Bernie Sanders’ Speech at the Vatican

download

Here is the text of his prepared remarks in full:

“I am honored to be with you today and was pleased to receive your invitation to speak to this conference of The Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences. Today we celebrate the encyclical Centesimus Annus and reflect on its meaning for our world a quarter-century after it was presented by Pope John Paul II. With the fall of Communism, Pope John Paul II gave a clarion call for human freedom in its truest sense: freedom that defends the dignity of every person and that is always oriented towards the common good.

The Church’s social teachings, stretching back to the first modern encyclical about the industrial economy, Rerum Novarum in 1891, to Centesimus Annus, to Pope Francis’s inspiring encyclical Laudato Si’ this past year, have grappled with the challenges of the market economy. There are few places in modern thought that rival the depth and insight of the Church’s moral teachings on the market economy.

Over a century ago, Pope Leo XIII highlighted economic issues and challenges in Rerum Novarum that continue to haunt us today, such as what he called “the enormous wealth of a few as opposed to the poverty of the many.”

And let us be clear. That situation is worse today. In the year 2016, the top one percent of the people on this planet own more wealth than the bottom 99 percent, while the wealthiest 60 people – 60 people – own more than the bottom half – 3 1/2 billion people. At a time when so few have so much, and so many have so little, we must reject the foundations of this contemporary economy as immoral and unsustainable.

The words of Centesimus Annus likewise resonate with us today. One striking example:

Furthermore, society and the State must ensure wage levels adequate for the maintenance of the worker and his family, including a certain amount for savings. This requires a continuous effort to improve workers’ training and capability so that their work will be more skilled and productive, as well as careful controls and adequate legislative measures to block shameful forms of exploitation, especially to the disadvantage of the most vulnerable workers, of immigrants and of those on the margins of society. The role of trade unions in negotiating minimum salaries and working conditions is decisive in this area. (Para15)

The essential wisdom of Centesimus Annus is this: A market economy is beneficial for productivity and economic freedom. But if we let the quest for profits dominate society; if workers become disposable cogs of the financial system; if vast inequalities of power and wealth lead to marginalization of the poor and the powerless; then the common good is squandered and the market economy fails us. Pope John Paul II puts it this way: profit that is the result of “illicit exploitation, speculation, or the breaking of solidarity among working people . . . has not justification, and represents an abuse in the sight of God and man.” (Para43).

We are now twenty-five years after the fall of Communist rule in Eastern Europe. Yet we have to acknowledge that Pope John Paul’s warnings about the excesses of untrammeled finance were deeply prescient. Twenty-five years after Centesimus Annus, speculation, illicit financial flows, environmental destruction, and the weakening of the rights of workers is far more severe than it was a quarter century ago. Financial excesses, indeed widespread financial criminality on Wall Street, played a direct role in causing the world’s worst financial crisis since the Great Depression.

We need a political analysis as well as a moral and anthropological analysis to understand what has happened since 1991. We can say that with unregulated globalization, a world market economy built on speculative finance burst through the legal, political, and moral constraints that had once served to protect the common good. In my country, home of the world’s largest financial markets, globalization was used as a pretext to deregulate the banks, ending decades of legal protections for working people and small businesses. Politicians joined hands with the leading bankers to allow the banks to become “too big to fail.” The result: eight years ago the American economy and much of the world was plunged into the worst economic decline since the 1930s. Working people lost their jobs, their homes and their savings, while the government bailed out the banks.

Inexplicably, the United States political system doubled down on this reckless financial deregulation, when the U.S. Supreme Court in a series of deeply misguided decisions, unleashed an unprecedented flow of money into American politics. These decisions culminated in the infamous Citizen United case, which opened the financial spigots for huge campaign donations by billionaires and large corporations to turn the U.S. political system to their narrow and greedy advantage. It has established a system in which billionaires can buy elections. Rather than an economy aimed at the common good, we have been left with an economy operated for the top 1 percent, who get richer and richer as the working class, the young and the poor fall further and further behind. And the billionaires and banks have reaped the returns of their campaign investments, in the form of special tax privileges, imbalanced trade agreements that favor investors over workers, and that even give multinational companies extra-judicial power over governments that are trying to regulate them.

But as both Pope John Paul II and Pope Francis have warned us and the world, the consequences have been even direr than the disastrous effects of financial bubbles and falling living standards of working-class families. Our very soul as a nation has suffered as the public lost faith in political and social institutions. As Pope Francis has stated: “Man is not in charge today, money is in charge, money rules.” And the Pope has also stated: “We have created new idols. The worship of the golden calf of old has found a new and heartless image in the cult of money and the dictatorship of an economy which is faceless and lacking any truly humane goal.”

And further: “While the income of a minority is increasing exponentially, that of the majority is crumbling. This imbalance results from ideologies which uphold the absolute autonomy of markets and financial speculation, and thus deny the right of control to States, which are themselves charged with providing for the common good.”

Pope Francis has called on the world to say: “No to a financial system that rules rather than serves” in Evangeli Gaudium. And he called upon financial executives and political leaders to pursue financial reform that is informed by ethical considerations. He stated plainly and powerfully that the role of wealth and resources in a moral economy must be that of servant, not master.

The widening gaps between the rich and poor, the desperation of the marginalized, the power of corporations over politics, is not a phenomenon of the United States alone. The excesses of the unregulated global economy have caused even more damage in the developing countries. They suffer not only from the boom-bust cycles on Wall Street, but from a world economy that puts profits over pollution, oil companies over climate safety, and arms trade over peace. And as an increasing share of new wealth and income goes to a small fraction of those at the top, fixing this gross inequality has become a central challenge. The issue of wealth and income inequality is the great economic issue of our time, the great political issue of our time, and the great moral issue of our time. It is an issue that we must confront in my nation and across the world.

Pope Francis has given the most powerful name to the predicament of modern society: the Globalization of Indifference. “Almost without being aware of it,” he noted, “we end up being incapable of feeling compassion at the outcry of the poor, weeping for other people’s pain, and feeling a need to help them, as though all this were someone else’s responsibility and not our own.” We have seen on Wall Street that financial fraud became not only the norm but in many ways the new business model. Top bankers have shown no shame for their bad behavior and have made no apologies to the public. The billions and billions of dollars of fines they have paid for financial fraud are just another cost of doing business, another short cut to unjust profits.

