« Desert trick to try at home | Main | Not playing by the rules »

Tuesday, August 09, 2005

Relevant wisdom in unlikely places

There is a very talented elementary school teacher living in the State of Oregon named Christopher Naze.  Although we've never met, he was one of my early inspirations in the online journaling world... and for more than two years I have read every word he has published.

Christopher and I come from very different religious and cultural backgrounds, but I keep coming back to read him because he has an uncanny ability to locate essential truths that transcend whatever issue he is discussing.

A recent example is a short quote he shared on his site a few days ago.  The quote was taken from a long article about, of all things, political immaturity posing an obstacle to the Oregon Legislature's ability to govern.  As usual, Christopher zeroed in on the money quote:

"We have spawned a generation that does not understand what it means to govern. Ideological lawmakers know what they know and cannot get along with anyone who differs. They are only interested in getting their own way. If a process prevents it they change the process rather than accept its results. They behave like spoiled, indulged children."

~ by Russel Sadler ~

[Taken from an article entitled 'Our Childish Legislature' that appeared on a progressive Oregonian site called BlueOregon.]

Truer words were never written... and they could be applied equally to any political faction here in Israel.

A few days ago I wrote a post entitled 'Reap what you Sow', about the Jewish terrorist attack last Thursday. In the comments on that post Jonathan Edelstein praised the points I had made and went out his way to make sure I understood that the compliment was coming from someone who considered himself 'left wing'. 

This bothered me to the point where I responded:

"While I'm flattered by the compliment, I am longing for people to start thinking about themselves less as 'left' or 'right'... and more as 'concerned, thinking people'. If you disagree with someone that claims only to be concerned, and professes to having thought about a problem for some time, you may not agree with that person's solution but you might be a bit slower to immediately discount what he/she has to say. My new resolution is to no longer identify myself as right left or center... but rather that I am simply a concerned, thinking member of society. Anyone who listens to my thoughts on a particular issue will quickly be able to use his/her own label... but at least they will have listened."

My point was that I find labels do more to cloud people's thinking than most are willing to admit. 

However, Jonathan misunderstood my reply to mean that I was pretending that 'right' and 'left' did not exist, and went on to list his left wing bona fides.  While Jonathan is clearly not a good example of the closed minded, immature political outlook that most bothers me... it troubled me that someone who has proved himself capable of sophisticated and nuanced political discourse found it necessary to cling to the 'left wing' mantle at all costs.

I wish people here in Israel would loosen, just a bit, their fervent grip on political/religious labels and prejudices.  This is not to deny the existence of 'left' or 'right' or 'religious' or 'secular' as real or legitimate. I just think that these labels and prejudices often deafen/blind us to small truths that we routinely ignore or dismiss because we view the source with suspicion, or even contempt.

We see over and over throughout our history, and in our Scriptures, that our heroes are often tremendously flawed... and our opponents are sometimes inspired to play an unwitting role in our redemption.  Who are we to now pretend that relevant wisdom cannot be found in unlikely places?
221_16_5_41

Posted by David Bogner on August 9, 2005 | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c581e53ef00e5503e87e88833

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Relevant wisdom in unlikely places:

Comments

Well said! You have articulated my frustrated ruminations of the past few weeks, particularly as they apply to the on-going (rather heated) discussions between various Anglo-Israeli bloggers regarding the disengagement. Should our loyalty to political dogma really override our committment to finding solutions?

Posted by: zahava | Aug 9, 2005 11:24:47 AM

It's true. The thoughtful, intelligent and committed people of the world need to listen to each other and form solutions together. The whole "ribbon" thing started to appall me in Israel, where it seemed every fifth car had either an orange or blue-and-white ribbon, announcing in shorthand the family's political affiliation.

Posted by: Mirty | Aug 9, 2005 3:09:34 PM

David,

That is a problem that is not limited to any particular country. One of my favorite bloggers just wrote about that here here.
There is a lack of willingness on the part of many to agree to disagree, a failure to accept that the "right thing" is not owned by those who label themselves as being part of UTC, Shas, Likud, Democrat, Republican or Bull Moose Party.

As hokey as it sounds one of my goals in the blogosphere has bee to try and help tone down the rhetoric so that we can get back to working together and stop pointing fingers.

Posted by: Jack | Aug 9, 2005 3:28:43 PM

David,

You are spot on, here. I am a little surprised at Jonathan's response too.

As someone who is right leaning on some issues and left leaning on others, those who cling to the issues on either side puzzle me. With Jonathan, I have no doubt that he came to his positions thoughtfully, but to many on both sides, probably a majority of leftists and righties, their positions are determined by the group they choose to identify with. It's that strong identification with the liberal or conservative label, that is counter-productive. And my guess is, Jonathan did not mean to sound dogmatic in his response, nor do I think his first comment was meant to come across as condescending...

