President Bush. Likewise joining European programs that are absolutely critical for research and cooperation in Israel. Also recognition of Israel as an associate in various regulatory forums. And other states—non-European too—want Israel partly as an opener of doors in the U.S.). The idea that the world today is something you can just thumb your nose at (without the solid backing of the U.S.) seems to me a horrendous idea that I can explain only as simple ignorance.

To Chai Riki,

1. The absence of guilt feelings is connected to the fact that you shouldn’t feel guilty that you don’t care about someone who doesn’t care about you. In general one should care, but not for moralistic reasons. That is, one should care because the world is a global system and something that happens far away also affects us, but there’s no place here for feeling “not okay.” There is no “guilt” here. At most, “lack of wisdom” (but not stupidity). Sometimes the bad things happen to our enemies, and then certainly one must not intervene.

2. I’m talking about genuine fear of God. Not “religiousness” and self-righteousness. But that’s something not very familiar to many people.

3. As you said, it’s all interests. Interests aren’t bad; it’s just that you can’t rely on them, that’s all. In the Six-Day War no one helped us and we stayed alive. On Yom Kippur, if it hadn’t been the U.S. helping us, then it would have been another country (in the War of Independence it was France, I think) or something else would have happened. But one must know that “all the kindness they do, they do for themselves.” One should be grateful, but also remember that rule (“all the kindness…” ). It characterizes 99.9999999999% of humanity, including 99.99% of the Jewish people. There are exceptions. Truly good people. Like Rabbi Kook. It’s just that among Jews, reality proved that it’s worthwhile to believe in the Jewish collective, even though that rule is still true for 99.99% of individual Jews, as I said. That is, when Jews unite around a general national purpose, something works (there is more than just the sum of its parts). I am of course speaking about the State of Israel. Among the gentiles, by contrast, reality proved the opposite. I am of course speaking about the Holocaust.

In addition, you misunderstand me. I’m not thumbing my nose at the world (I don’t think anything in the world can just be dismissed). International constraints are fine and not bad. A tactical matter. But it cannot be that the world determines our policy. Sometimes there is no choice and one must stand against the whole world. And then that is tactically the right thing to do as well. The world respects nations that stand up for themselves. And the State of Israel today, like a good Diaspora Jew (?), turns its bare back so they can lash it. It cannot be that we have to meet moralistic and irrational standards that no other country is itself willing to meet. That is the meaning of independence. That is the meaning of a state for the Jews. In short, what matters is what the Jews do, not what the gentiles say.

This way of thinking—of not wanting to be as little dependent as possible on other human beings (gentiles)—is still part of the Diaspora mentality we carried with us to the Land. It only makes you think you’re wise and sophisticated, but it doesn’t make you so. In short, enough with left-wing foolishness.

1. Conditioning morality on symmetry is a general principle I accept. Theoretically I don’t think there’s justification for it, but practically that’s how I think one can and should operate. Faced with a choice between punctilious moral principles and preserving the integrity of the padding under my private and collective backside, I’ll choose the integrity of that padding. Just like that. Someone who holds by the categorical imperative (which in its purity I absolutely do not accept) might perhaps be able to ground this conditioning theoretically. I really did feel bad for Lebanon. What can I tell you. I didn’t know what to think about civilian aid there. But afterward I spent several good hours smoking and reading comments by Lebanese and others on Twitter, and the inclination I had toward offering some assistance weakened a lot. A full-fledged enemy state. Though precisely on that point, even if one gives aid, it’s not because one wants to contribute to the wretched of the earth, but because of an image-related self-interested concern (they thought it would help the image).