Some might feel that it is hopeless to fight the economic juggernaut, that once the market economy escaped the boundaries of morality it would be impossible to bring the economy back under the dictates of morality and the common good. I am told time and time again by the rich and powerful, and the mainstream media that represent them, that we should be “practical,” that we should accept the status quo; that a truly moral economy is beyond our reach. Yet Pope Francis himself is surely the world’s greatest demonstration against such a surrender to despair and cynicism. He has opened the eyes of the world once again to the claims of mercy, justice and the possibilities of a better world. He is inspiring the world to find a new global consensus for our common home.

I see that hope and sense of possibility every day among America’s young people. Our youth are no longer satisfied with corrupt and broken politics and an economy of stark inequality and injustice. They are not satisfied with the destruction of our environment by a fossil fuel industry whose greed has put short term profits ahead of climate change and the future of our planet. They want to live in harmony with nature, not destroy it. They are calling out for a return to fairness; for an economy that defends the common good by ensuring that every person, rich or poor, has access to quality health care, nutrition and education.

As Pope Francis made powerfully clear last year in Laudato Si’, we have the technology and know-how to solve our problems – from poverty to climate change to health care to protection of biodiversity. We also have the vast wealth to do so, especially if the rich pay their way in fair taxes rather than hiding their funds in the world’s tax and secrecy havens- as the Panama Papers have shown.

The challenges facing our planet are not mainly technological or even financial, because as a world we are rich enough to increase our investments in skills, infrastructure, and technological know-how to meet our needs and to protect the planet. Our challenge is mostly a moral one, to redirect our efforts and vision to the common good. Centesimus Annus, which we celebrate and reflect on today, and Laudato Si’, are powerful, eloquent and hopeful messages of this possibility. It is up to us to learn from them, and to move boldly toward the common good in our time.”

Courtesy of Time.com

Hilary Putnam: Secular Philosopher and Religious Jew (July 31, 1926-March 13 2016)

maxresdefault (1)

“On March 13, America lost one of the greatest philosophers this nation has ever produced……there is no philosopher since Aristotle who has made creative and foundational contributions in all the following areas: logic, philosophy of mathematics, philosophy of science, metaphysics, philosophy of mind, ethics, political thought, philosophy of economics. philosophy of literature.”

Martha C. Nussbaum (Ernst Freund Distinguished Service Professor of Law and Ethics, The University of Chicago Huffpost March 14)

Hilary Putnam was born in Chicago and raised in a secular family with a left-leaning gentile father and a Jewish mother. One of Putnam’s fellow pupils at school was another left leaning Jew, Noam Chomsky, who remained a friend throughout his life. In fact Putnam’s last post at his blog Sardonic Comment was about a debate he was having with Chomsky. Putnam’s first teaching posts were in math and philosophy at Northwestern(1952-53) and Princeton (1953-61) and then as professor of the philosophy of science at MIT (1961-65) until his move to Harvard as professor of philosophy.

Putnam focused on philosophy of science, epistemology, and the mind. He was a critic of both Behaviourism and Type-Identity theory, each of which seek to reduce mental states to physical ones. Behaviourism claims that mental states are simply what we do, or are inclined to do, in certain circumstances (being in pain, for instance, is just the way we typically react to physical injury by flinching from its cause, crying out, etc.) and Putnam proposed a thought experiment: would stoic Spartans trained not to react to pain thus not be in pain?

He vigorously critiqued Type-Identity theory, which holds that  mental states will “turn out to be” particular types of brain states just as we have found heat is “just molecular motion” and water “just H2O”. Putnam argued that mental states are “multiply realisable”, i.e. the same mental state, for instance an experience of pain or desire, could be generated by different physical bodies- humans, cats, or whales. Therefore one can not be reduced to the other.

Putnam also famously argued that meaning was neither subjective nor objective. Meaning depends on external states of affairs; but the nature of these as we experience them are relative to language. “Thus the world is both ‘objective’ and not ‘objective’; we cannot ask what is the case without choosing some system of concepts (and no one system is uniquely fitted to describe ‘the world’); but once we have a system of concepts in place, what is true or false is not simply a matter of what we think.” Our linguistic system is thus like a fundamental axiom: once it is set, which statements within it are true or false are not subjectively so but objectively are so dependent on the rules of how our language and the external reality interact.

While revolutionising philosophy, Putnam was also involved with radical politics. At MIT in 1963 he organised against the Vietnam war, and at Harvard he organised campus protests and publicly burned draft cards. In 1965 he became a member of the Progressive Labor party (promoting, in his own words, an “idiosyncratic version of Marxism-Leninism”), and would stand outside factory gates to discuss politics with the workers. On campus he disrupted the classes of Richard Herrnstein (co-author of the allegedly racist Bell Curve: Intelligence and Class Structure in American Life), and he lived in a commune with students. As Jane O’ Grady wrote in a recent obituary, “for a time his students had to spend his lectures twisted round to look at him because he refused to sit at the front; although, in his more dogmatic Marxist phase, he spoke on a podium and advised students to read Mao Zedong’s Little Red Book. The Harvard establishment was in despair”.

Putnam took intense pleasure in thought. After reading aloud from a philosopher’s work in a lecture, he would laugh with delight. Putnam valued the willingness to think in complexity and nuance, famously saying, “Any philosophy that can be put in a nutshell belongs in one.” As Martha Nussbaum recently wrote, “The glory of Putnam’s way of philosophizing was its total vulnerability. Because he really did follow the argument wherever it led, he often changed his views, and being led to change was to him not distressing but profoundly delightful, evidence that he was humble enough to be worthy of his own rationality”. In fact Putnam became so well known for changing his mind that the Philosophical Lexicon named a moment of intellectual time a “hilary”, as in, “That’s what I thought a few hilarys ago.” 

In 2008 Putnam published the surprising Jewish Philosophy As A Guide To Life, which analyzes the thought of Wittginstein, Buber, Rozensweig, and Levinas (a group he called 3 ¼ Jews). In the introduction to that book Putnam describes how he came to write it. In 1975 the older of his two sons surprised him by wanting a bar mitzvah. Putnam got in touch with a Rabbi he had met and been impressed with years previously, Rabbi Ben-Zion Gold. Gold had been Rabbi of Harvard Hillel when Putnam gave an erev shabbat talk there on his reasons for opposing the Vietnam war. Putnam and his wife agreed to attend services with their son for a year while the boy prepared for his bar mitzvah, and by the end of the year the service and prayers, in Putnam’s words, “had become an essential part of our lives”. Putnam davenned every day for the rest of his life. How did a self-described “naturalistic philosopher” reconcile with his newfound religiousness?