Fiery rhetoric... blind adherence to group positions... and the assumption that everyone must pick a side... they're killing civility in public discourse. It is most certainly NOT useful to keep emphasizing the differences among us by using the left-right or liberal-conservative labels. The COMMON ground, when it exists, needs to be recognized and celebrated.

I'd have thought it would be a bit less of a problem in Israel with a multi-party government. But maybe it's worse when more voices clamoring for attention. You've lived it both ways... Care to address those differences?

Posted by: Ocean Guy | Aug 9, 2005 3:35:44 PM

thank you so much for your invitation! i think im going to try to figure out a way to jerusalem this shabbas, but i will tell you when ive got a free moment. i appriciate it soo much!

Posted by: lisa | Aug 9, 2005 3:49:18 PM

Here in LA there's a different problem. People are every bit as dogmatic and every bit as visceral in disliking the opposite side, but "labeling" people is so politically incorrect that no one will label themselves into any category. People will reflexively take the left position on every single issue but will object at being labeled a liberal.

"Liberal? No. I don't like labels. I'm a free spirit and think deeply about every single issue independently. That gives me something to do while I braid my armpit hair. By the way, this week I'm collecting for The Alliance To Redistribute Most Of Your Money To Make The Planet More Groovy. Do you wanna donate? Also, I noticed the water bags handing around your house. They really balance the fung shui. I get very positive energy from them."

Posted by: Doctor Bean | Aug 9, 2005 4:49:14 PM

Zahava... Regarding your "frustrated ruminations "... I think if you chew more slowly you will find it less frustrating. [ducks as frying pan sails overhead] :-)

Mirty... More importantly, I want the hot heads and firebrands to take a deep breath and listen to one another. We have gotten to a point where people are considered traitors for their political affiliations rather than their expressed ideas.

Jack... That is a worthy goal, but you and I are not preaching to the right choir.

OceanGuy... I have written and deleted that very post more times than I can count. Each time it ends up sounding poorly researched (which it is) and critical of both systems (which it is) without providing any hint as to a solution to the impasse (which it does not). I am not a political scientist.

Lisa... Any time.

Doctor Bean... I can't tell if you are lumping me in with the armpit-hair-braiding crowd or not (I probably deserve it). Either way you made me laugh when I wasn't really in the mood to do so. Thanks.

Posted by: David | Aug 9, 2005 5:18:20 PM

David,

please excuse my broken English, I am visiting your very interesting blog the first time (I got a hint from Sandra) and am originally from Germany.

I think you made a good point with your article and I completely agree with Jack that the problem you mentioned is not limited to any particular country. People who adhere to a political party because they agree with some of its important issues often get the notion that they owe loyalty to the party in all political issues.

Posted by: Frank | Aug 9, 2005 6:07:26 PM

You only have to look at the US to confirm what you said to be so true. Not once but twice did this nation's insane vote for the child we call President Bush. The only smart thing this man has ever done is to insulate himself with very powerful people and then allow himself to become their puppet. In both camps, right and left, people bit down and refuse to recognize the great harm he was going to do and has done to the Country. But out of foolishness, narrow-mindedness, and determination to be loyal to the party or to a particular issue or agenda has given power to a man and his corporate cronies that is threatening the environment, the social welfare of people, the health and the public safety of US and the rest of the world.

Sorry for my soapbox...it’s the bleeding heart liberal inside me that makes me do it ; )

Posted by: jaime | Aug 9, 2005 6:40:54 PM

David... No need to offer a solution... I'd just like to hear your perspective.

Posted by: Oceanguy | Aug 9, 2005 6:42:48 PM

For some reason, people like to label themselves and put themselves into 'boxes'. Relate it to my world of Jewish dating. If you don't have a label or a box you fit into, no one knows what to do with you.

Posted by: Essie | Aug 9, 2005 7:03:44 PM

Jack... That is a worthy goal, but you and I are not preaching to the right choir.

That is hard to say. There are many people who stumble onto our blogs. Some may keep going and others may spend a few minutes reading our words.

Within the comfort and confines of their homes they may be influenced by what they read and it just may be the thing that gets them thinking.

It is entirely possible that this may not happen, but without the pressure of peer groups and the need to feed an ego in front of others there is a greater likelihood of success.

Posted by: Jack | Aug 9, 2005 7:17:04 PM

In a way, I think labels are also a way for us to escape self-criticism. It's all too tempting to congratulate ourselves for not being a liberal, conservative, fundamentalist, progressive, etc without circling back around to reflect on our own weaknesses and errors. The problem is not always because of the other guy, sometimes it's ours. But then, I generally believe there is not enough introspection and individual responsibility going on these days.