3. I really do not think everything is interests. In democracies, voters have influence, and they aren’t really aware of the full range of interests. How would you explain differences in conduct between leaders like Obama and Trump? Or Carter and Bush? Or Netanyahu and Barak? Europe too, in my view, despite all the hypocrisy and bias, is very much influenced by the memory of the Holocaust.
You can’t ignore the fact that we really are a tiny minority in the middle of a turbulent Muslim-Arab sea, and we are connected to, and live in, the cradle of Western history, so both Arabs/Muslims and Europeans and Americans take special interest in what happens here. Economically we are unequivocally dependent on trade and cooperation with the world, and especially with the U.S. and Europe. Therefore the number one strategic interest of the State of Israel is achieving peace with the Arab world. That overrides every sentiment regarding clods of holy land. How to do that is another matter. But one cannot downplay the importance of this, especially if one wants a state here that won’t constantly stand on the edge of the abyss and depend on kindnesses (and as I see it, today we do depend on kindnesses). In votes at the UN we lose overwhelmingly and serially (and pay Micronesia or Nauru so they’ll sell their miserable little vote), and without the American veto and the active Congress there, I don’t see how we would avoid painful sanctions and academic-economic exclusion. There is a big world, as Bibi says—Brazil, India, China, countries in Africa—but from what I can see from my little shell, right now I see only the U.S. and Europe. Every year I deal with budget applications for European programs. Without the idea of entering the OECD, I think politicians would be much less fiscally restrained. I have no desire whatsoever to live like North Korea inside some isolated shell.
I’m very troubled by developments in the U.S. Since Trump came to power I started looking more deeply into the left-wing factions of the Democratic Party, and this isn’t the place to go into details, but it’s very discouraging. With as many consecutive “very” boxes as you like. Kissinger in Diplomacy coolly describes, with icy self-interest, America’s considerations in the Yom Kippur War (that Russian weapons should not defeat American weapons; that Israel should not win too decisively because that could heat up the Cold War between the superpowers and because it would not agree to a “fair” peace agreement; etc.), and yet, as I said, in my eyes that is far from the whole picture.
The kindness of the nations that you mock is Israel’s great shield, and that’s something I think should no longer be dismissed. In my opinion, without Christians and Reform Jews we’d have been paddling in the sea long ago. I don’t want to elaborate on that more here. The Six-Day War was a very unusual miracle that took place in the first hours (Rakafet), and the rest of the days were mainly movement of forces and technical calculation. Definitely not something you can build on, even psychologically.

In any case, without explicit claims about what you actually want Israel to do, it’s hard for me to respond, and like you I’ve also spoken here in generalities and fog. What—annexation, is that the issue? To strike the Palestinians again and again and again? To push the Arabs of the Land out? Believe me, if no one were watching, I’d notify the Palestinians that they have ten minutes to hand over in handcuffs everyone who fought against us and to transfer by truck all the weapons they have there, or every half hour another village gets bombed. I’d shift all the pressure onto them. But you can’t do that, period.
The statement that “it cannot be that we meet moralistic standards” is itself a moral consideration, not a tactical one. The idea that the world respects nations that stand up for themselves seems to me nonsense dressed up. And if your words imply that everyone acts according to interests and only holy Israel is significantly influenced by moral considerations, then I really disagree. In my opinion it’s pretty much the opposite. Israel, because of security constraints, is not influenced all that much by principles (the Zionist left in Israel too, in my opinion, is not influenced all that much by morality; it’s one component in the picture and no more, though I do see a drift in that direction). And the nations of the world, because they have fewer security constraints, are more influenced by principles. Our international case, certainly for right-wing positions, is really not exactly impressive. And I say openly that my positions are strongly influenced by concern for the connection between my head and the rest of my limbs and by the level of swelling in my wallet. If I were not Israeli/Jewish, my positions would probably be different. That’s also why I can better understand (in the sense of justification on their terms) global positions when they are against us, and I really do not see everything as filthy hypocrisy.

And peace be with you.

To Chai Riki,

All right. The idea of the kindness of the nations is a bit deeper than it appears to the eye. What you think is not relevant here. It’s simply shallow thinking/vision. “Interest” means anything that stems from a person’s own being when it is not nullified before God (which is 9.99999999999999 of human beings, including religious Jews). That is, even people who act from pure religious / ideological motives are self-interested. Meaning, even if they get no honor / status / money from engaging in those things, they still have an interest. The interest is that it gives them importance. Meaning. But still the meaning of this is that the religion/ideology serves them, not they it. And therefore, for example, if they no longer have that feeling of importance from their religious and ideological involvement (for example, if someone else advances them better than they do, and all the more so if more and more people advance the idea and the religion and they become more and more of a cog in the system that works to advance the religion and the idea), their motivation will fly off to hell. A genuine person is one who acts for something מתוך an understanding that this is the right thing to do, out of the good that will come to the collective and the understanding that that good for the collective will benefit him far more than any narrow and side benefit. And one is not born with that understanding; it is something acquired through effort, and in the end it is also a gift from Heaven (like holiness in Mesillat Yesharim). You build the vessels and the light comes from above. There are very few people in the world (all Jews, of course) who know this secret, and even that is not always enough.