According to Putnam, for many years he simply did not reconcile them. The philosopher and the religious person lived side by side but did not enter into direct confrontation. This could not be the final resolution for a questing mind like Putnam’s, of course. In an attempt to explain his perspective, over which he said that he still struggled and expected to struggle, Putnam wrote:

“Physics indeed describes the properties of matter in motion, but reductive naturalists forget that the world has many levels of form, including the level of morally significant human action, and the idea that all of these can be reduced to the level of physics I believe to be a fantasy. And, like the classic pragmatists, I do not see reality as morally indifferent: reality, as Dewey saw, makes demands on us. Values may be created by human beings and human cultures, but I see them as made in response to demands that we do not create. It is reality that determines whether our responses are adequate or inadequate. Similarly, my friend Gordon Kauffman may be right in saying that “the available God” is a human construct, but I am sure he would agree that we construct our images of God in response to demands that do not create, and that it is not up to us whether our responses are adequate or inadequate.”

Ruth Anna Putnam has said, “If you would like to make a gift in Hilary’s memory, please donate to Southern Poverty Law Center, 400 Washington Avenue, Montgomery, Alabama 36104.”

A Season of Cooperation: The Good Interfaith News

nterfaith-harmony

For the religious world, the last year has been a battle scarred one. The rise of ISIS has spelt the near-extinction of several Middle Eastern Christian communities as well as a severe threat to lesser known religious groups such as the Yazidis and the Shabak. Ahmaddiyas and the Bah’ai continue to suffer persecution in the Middle East, and Buddhist Myanmar continues it’s genocidal policies against Rohingya Muslims, even under new government of Aung San Suu Kyi. Meanwhile in the US and elsewhere there have been violent attacks against Muslims in response to terrorism in the US and Europe. Some Christian leaders in the West have responded with a recourse to militarism, such as Jerry Falwell Jr., who urged his seminary students at Liberty University to arm themselves. The 2016 Republican candidates have combined public avowals of Christianity with an embrace of militarism, xenophobia, and anti-Muslim rhetoric.

Yet the picture as a whole is not bleak. Taking the above example of pistol packing theologians for one, Falwell’s statements sparked massive criticism throughout the US Christian community, including from the leading  Evangelical pastor John Piper in the Washington Post.  Despite the fearful shutting of doors against Syrian refugees in many US states, the inspiring stories of nations and communities welcoming them far outshadow that show of inhumanity. In the US, leading centrist and right of centre Christian pastors and Academics (aside from the expected denunciations from the Christian left) like David Gushee, Max Lucado, Russel Moore and others have come out against Drumpf and the behaviour of the GOP.

In Canada there were several examples of inspiring interfaith cooperation in the last months. In BC synagogues raised tens of thousands of dollars to sponsor refugee families. Across Canada many congregations stepped up to sponsor refugee families as well. Jewish communities are also  working with the Blended Visa Office-Referred Program which matches private sponsors with people fleeing war that the UN Refugee Agency has “identified for resettlement.” This program matches support from donors (who agree to sponsor the refugee for six months) with a government pledge of an additional six months of support.

In Montreal, Jews and Muslims joined hands to help Syrian refugees together, and Pope Francis called for every Catholic diocese to house one refugee family. One of the season’s most inspiring stories came from Peterborough, where a Synagogue donated the use of its space to members of a Mosque destroyed by arson. In addition many cold Facebook feeds were warmed recently by the Israeli restaurant that gave a 50% discount on any meal shared by Arabs and Jews during the recent surge of Palestinian terror attacks.

There were also heartening stories from within the Muslim community. In Kenya, Muslims on a bus refused to separate from the Christian passengers, preventing their execution by Jihadis, recalling the protective ring formed around a Jewish synagogue by 1,000 Muslims in Norway earlier in the year. In New Jersey, Muslims for Peace organized a Christmas Party for youth at risk, and in Montreal Muslims, Jews and Sikhs joined hands on Christmas to serve food to the homeless at the Old Brewery Mission.In Vancouver students from RJDS joined with students from Al-Zahraa Islamic Academy to feed the homeless, continuing a tradition the two communities have developed.

Meanwhile in Jewish-Christian relations the 50th anniversary of Nostra Aetate, the Vatican II document which radically changed the Jewish-Catholic relationship arrived. Two important documents were released to coincide with it, one by a colloquiam of Orthodox Jews and one by the Vatican. The Jewish statement used the boldest language yet in a document of this kind, asserting that Christianity is “not an error” and is an intentional part of God’s plan to redeem the world. The Vatican document discouraged institutional evangelization of Jews and affirmed that Jews are saved by their own covenant with God outside of accepting the historical Jesus as saviour.

Reason for hope exists on all fronts. The real religious war is not between the religious and the irreligious, or between one religion and another. The real “holy war” is between those who live their religion as a way to love God and human beings, walking in humility, love and the a quest for ever growing understanding and those who pervert their traditions to serve the causes of nationalism, war, fear and hatred. Religion becomes a weapon when the human passions are idolized above the wisdom of God, of whom “all Her paths are pleasant and all Her ways peace (Proverbs 3:17)”. May we have the wisdom and courage to listen to the “still, small voice” (1 Kings 19:12) urging nonviolence, justice and humility.

 

New Piece in The Forward: Inside The Twisted Anti-Semitic Mind of Oberlin Professor Joy Karega

Read it here.

What The World Needs Now……is Pictures of Yoga, Sweet Pictures of Yoga

The following post was originally published in Elephant Journal

Man sitting on bed doing yoga
Man sitting on bed doing yoga

I am a former teacher of the various commercial brands of western hathayoga, colloquially known here in BC where I live as “Yoga”. I also used to work as a holistic therapist out of a health studio/day spa which called itself a Yoga centre. For both of these reasons I am connected to a lot of teachers and practitioners of Yoga, especially on Facebook and other social media outlets. Scrolling down my feed as I am wont to do, I’ve come to a sad conclusion:There are just not enough pictures of beautiful, highly fit and photogenic young men and women doing advanced Yoga poses out there.

Ask yourself: how are we ever going to change the world, make a healthier society, and lead people to strength and enlightenment without more half-naked, beautiful pictures of people doing tricky and impressive asanas? Particularly caucasian women, who are under-represented in this field. My feed is inundated with pictures of people of colour, plus size models, octogenarians, and men with limited flexibility. More white women! Where are you? And young too, please: where are the twentysomethings and thirtysomethings? The constant barrage of photos of people in their 40s, 50s and 60s gaining enlightenment through meditating in yogic postures is getting tiresome. You would think that Yoga was for just anybody, when from my experience the  really succesfull yogis are fit, beautiful young women. This is not well represented in what you actually see out there. Also- let’s be honest: very few of these pictures are sexy. Who wants to see you do yoga in sweatpants, or loose flowy clothing, or anything else which covers up that svelte yogi/yogini body? How about trying bikini underwear, skin tight fabrics, or even lace underwear or outright nudity. Nothing communicates “close to enlightenment” like being able to see your ripply muscles and gorgeous contours. Even if you’re just trying to promote Yoga for health, bear in mind that we all know that health=thin, fit and young, so let’s not send a mixed message by covering up how fit, thin or young you are.