And I think that many times people have far much more in common than they have in difference. We seem to fight over the 5% difference rather than unite on the 95% in common. So busy fighting over the 5% that the 95% gets neglected.

Posted by: Steve Bogner | Aug 9, 2005 8:15:47 PM

I agree with your comments quite strongly. Stop the labels and communicate with some thought process and this world will be a better place for everyone.I see the Bush Bashers have made thier way to your site.
My personal opinion is that G-d decides what will happen not the President. We can argue all day about what would have happened this way or the other way..what if Kerry had won etc. We have to make an attempt to better things (make hishtadlus) but ultimately no matter who is President G-d will decide what war will happen when and if the President will have good or bad relations with Israel etc.

Posted by: Jewish Blogmiester | Aug 9, 2005 8:24:06 PM

Jewish Blogmeiester...Bush Basher, nah, just making the point that being loyal to your party, or agenda, despite what the consequences will be, isn't good for anyone.

It's nice to hold on to the idea that even with our influence, ultimately, it's all God's will. I am sure there are even one or two jokes about it. But unfortunately, we can't depend on that for immediate change to happen. Quick story...an older friend of mine, who was from Texas and Oklahoma converted to Judiasm and then made aliyah to Israel. She told me her family would often call, asking her when she was going to come home and return back to "God's Country, i.e. TX/OK". She said "DAD, I AM IN G-D's COUNTRY."

So, I take back what i said abuot G-d's will, maybe you are right and that's why Bush is in power.. He's from God's country.

Posted by: jaime | Aug 9, 2005 9:11:47 PM

David: I'm definitely NOT lumping you in with the armpit-hair braiding crowd (but I'm thinking about lumping jaime in). I think (and I've said it before) that you're a conservative but you're afraid of the label. In any case, I'm glad I amused you. That's really why I'm here.

Feel free to label me a crazy-right-wing-skinny-Romanian-Jew. I'm what jaime thinks is wrong with the country!

Posted by: Doctor Bean | Aug 9, 2005 10:26:38 PM

Frank... I wish my Hebrew were as good as your English... stop apologizing! I actually think it goes beyond loyalty. People who are loyal to sports teams often call each-other names and even get into fights. But what I've been seeing is something even deeper, as though a person from the other side of the political or religious spectrum doesn't deserve to live. Think I'm kidding. Look at how much ISRAELI news coverage there is when a terrorist kills a secular person inside the green line as opposed to when a religious person is killed by a terrorist outside the green line. It's not even close.

Jaime... I'm hoping your comment was intended as a satiric illustration of my points... because otherwise I'm not sure you understood what was/is bothering me. People who vote for a person that you feel is unqualified to be president of the United States are not insane... they just have different criteria than you. In fact they may have only one issue that they care about. Israel is a typical single issue that has swayed many a Jewish voter. To illustrate this, let's set aside what people are looking for in a president and take a peek at what they don't want in a president: For many voters a woman, no matter how qualified, is not going to be seriously considered so by default any man (no matter how unqualified) who runs against a woman will automatically capture that segment of the votes. In recent years there are so many people on both the right and the left who are 'one issue' voters - either for or against a particular issue - that this latest election came down to which candidate captured the heart of the majority of single issue voters. Nobody can argue with the fact that Bush ran his campaign around identifying these issues (morals, terrorism, family, right-to-life, values, etc.) while Kerry's platform was full of very complex issues that related to one another on multiple levels (and were therfore harder to identify). I won't argue here which candidate was/is better qualified for the job... but one was much better able to identify and play to issues of the electorate. When my wife and I bought our first house we each had one or two 'deal-breaker' issues that each we had in mind which would result in a veto of a house if it didn't meet these needs. I promise you that we spent much more time thinking and agonizing over that house purchase than we did over our votes in the presidential election. Does that make us insane? No.

OceanaGuy... OK, next time I write that post I'll try to resist the temptation to delete it. :-)

Essie... The 'boxes' you mentioned are real, and in some cases have value. I know that neither Zahava or I would consider dating someone who wasn't interested in living in Israel This was one of several 'boxes' into which potential mates needed to fit before we would go out with them. Of course there are bad boxes as well... and when taken to extremes these boxes can devalue life and trivialize deep concerns.

Jack... You may be right, but I don't write to convince or convert. I know from my own surfing habits that when I land on a blog whose ideas fly in the face of my own ideas, I click away faster than an LA conservative who has accidentally tuned into a Latino station on his car radio. The only exception to this behavior is if I have a personal connection to the writer (i.e. friend of a friend) or if I have been recently curious about the topic being discussed.

