Humility

Published in the New Hampshire Concord Monitor, May 21, 2017

Greatness Manifests Humility                                                                      May 15, 2017

A recent White House dinner included several journalists as invited guests. They reported that guests were served water while President Trump received a diet coke. Guests were served chicken as the main course. President Trump’s chicken came with a side of extra gravy. And for dessert the guests were served one scoop of ice cream while Trump received two scoops, whipped cream, and a cherry.

This White House meal with the President is in sharp contrast with a meal my colleagues and I experienced in a village of impoverished indigenous Mayans in Chiapas, Mexico. The hosts insisted that we sit in places of honor at their table. They then served us the only chicken available in the village while they were content to eat rice and beans.

These contrasting meal experiences illustrate a growing tension in our country between attitudes of arrogance and expressions of humility. It seems there is a growing affinity for people manifesting over-large egos. Led by our President and some national and state elected officials, we are becoming a nation that values bluster and consolidation of coercive power over discernment and collaboration. Associating with “winners” has become more important than attending to refugees, the impoverished, and the sick. There is a burgeoning disrespect toward differing cultures, religions, and lifestyles. Effective leaders are expected to be able to force their will on others – particularly at the beckoned call of wealthy Special Interests. Internationally, The United States is expected to assert absolute dominance over the nations of the world: the strongest military, the most prosperous economy, a superior culture, and the most successful political system.

It is essential that such popular bluster be mitigated by a sense of humility. In English, the word “humility” comes from the Latin root word, “ground.” To have humility is to be grounded in a way that does not need to prove self-worth or to claim superiority over others.

The primacy of humility is advocated in many of the major religions. Rabbi Lord Jonathan Sacks states, “In Judaism humility is an appreciation of oneself, one’s talents, skills, and virtues. It is not meekness or self-deprecating thought, but the effacing of oneself to something higher. Humility is not to think lowly of ones self, but to appreciate the self one has received. In recognition of the mysteries and complexities of life, one becomes humbled to the awesomeness one is and what one can achieve.”

In Christianity, Jesus says, “When you are invited… to a banquet… sit down at the lowest place…” From there, you may be honored with an invitation to move up higher. “For all,” he said, “who exalt themselves will be humbled and all who humble themselves will be exalted.” C. S. Lewis states that, in Christian moral teaching, the opposite of pride is humility. “Humility is not thinking less of yourself, but thinking of yourself less.”

In Islam it is said, The Prophet did not behave towards others as if he was better than they were, nor did he spurn manual work.  One of his companions reported that Prophet Muhammad worked happily with servants or workers.  Other companions related that the Prophet tidied his house, tied camels, fed animals, ate meals with his servants, and helped them in kneading dough and bringing provisions from the market.  It was also reported that he used to visit the sick, attend funerals, ride on a donkey, slow down his pace for the sake of the weak and accept invitations from the poor.

Lao-Tzu said, “humility … keeps me from putting myself before others. Be gentle and you can be bold; be frugal and you can be liberal; avoid putting yourself before others and you can become a leader among men (sic).”

People of privilege, including our President and elected leaders, have advantages over the general public that demand a serious dose of humility. Imagine these privileged people leading our nation toward a growing awareness that “Fullness of knowledge always and necessarily means some understanding of the depths of our ignorance, and that is always conducive to humility ” (Robert A. Millikan). Imagine people expecting a semblance of humility among members of Congress, in the office of President, and in our relationships with other nations. Imagine humility influencing our relationships with one another. Imagine what we could learn from one another, the respect that could be generated, and the problems that could be solved. Imagine electing people who are strong not by being proud and arrogant but by being humble and respectful. Imagine the impact on international leaders at a White House dinner where the host took only one scoop of ice cream so that the guests could each have two!

Humility is an amazing tool to complement the economic, military, and political strength of our country. A humble America could advance trustworthy creative relationships between our country and other nations in our troubled world.

Advantaged and influential people exercising humility could break down the economic, racial, ethnic, and gender identity barriers among us. Modeling humility could enhance the effectiveness of our democratic system. Bluster, arrogance and coercion have been tried. It’s time to give humility a chance.