On top of the lack of sexy yoga pictures, not just of women but also of men (all the male yoga pictures I say these days are of older, out of shape men- and there’s also a real lack of tattoos and dreadlocks)-most of the pictures I see seem to be of people doing boring un-yoga like things like feeding the poor, praying, meditating while fully clothed, engaging in street protests or planting trees. NONE OF THESE THINGS ARE YOGA! Here’s my rule of thumb: if the activity helps you to try out for Cirque de Soleil, it’s Yoga. If it has a merely spiritual or moral purpose, it’s something else.

A friend of mine the other day said the most insane thing to me. She said, “Real yoga can’t be photographed. The word “yoga” comes from the ancient root “yuj”, which referred to a yoke in the sense of a “discipline”. That’s the way the oldest texts, Yogic and Buddhist, use the word. It just means “committed spiritual discipline” and there are a million ways to do it. It’s entirely a matter of the heart.”

BORING! These kinds of sentiments devalue what Yoga is really about: feeling beautiful. Yoga allows me to feel a sense of mastery and a radiant sense of beauty which I communicate to others through well orchestrated photos of my accomplishments in flesh and bone. I’m sure you feel the same, and we need to fight against these disembodied, spiritualist put-downs of our bodies and our selves.

Another friend of mine, who is a Yoga teacher, suggested to me that a true “yoga picture” would be a picture of the practitioner’s face, one that showed the lines on their face, the soul in their eyes- the hard-won wisdom and transcendence that their years of practice had brought them. What nonsense! Anyone can have a nice face and still be overweight, stiff, and not know a bharadvajasana from a vishvamitanasana.

So: a plea to the beautiful people-to the truly successfull yogis and yoginis out there: strip down, go somewhere beautiful, and have someone take truly beautiful pictures of you showing what Yoga is really all about. Let’s stop navel gazing and start celebrating each other. I’ll celebrate you and you celebrate me, ok?

DSC_0627

A View From The North

Donald-Trump-Donkey-Hotey

Like a river of bullshit it flowed: fetid, revolting, and fertile with dangerous life. To watch the invasion of America by the circus-hallucination reality-tv politiporn of Donald Trump and the swaggering John Wayne insanity of Ted Cruz seems at time like watching the invasion of civilization by a an unthinkable horde barbaric.  What does it mean that simaltaneously we have the rise of ISIS, Al-Quaeda, Boko Haram, etc. in the Middle East while in America we see the rise of Trump and Cruz? Not that there is a moral equivalence between Daesh and Donald, at least I hope there isn’t, yet there is a similar madness, a similar horrific urspung of primal perversity in both cases which makes one fear that some sectors of the political stage are devoluting into a gangfight of swaggering mafiosos. Meanwhile Clinton, the true blackstar giving off obfuscation instead of light, the mask of a mask, pulls out her latest chameleon skin and says what her advisers tell her to say.

From the other side, the side of holiness, like some neopagan prophecy of the required balancing of darkness and light in the great cosmic harmony comes Bernie Sanders, Brooklyn Jew with white hair glowing like the transfigured robes of Jesus. It is literally like we are watching the writhing mass of American culture coalesce into a living yin-yang symbol before our very eyes.

Bernie Sanders will be president in 2016. Trump will go on to some other grandiose bit of public masturbation. The real fear is: what happens after Sanders gets elected? The Roman empire doesn’t treat socialist Jews all that well. How long will Sanders survive in the white house? I mean, like, literally survive? I hope he has bullet proof pajamas and that wily old zaida survives long enough to turn the American ship away from the brink of disaster and towards the dream of a civilized future where tzedaka u’mishpat (righteousness and justice) are allowed once again to rear their hoary, weary, immortal heads. I don’t agree with Sanders on everything but on most things I vehemently do, and every half-blind donkey who has not been bewitched by Trump’s Reichian fascist-nation into seeing Trump as anything other than what he so painfully, obviously, is, can see the writing on the walls of Trump tower (how have I had to write that man’s name so many times?). Sanders is a decent man and what’s more- a jewel so rare it’s value is hard to calculate- an honest politician. Yasher Koach, Bernie. I pray to see you in the White House.

 

Is Bernie Too Among The Prophets?

1e96660c878ec979cd1ccee2e24ce04f

Bernie Sanders is now the first Jew ever to win a presidential primary and be seriously considered as a candidate for the American presidency. Recent polls have him tied with Hillary Clinton. Reactions from the Jewish community have been mixed, and mostly quiet. Many Jews have chosen, unsurprisingly, to debate Bernie’s record on Israel. Has he supported the state enough? Are his ties to J Street and other liberal, dove-ish groups a sign that he will not stand up for the Jewish state?

For myself I am not interested in debating Sanders’ record on Israel, and I think other North American Jews would also be wise not to focus on it. The reason is simple: Sanders is running for the US Presidency, and the primary issues that need to be considered are how he will run the country he might be chosen to lead. I also resist the idea that the primary consideration for Jews should be Sanders’ relationship to Israeli security concerns. I think that the primary consideration for a Jew thinking about Sander’s candidacy is his relationship to Jewish tradition and the degree to which he embodies Jewish values.  

Sanderszwitsky

The progressive Jewish community has seemed hesitant to throw it’s weight behind Bernie, perhaps because until recently they saw him as unlikely to succeed. Or maybe there is a fear of jinxing him: “Shhh, they haven’t really realized that he’s Jewish yet.” As Sarah Tuttle-Singer wrote  a few days ago in The Times of Israel, one of the great things about Sander’s ascension is that his Jewishness has been so irrelevant to Americans- he has risen in the polls purely because of who he is as a human being. Meanwhile big Jewish financiers like George Soros, Donald Sussman, and several others have been backing Clinton, not Sanders.