Steve... It's a shame we aren't related because I'd be proud to call you family. I love your 95%/5% illustration. I plan on plagiarizing it often. :-)

Jewish Blogmiester... Aren't you forgetting a little thing called 'Free Will'? I think that we and our elected official have a fairly free hand with our respective choices. G-d may already know the outcome... but that's not the same as influencing the outcome.

Jaime... The real enemies of Israel (and the US) use G-d's will as an excuse for all they do. But even the Cristian right in the US is more about working the system to support their beliefs than attacking the system because G-d gave them permission. No?

Doctor Bean... Now now, play nice! And no, I'm not afraid of the conservative label... I'm afraid of ALL labels! I think they limit us. When I was in university I used to go to a little bar on the west side called Dublin House. I went there because nobody I knew from school went there. The first time I went there I ordered a particular drink and the bartender remembered it. Every time I went there afterwards the bartender asked if I wanted 'the usual' (clearly proud of himself that he had remembered) and I invariably said yes. I said yes, not because I really wanted the same thing, but because I liked the idea of having 'a usual'... and I also didn't want to disappoint the bartender. Many people who identify themselves with labels get stuck with them even when those labels no longer perfectly suit them.

Posted by: David | Aug 9, 2005 11:07:59 PM

Jack... You may be right, but I don't write to convince or convert. I know from my own surfing habits that when I land on a blog whose ideas fly in the face of my own ideas, I click away faster than an LA conservative who has accidentally tuned into a Latino station on his car radio. The only exception to this behavior is if I have a personal connection to the writer (i.e. friend of a friend) or if I have been recently curious about the topic being discussed.

We all have our styles. I write first and foremost for me because I need the outlet, but I make no bones about being hopeful that the people who read my blog will come to agree with me about certain positions.

I don't want to break my arm patting myself on the back, but I there are very few issues that I really care about whether people agree with me about. It is just a matter of being secure.

Overall I am very pleased to be surrounded with people who think differently because it helps me to learn and grow.

Posted by: Jack | Aug 10, 2005 1:59:08 AM

And my guess is, Jonathan did not mean to sound dogmatic in his response, nor do I think his first comment was meant to come across as condescending...

For what it's worth, I didn't and it wasn't. The reason I said what I did in the first comment was to let David know (as a loyal and long-time reader) that I found his post inspiring notwithstanding the differences between our political views. And my point in the second comment was not to list my left-wing bona fides but to say that labels were sometimes meaningful.

At any rate, there seems to have been a mutual misunderstanding, and I apologize.

Posted by: Jonathan Edelstein | Aug 10, 2005 2:02:29 AM

DB: How did you know? Of course, what are braids without accessories? That's why I have a drawer full of color beads. Whenever I want to feel extra girlie, I just slip on some beads or clip on a pink bow or two.

Posted by: Jaime | Aug 10, 2005 2:20:50 AM

jaime: I'm glad you have a sense of humor. Cheers.

Posted by: Doctor Bean | Aug 10, 2005 5:29:43 AM

Jack... When I stop to think about all the people who come here who aren't Jewish... or who aren't religious...or who aren't 'hetero'... or whose only exposure to some of these issues might possibly be what we discuss here... then I guess you have a valid point. You were right and I was wrong (mark the date).

Jonathan... No apology necessary. My point was simply that right and left are part of a long continuum... not two stations on an express train, and neither of us has missed our stop.

Jaime... You are indeed a very good sport.

Posted by: David | Aug 10, 2005 11:42:35 AM

David, I was referring to trivialities like "what type of headcovering will she wear" and "what type of kippah does he wear".

Posted by: Essie | Aug 10, 2005 3:33:49 PM

My point was simply that right and left are part of a long continuum...

Absolutely - I guess all the arguing over the disengagement has been getting to me...

Posted by: Jonathan Edelstein | Aug 10, 2005 5:50:20 PM

Jack... When I stop to think about all the people who come here who aren't Jewish... or who aren't religious...or who aren't 'hetero'... or whose only exposure to some of these issues might possibly be what we discuss here... then I guess you have a valid point. You were right and I was wrong (mark the date).

Every dog has his day. The basis of this argument comes from years of posting on BBs. The lurkers that come through can surprise you with commments that you would never expect and as you mentioned there are many who do not have the same background/education on things and you just never know what can happen.

Besides there is a reason that we read you beyond raw meat, chopped liver, back problems and the like. And that ties into learning about you and your life.

Posted by: Jack | Aug 12, 2005 7:24:58 AM

Post a comment