In any case, it seems you haven’t learned enough from history and you’re still occupied with too many calculations. How many slaps do you want to take from history before you understand that there is no person in the world who truly wants your good and will help you in time of trouble when you need him, even when his interests do not coincide with yours? How long this stiff-neckedness? What you think is not relevant. You think like the Jews of Europe thought before the Nazis. And before the storms in the Negev. You have a narrow view. Details without principles. Trees without a forest. In the end, precisely your approach will sever your head from your body and thin out your wallet, just as happened to the Jews of Europe.

What I want is simple. To respond the way any normal country would respond. Missiles for missiles. But the people have to be united around that (otherwise it really won’t work). That is Zionism. Back then too they said it was madness. Back then too Jews were afraid. But God helped them when they were united. There’s no choice. Sometimes you have to belie. I’m interested to know: what is your limit? If your house is shelled nonstop, only then will you do what you suggested? Well then, what the mind will not do, time will do. One must learn from history and foresee what is coming.

I’m telling you sensible things and you head into the fog. Leaders in democracies lean this way or that (subject to interest) according to the will of their voters. What the voters say can be read and their reasoning can be understood, and it’s clear as day that they are influenced by their principles. Whether those principles are pure or serve their sense of self-importance is a question that really doesn’t matter.

As for the past and the present, I explained that were it not for the kindness of the nations we would not have survived, and as for the future I said that if the whole world grows angry at us we’ll be like North Korea. The distance between us and sanctions and exclusion is not great enough. When I finished writing the previous scroll, even my desk here stood up and said, “I understand” (and added: obvious—what is he coming to teach us?).

I’m aiming to reduce risks and minimize dependencies. I’m not into this business of fearing what tomorrow may bring (and attacks from the Palestinians are really not at the top of my list of concerns). I don’t understand policy details, but that goal is much more important than anything else (land, principles, normality, and also the brilliant summary “There’s no choice. Sometimes you have to believe”). My limit is what is feasible in terms of geopolitical cost-benefit analysis; I don’t bring other considerations into it. And with this I have exhausted my spirit and place my end.

You like talking to yourself (that’s okay. Everyone does. But it’s still a distinctly left-wing trait). Take your time and think about what I said. The fog you’re talking about is the forest you can’t see because of all the trees.

With God’s help, 27 Av 5780

To Emmanuel and Chai Riki—greetings,

Beyond the practical side that Chai Riki mentioned, of being careful not to go head-to-head with the nations of the world, whose political and economic cooperation we need—even on the level of values, the Jewish people in relation to the nations are like “a heart among the limbs,” whose destiny, at least in the long run, is to guide all humanity to call in the name of God, “that they may all form a single band to do Your will with a whole heart.”

Even if we have a hard struggle and a war of annihilation against the haters of God and haters of Israel among them, still in the end we want to draw all the gentiles closer to faith and to observing the seven Noahide commandments, and at this stage, at the very least, to behave toward them with fairness and integrity that will bring sanctification of God’s name in their eyes.

Regards, Samson Morpurgo

Even the greatest of the wicked among them can find repair through their children, who may channel to holiness the powers that their fathers directed toward hatred and evil. Just as from Balak king of Moab, who sought to curse Israel, came King David; and just as from the descendants of Sisera, Sennacherib, and Haman came tannaim and amoraim who greatly increased Torah in Israel, and so on.

The repair of the whole world (that the heart should begin to pump blood to the limbs) is a more advanced stage than the reality I’m talking about. Or perhaps we should say it is included within it. First of all, one must learn from history. And I’m speaking only about simple justice. If the world demands from us things that are unjust, then we must not heed what it says. And we must not let fear of the consequences direct our actions. Justice is not only toward others but also toward yourself. One who harms himself is also a kind of wicked person. And in the end he will both eat the rotten fish and be expelled from the city. So tactically too it won’t work.