So what is Sanders’ relationship to Judaism? Well, it seems that he is comfortable with his Jewishness and appreciative both of what he finds valuable in the tradition and of Jewish customs. Sanders has not been making much of his Jewishness, to the chagrin of people like Michael A. Cohen. Cohen recently complained in Tablet that Sanders was downplaying his Jewishness, saying that it “hurt”. Cohen seems to prefer Jewish identity politics to embodying Jewish ethical values. Sanders feels the opposite, and his evaluation is a perfect example of the moralism that is drawing people to him in the first place.

On Chabad,org Dovid Margolin recently defended Sanders’ connection to Judaism, citing his fight for the right for Chabad to light a public menorah on public property in a key court case which paved the way for the now common practice. Sanders was also appreciative of the Rebbe’s stance on education and declared the Rebbe’s birthday “Education Day” in Vermont with these charactarisic words:

The Lubavitcher Rebbe has democratized education by labouring tirelessly to establish educational institutions for the elderly, for women, for children, and whereas he has sought out the materially oppressed and disadvantaged thereby effecting their enfranchisement through education and by stressing the universal implications of education as a source of continuous creativity through which the human condition is perfected; and whereas especially in this same week marking the 850th birthday of Maimonides, binding the principle of reason to human liberation, now therefore I, Bernard Sanders, mayor of the city of Burlington, hereby designate yud-alef nissan as the day of educationNote Bernie’s use of the Hebrew “yud-alef nissan” to designate the date, as well as his interesting commentary on Maimonides. Margolin also notes that Sanders and the Rebbe corresponded and Sanders celebrated his re-election as mayor by attending a Purim party in Crown Heights. This writ, from 1985, does not establish Sanders as a Hosid, which clearly he is not. It does show him as sensitive to, and appreciative of, Jewish values and Jewish sages. As some have pointed out, Sanders is more of an old style Yiddish Socialist than a “Socialist”.

Sanders himself, when asked, had made it clear that he is not a religious Jew. When late-night TV host Jimmy Kimmel asked  Sanders in October whether he believes in God, Sanders sounded more like Kurt Vonnegut, Jr than Abraham Joshua Heschel: “I am what I am….and what I believe in, and what my spirituality is about, is that we’re all in this together.”

Sanders does not strongly identify with his Jewishness, and his religious sentiments could better be described as a general reverence for life and humanity, a kind of secular, naturalistic spirituality. He and his Catholic wife Jane both say they believe in God but are not involved in organized religion, and that their faith backgrounds inform their moral sentiments. David Harris-Gershon has written in Tikkun, “For Sanders, socialism is Jewish. Ending income inequality is Jewish. Supporting black Americans as they struggle against continued oppression is Jewish. Which is not to say such things are inherently so, but rather that for Sanders, such positions are a direct extension of his Jewishness. His career-long drive for social justice is a central part of his political identity in the same way his being Jewish is a central part of his cultural identity, and the two are inextricably intertwined. Belief in God doesn’t matter. Going to synagogue doesn’t matter. Keeping kosher doesn’t matter. What matters is justice. And that mattering is Jewish.”

Jay Michaelson has written, “secular, progressive Judaism is, itself, a kind of religion. While dispensing with the God of the alte velt—if the Enlightenment didn’t kill him, the Holocaust certainly did—leftist Jews of the 20th century maintained a prophetic, religious zeal for justice… if we are asking whether Sanders is “religious” in Jewish terms, the reply must be that he is.” I would argue that the evidence supports that assertion with regards to Bernie, who may be the most prophetic politician in decades.

The prophets of Israel were relentless in criticizing the behaviour of Israel and calling it back to its highest ideals. Contrary to the popular vision of them as diviners of the future their primary job was calling people back to the ethical demands of God. Their vision had social justice at it’s core; for them this equalled fidelity to God. In the words of Jeremiah (22:13-17): “Woe to him who builds his house by unrighteousness, and his upper rooms by injustice, who makes his neighbor serve him for nothing and does not give him his wages, who says, ‘I will build myself a great house with spacious upper rooms,’ who cuts out windows for it, paneling it with cedar and painting it with vermilion. Do you think you are a king because you compete in cedar? Did not your father eat and drink and do justice and righteousness? Then it was well with him. He vindicated the cause of the poor and needy; then it was well. Is not this to know me?’ declares the Lord.”  Isaiah sums up the prophetic vision well (1:17): “Learn to do good; seek justice, fight oppression; bring justice to those without a protector, plead the cause of the vulnerable.” Or Zechariah (7:9-10): “Thus says the Lord of hosts, “Judge truly, show kindness and mercy to one another, do not oppress the vulnerable, those without a protector, the foreigner, or the poor, and let none of you devise evil against another in your heart.” Israel’s wisdom literature agrees: Open your mouth for the mute, for the rights of all who are destitute. Open your mouth, judge righteously, defend the rights of the poor and the needy (Proverbs 31:8-9).”

Walter Brueggeman, a leading scholar of the Hebrew Bible, describes the prophets as follows, in words I challenge you not to associate with Bernie Sanders: “The prophet engages in futuring fantasy. The prophet does not ask if the vision can be implemented, for questions of implementation are of no consequence until the vision can be imagined. The imagination must come before the implementation. Our culture is competent to implement almost anything and to imagine almost nothing. The same royal consciousness that make it possible to implement anything and everything is the one that shrinks imagination because imagination is a danger. Thus every totalitarian regime is frightened of the artist. It is the vocation of the prophet to keep alive the ministry of imagination, to keep on conjuring and proposing futures alternative to the single one the king wants to urge as the only thinkable one.” (The Prophetic Imagination)

These are, of course, the very criticisms levelled at Bernie: that the future of justice that he fantasies is not thinkable, that it is indeed pure fantasy and cannot be implemented. Many would argue otherwise. Many would just like to see somebody really try for a change. That is why Bernie is so popular with millennials.

The Jewish Candidate

Bernie Sanders is relentless and consistent in his criticisms of the financial elite, his calls for a political system free of legal bribery, and his defence of education and the needs of the poor for fair wages, medical care and enough money to live. He wants to free Americans from debt and modern slavery and to pull America away from militarism and hatred of the stranger. All of these themes echo in dozens of verses and laws structuring the political vision of the Torah and running deep in Jewish consciousness, even when they are obscured by fear or effaced by our falls into chauvinism. Bernie Sanders may not be just the Jewish Candidate by ethnicity. Ironically this secular, non-observant Jew may be the candidate that best embodies the political values of the Torah, which is to say, the ethics of the Jewish tradition.

 

Zaida: Remembering My Grandfather

Meyer Gindin photo obit

This is an unusually personal piece. I wrote it last October while my grandfather, or “zaida” in Yiddish, was dying of cancer and finished it shortly after he passed away. My zaida was a holocaust survivor and an amazing man who was an inspiration to the whole family and beyond. There are few survivors left. In a few years there may be none left, aside from a few people like my Dad who were children during the Shoah or in the DP camps after the war and can remember very little of what happened. 

I.

It is 1951. My zaida is a greenhorn just arrived in New York City. He has spent the last 12 years trying to survive and save his family from pain and death at the hands of their foiled executioners, millions strong and armed with guns, warplanes, radios, and all of the resources of the most advanced country on earth. He has succeeded.

He cannot speak english. He is looking for his one surviving brother, who is much older than him. Because this one brother left the old country for America when my zaida was a child, my zaida was later kicked out of the Russian army for having American ties and sent to a Siberian labour camp. He survived that too. My zaida’s name, Myer, means “light”. His wife, my baba, has a name which means “beautiful”.

Myer is following another Jew down the street. They are speaking Yiddish together, and Myer has gone from being lost to being found.

II.

My zaida Myer is led into a room where the voices add Russian to Yiddish. An old man sits among the others playing cards. It is his long lost older brother, the only other survivor.

His brother and the other New York Jews set Myer up with a room to stay in, money, food, and friends. He has never had it so good. After a few weeks he begs them to find him some work but they are not in a hurry. They know what he has been through.

Myer has been arguing with his wife about whether they should stay or go to Winnipeg, Canada, where her parents Gedala and Hyitl have been resettled, having gotten out of Europe sooner. She wins, which he will complain about for the rest of his life.

III.

1935. My grandmother’s father, Gedala, has put all of his money into sending his daughters Rya and Sarah to a tarbut, a new kind of Zionist Jewish school where they will learn the emerging modern style of Hebrew and get a secular education as well as education in Jewish culture. On the way to school every morning my Baba Rya and her older sister Sarah walk fearfully, their eyes peeled for non-Jewish Poles who gather to throw stones at them, spit on them, call them dirty Jews. My Baba will acquire Hebrew with a modern sefardit pronunciation. She will weather the humiliation of being pulled out of school one year because Gedala can’t afford it. She will learn to play the mandolin, and will do so until a nervous condition developed during the holocaust scars and disfigures her hands.

IV.

My zaida is late for shul. His older brother, who is an atheist and a marxist, slaps him for being late to the religious service. “Show papa some respect!”, he barks. Papa, Reb Shmuel, is an orthodox litvak, a non-Hasidic but pious Jew who teaches Talmud and Rashi in the synagogue and acts as a cantor during the high holidays. Myer will follow in his brother’s footsteps, join a Jewish socialist group, and hang out with the Red Army soldiers stationed in his town of Glemboka. It’s those soldiers who will tell him that the pact between Russia and Germany will fail and the Germans will come. They tell Myer to leave with his family before the Nazis get there.

When Myer tells his family he is leaving and why they are unmoved- they do not believe the stories of the Germans could possibly be true. Myer is adamant, already showing the prescience and cunning which will serve him so well later. He begs to be allowed to take one of his brothers, but his parents are firm that he will not break up the family. His father touches his head and bensches (blesses) him. Myer leaves alone and heads for Russia.

V.

1941. My baba Rya is taking food and clothing into a detainment complex where her father is kept. Drafted into the Polish army, Gedala is now a POW. His wife Chayitl and his two daughters are staying near the camp and doing what they can to take care of him. One day the family meets a handsome young Russian officer, a Jew, who is helping to get some basic amenities to the many migrants and refugees who need it- firewood, boots, bread. The young officer takes an interest in Rya, who is a beautiful, diminutive teenage girl of 17. Eventually they will marry in a back alley somewhere in Russia, secretively, hurriedly,  with a hastily put together minyan (quorum), Myer and Rya Gindin.

VI.

Through a series of unlikely events Myer has a key position in the leadership of a Russian munitions plant in Siberia. Months before he had been called before a committee of three men from the Party, one of them a Jew, to be examined as a possible candidate for helping with the plant. The men asked Myer a few questions and dismissed him. Myer took a shot. He had spotted the Jew. Figuring he might play on the man’s compassion, as he turned around to leave he faked a limp (which would mean he as useless as infantry). The man stopped him. “Amcha?”, he asked in Hebrew.Who are your people?

Yisroel, Myer replied in his ashkenazi Hebrew. He was given the position. Through superhumanly hard work he rose in the plant hierarchy, gaining the trust of the upper managers. They put him in charge of finding resources- scrap metal, industrial materials- to be turned into the weapons of war against Germany.

VII.

My zaida arrives cold and exhausted in Glemboka. He has gone back to see what has become of his family, and to tell them of his marriage. He rode the rails all the way there, a huge distance which took a weeks travel. The Jewish area of his village, the largest part of the village, is a ghost town. His family home is empty. In a shack erected outside of the home he finds the family’s shabbes goy- the gentile housekeeper they hired to look after the farm and house without the restrictions Jewish law placed on them. She tells him the story.

The Nazis did come, and they exterminated the town’s Jews. Myer’s family was lined up by a giant grave and gunned into a pit. Shmuel, his wife Bluma, Yankl, Shepsl, Yehuda, Baruch, Avraham, Zerah, Mendel, Ephram, Raphael, their wives and children….The shabbes goy saved some of their things in a locked room in case Myer came back. He takes a pair of boots for Rya and leaves the rest for her. He walks back to the train, back to Russia. For the rest of his life he will search phone books for Gindins. Maybe one of them escaped. Maybe.   

VIII. 

1943. My zaida is standing trial before an army tribunal, court-martialled. He is on trial for black market racketeering. He was turned in by a man, a barber, who he helped get a pair of boots. Someone planted whisky in his room, and he is being accused of hustling resources and moonshine. His government appointed defence lawyer is useless and Myer is sentenced to ten years in prison.

That night his dead father, Shmuel, comes to him in a dream. Make an application, my son, he says, and you will be freed.  Myer awakes to see a white bird tapping on his window, and then it flies away. Myer follows his father’s advice and gets an acquittal.

IX.

Myer and Rya cross European borders underground, looking for safe haven.They end up at one point in Ural, Siberia, where their first child is born. They name him after Myer’s father Shmuel. Myer refines his hustling abilities, making one potato become, after a day of trading among the poor, a small meal- maybe a loaf of bread and condensed milk for his wife and child.

A Jewish organization called bracha (blessing) gets them into Austria as the Allies win, and they end up in A DP camp on the river Danube where they will live in squalid, cramped conditions with other holocaust survivors for five years awaiting a country to immigrate to. The camp is near Linz, where Hitler was born. My Dad, whose Hebrew name Yehuda derives from one of Myer’s murdered brothers, is born there and lives there until the age of five.

My baba and zaida tell me of their flight into Austria, walking through snow covered forests with broken shoes, my baba’s pregnant belly poking through her undersized dress. They sneak across the border at night, my zaida begging one year old Shmuel to be silent, which, miraculously, he is. As soon as they step into the warmth of the safehouse Shmuelke begins to wail.

XI.

After my baba and zaida moved to Winnipeg my zaida took several jobs: a denim cutter, laying floor tiles, cutting glass. They lived in the poor part of Winnipeg’s North End. Myer eventually bought into a convenience store, and then borrowed money to invest in real estate. Working constantly, figures dancing in his brain, forming alliances and cultivating connections, Myer eventually bought and sold dozens of hotels and parcels of urban real state and became a wealthy man. He supported his sons, buying them property, paying off their debts, buying them businesses, making investments on their behalf. He helped put his grandchildren through school, financed their housing, flew them to Florida to visit him and Rya in the Winter or Winnipeg to visit them in the summer. Nights he did not sleep. He read voraciously, mostly about WW2 history, Jewish history, European history, understanding what happened in ever finer detail, spreading out through trajectories of historical space and time.

XII.

It is 2003 and I am a Buddhist monk. I am sitting on a wooden platform in hand-dyed burnt orange robes, with a shaven head and eyebrows. My Zaida Myer, and my uncle Sam are there, in an impossible and surprising gesture of solidarity. They are sitting across from me on a wooden bench peppering me with questions. They will ask me more questions in 20 minutes about the logic and intricacies of Buddhist monastic life than I have received in the previous two years. They head back to their motel room after agreeing to return the next morning to spend the day together.

The next day Sam, Myer and I go to a bookstore for coffee. Sam goes to the bathroom and my zaida leans in toward me. “Mettyu”, he says in his Yiddish accent, “I want you to know something. I might have my ideas about what you should do. And you might have your ideas. But whatever you do, and wherever you go, I will always love you.”

XIII.

2015: My father’s voice sounds lighter on the phone now. He has had a night and day to digest his father’s diagnosis with terminal cancer, and his natural philosophical optimism is kicking in. “I gave him the Feldman argument”, he said, citing the good death of his friend Bill Feldman a decade earlier, “People die all the time without knowing it’s coming. This way you get to put all of your affairs in order, say goodbye to everyone.”

In the background I can hear my zaida talking, then singing. My Dad holds up the phone so I can hear his amused, Russian-Yiddish sounding singing voice intoning, “I’ve got plenty of nothing….and nothing is plenty for me!”

IV.

 A week later My zaida gets the prognosis: 3-6 months. “What if I want to make it quicker?”, he asks. The doctor changes the subject. We visit him a couple of weeks later. My son lies in bed with him and they make funny noises.We talk privately. He says to me, “70 years of work, what did I accomplish?”

Thinking he is fishing I say, “What did you accomplish? You built an entire family! Everything we have is because of you. You built everything.”

“Did I?”, he asks, “Maybe it was God. I don’t know.”

The next day I am asking him questions about the war, clearing up parts of the story. He tells me my Dad got him a book about Jesus (Killing Jesus) a couple of months before. “Do you believe Jesus existed?”, he asks.

“Sure”, I say.

“Who killed him?”, he asks.

I am not sure what to answer with, so I choose what seems safe: “Pontius Pilate.”

“Both sides played a part”, he says correctly, making a matching hand gesture. “So we both have blood on our hands.”

I nod.

“He was a socialist”, he says dismissively. “If they hadn’t killed him nobody would remember him.”

I don’t say anything. He begins talking about God, denying his existence. My baba told me in the night he was asking her why God was punishing him. “He doesn’t talk like that”, she said. I begin asking him about his father, who came to him in a dream and saved his life after his death. I want to do a small something to turn his thoughts that way. Where did his father come from? Might there be something beyond the grave? Family members come in and disrupt the conversation. I make one last attempt: “Your father, he came to you….where did he come from?”

“He was dead!”

“I know…”

He loses the thread, starts talking about his trial. About going back to Glemboke during the war. He begins weeping. “When I walked into the forest, blood came up through the soil.”

We talk a little more, and then it is time to go. We exchange gestures of affection and I tell him I will call him the next day from Vancouver. When I call from Vancouver after that he is not well enough to talk. Two weeks later he is moved, at his own request, into hospice care. Before he goes to sleep that night he turns to his wife and asks, “Do you want to come with me?” That night he dies during his sleep, like a heavy, broken tree falling finally to the earth.

 

Some Thoughts On the Children Burnt Alive in Dalori In The Form of a Prayer

 

Dalori-3_3564095b.jpg

Father in heaven, any words seem trite in the face of children burnt alive in their huts by Boko Haram two days ago, an unknown amount of children among the 86 people murdered. Yet we must keep speaking. We must keep finding meaning, we must keep speaking what truth we can, what solace and protest we can, because if we stop speaking, if we stop trying to understand, we will vanish into a horrible silence in which we say and do nothing.

Mother of spirit, my conscience tells me that those children, who a survivor heard screaming in the flames as their homes burnt down, must now be in your arms if you are worthy to be called the God of Abraham, Sarah, Isaac, Rebekka, Jacob, Rachel, and Leah. As their bodies screamed their souls must have already been halfway out the window of this world into your waiting arms. This world created so we could learn to love, in which all of us everyday in ways small or big choose often, too often, to hate instead.

My conscience tells me this must be so, or else the world we live in worse than meaningless. Some will be offended that I contemplate a God at all in these circumstances, will wish that I only be angry, that I only mourn, that I do not seek any solace. Some take a curious refuge in meaninglessness, but I can’t see any strong solace there. How could pain plus meaninglessness be better than pain with meaning, pain with God? Does the world need more bald, unhealable rage and sorrow? Oh Lord, I think and hope that believing that Your loving embrace met those injured souls means that this world is not the way it is supposed to be, not the way you want it to be. Things are bleak because of the darkness in our human hearts, but things are not hopelessly that way. We must fight against the violence done to the innocent, not by doing violence to the guilty but by remembering and embodying the mercy you desire. We must not go silent, not go cold, not become comfortably numb. We must keep alive a heart beating and burning for what your heart desires, and the love you bear each one of us.

Creatorgive us strength to see above the fire and the water, and to walk with faith and hope towards your world.

The Tower of Babel: Bad Religion?

Pieter_Bruegel_the_Elder_-_The_Tower_of_Babel_(Vienna)_-_Google_Art_Project_-_edited.jpg

I was recently listening to the punk band Bad Religion’s album Recipe for Hate. The song Skyscraper, whose passion and composition I’ve always enjoyed, centers around the metaphor of the tower of Babel (you can listen to it here: https://youtu.be/37Jlj0_FsZU). I can’t claim to understand the lyrics to the song in toto, but it does seem to be criticizing the destroyer of the tower (God), not the builders. In Greg Gaffin’s midrash, the tower builders are trying to reach God and God is afraid that if they find him they will abandon him (presumably because he doesn’t exist). Gaffin sings: I know why you tore it down that day, you thought that if you got caught we’d all go away, like a spoiled little baby who can’t come out to play, you had your revenge.  Gaffin sees the destruction as a bad thing: Well madness reigned and paradise drowned when Babel’s walls came crashing down. The song also seems to contain an implied criticism of the story of the tower itself- the last verse of the song characterizes the story as hardly understood and never any good.

Leaving aside Gaffin’s somewhat bizarre atheist fantasy midrash, this got me thinking about the story. How good of a story is it?

This question resonated in my mind more because of some reading I was doing lately, in a book called Ancient Near Eastern Thought and The Old Testament by John Walton. This book, which I recommend, strives to let people know what more than a century of intense archaeological investigation has uncovered about the cultures surrounding ancient Israel. It puts the Torah into context. Walton says, as many have before him, that the story of the tower of Bavel takes its central image from the Babylonian ziggurat.

In Genesis 11:1-9 a group of early humans settles in Shinar, probably Sumer, an area in southern Mesapotamia associated in the Torah with Babylon. The Mesapotamian building materials are foreign to Israelites, so the Torah describes them for us. The “city and tower” being built (see below), if true to history, would have been an urban area housing public buildings. In this case it was a temple complex. These structures, which began being built at the end of the 4th milennium BCE, were still visible in Nebuchadnezzar’s Babylon. The tower in the story is almost certainly based on the ziggurat temple complexes of Sumer, which are frequently described in Mesapotamian literature as”with head touching heaven”, as in the Torah as quoted below.

The story in the Torah is as follows:

The whole earth was of one language and of one speech.  It came to pass as they journeyed from the east that they found a plain in the land of Shinar and they dwelt there,  and they said one to another: ‘Come, let us make brick and burn them thoroughly.’  They had brick for stone, and bitumen for mortar, and they said: ‘Come, let us build us a city and a tower with its top in heaven and let us make us a name lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth.’ And YHWH came down to see the city and the tower which the children of men built. And YHWH said: ‘Behold they are one people and they have one language and this is what they begin to do.  Now nothing will be withheld from them which they aim to do. Come, let us go down and confound their language that they may not understand one another’s speech.’  So YHWH scattered them abroad from thence upon the face of all the earth; and they left off  building the city. Therefore was the name of it called Bavel; because YHWH did there confound the language of all the earth; and from there did YHWH scatter them abroad upon the face of all the earth.

This enigmatic story seems to warn human beings about the hubris of using technology to storm the heights of heaven and make themselves secure from any danger. Sound familiar? Far from being a story that should irk Bad Religion, a band which continuously snarls warnings about human arrogance and self-deception, I would think this story might make it on to their “acceptable biblical stories list”. I suspect that such a list does not exist. In any case let’s look a little more at the story itself and its ancient context.

In the story YHWH confounds people’s languages and spreads them out over the world. The story then explains the existence of multiple languages: they are there to prevent the creation of a mega-mono-culture and the attendant human hubris and blindness, one in which people make themselves God and depend on their own technology and might.

The fact that the story appears based on ancient Israelite perceptions of Babylon is also interesting. Babylon was a sophisticated, expanding empire with technology beyond Israel’s. Israel, a society of farmers and shepherds, looked up at the urban megalopolis of Babylon and its temple towers and saw nothing but a symbol of human arrogance and, it seems, a force that threatened to destroy smaller cultures and impose it’s own hegemony on everyone. Babylon was an imperialist state whose leaders glorified themselves and exalted in their technology and military strength. The story criticizes what Israel perceived as Babylon’s dream of a monocultural, invincible empire.

One interesting thing about this story, though, is that the Israelite perception of the nature of ziggurats- temples reaching upwards to heaven- is wrong. As Walton points out, ziggurats had a different nature and purpose. Humans did not use them, did not live in them or climb up them. Ziggurats existed as stairways upon which the gods descended to bring blessing to the earth, and to receive offerings. The ziggurats were not for the use of human beings, but for the use of gods!

We can thus see that the Israelite story is not an accurate depiction of Sumerian or Babylonian religion but rather takes up an image from the civilization of their neighbours and riffs on it to make a point- a point that is both a shot at perceived Babylonian arrogance and a broader statement. Anyone familiar with the sourcing of the story of Noah and the flood in older Akkadian and Mesapotamian stories knows that this is not a singular occurence in Israelite literature. It appears that the crafters of Israelite literature took up motifs from the literatures and civilisations of their neighbours and ran with them in a completely different direction. The religious sensibilities of Israel were truly an anamoly in the ancient near east (see Created Equal by Joshua Berman or the excellent discussion in Fight by Preston Sprinkle, ch.3-5). 

To answer my own question: is the the tower of Bavel a good story? I think it’s a very good story.  The story’s lesson seems to me to be that cultural diversity is a divinely willed protection against human hubris. Think of this-when there is only one human culture, from where does diversity, criticism, and challenge come from? Israel seemed to intuit that an unchallenged culture possesses an unlimited potential for evil.

Technology tends to empower empire and its accompanying arrogance. The technical-industrial explosion of the last 300 years has not only allowed us to touch the heavens. We have also exterminated more than 50% of the cultures and languages of the world, reducing ethnodiversity as well as biodiversity. We have pierced the atom and the gene and are quickly approaching the doleful day when “there is nothing they cannot do”.

I am reminded of a verse from the Daodejing, the ancient classic of Daoism by the Old Master (Laozi) which describes the ideal civilization (translation by Red Pine):

Imagine a small state with a small population

let there be labor-saving tools

that aren’t used

let people consider death

and not move far

let there be boats and carts

but no reason to ride them

let there be armor and weapons

but no reason to employ them

let people return to the use of knots

and be satisfied with their food

and pleased with their clothing

and content with their homes

and happy with their customs

let there be another state so near

people hear its dogs and chickens

and live out their lives

without making a visit.