No More War

Published in the New Hampshire Concord Monitor, May 28, 2017

MEMORIAL DAY 2017

Study War No More

Each spring, on a sunny day before Memorial Day, our family visits the graves of our parents to clean away the weeds and plant flowers. As we clean the headstone, we remind each other of the struggles and good times we had shared with our parents. The view from the family plot in this small country cemetery includes small American flags waving in the spring breeze next to grave markers of military veterans. Some had lived long lives while others had fallen in battle, much too young. There were veterans from many past wars. However, as I took in this scene, a cloud settled over the cemetery and the wind ceased to blow. The flags fell limp as if grieving with the discovery that for the past fifty years there has been perpetual war creating more veterans, more wounds, and more graves.

I was reminded again of our country’s never-ending war when I viewed a new memorial to veterans in the community where I live. There is a plaque embedded into concrete for each branch of the military. Written into the concrete are the words, “In honor of all veterans past, present, and future.” Has war become so much a part of our lives that we accept its inevitable extension into the future of our country?

The normalization of perpetual war has seeped into our society unnoticed. We have professionalized our armed forces. During World War II, military personnel were called “our boys in uniform.” Now we call them “warriors.” Joining the military is a job and a career choice. In March of this year there were United States Special Operation Forces deployed in 102 countries around the globe. Often our country leads with military action or the threat of action before initiating diplomacy. The military industrial complex drives our country’s economic health. To seek an end to war is to jeopardize the stock market and to be against good civilian jobs needed to keep the military supplied with weapons and all the materials that keep an army running.

The best way to honor our war veterans this Memorial Day is to reject the notion that it is normal to live in a time of perpetual war. In the Memorial Day ceremonies in every city, village, and town let us sing “I ain’t gonna study war no more.” Let us pledge to take military recruiters and organizations out of our high schools. Further, as a veteran, I do not need praise for being a “warrior.” Nor do I need medals and speeches for bravery or praises for my sacrifice. I need people to confess that there is no glory in war. There may be times when our country finds itself in a defensive war. But do not deny that war is a horror and a corrupter of young lives wrenched out of their home cities, villages and farmlands. Some are killed. Some are permanently disabled. PTSD is another result of sending people into a war environment that is alien to all they’ve been taught about relationships, citizenship and rule of law.

Therefore, this Memorial Day, I seek to honor veterans of past wars with my own confession. I served as an Army Medic at Walter Reed Army Medical Center from 1962 through the beginning of the Viet Nam war in 1965. Later, one of my brothers served as a cook in Viet Nam. I was never on a battlefield. But I confess we’ve both contributed to the carnage of war by our participation in support systems that make it possible to send men and women into harms way, some to their deaths. In retrospect, I’m sorry that I chose that path when other ways were available to me. I am unable to justify participating in the precursor of what has become perpetual war.

And so I grieve over the flag marked graves of our veterans. I seek reconciliation with those women and men who have been injured and killed during the last fifty years. I also seek to reconcile with veterans who gave up portions of their lives to military deployment. The first step is for us to commit to extracting our country from the bravado and profits of war.

We can begin by becoming a people who honor those who non-violently risk and sometimes sacrifice their lives as volunteers in risky areas and situations in our world: people who bear the name of our country as they serve through non governmental agencies such as Doctors Without Borders and journalists; serve in refugee aid projects and rehabilitation projects after floods, tornadoes, and earthquakes; and serve through organizations like UNICEF, United Nations Relief and Works Agency, and the Peace Corps. These are sometimes dangerous and radical alternatives to war and aggression. Thank them for their courage and commitment.

Finally, this Memorial Day let us say over the graves of the fallen, ‘in our grief we commit to a future where we teach the ways of peace with justice. You have not died in vain. You have created among us abhorrence for the ways of war and a passion for diplomacy and reconciliation with our neighbors.”  Then perhaps we shall notice the clouds pass away and the wind stir the flags marking the resting places of our war veterans.

Advocate for the Rights of Children Living Under Israeli Military Occupation

Concord Monitor “My Turn,” published April 8, 2017

The phone rang at 2 in the morning. Our friend Mafaq said, “Two Israeli military vehicles have come into the village. Soldiers have entered the house of our neighbor and taken away fifteen year old Khaled.” We dressed quickly and hurried through the dimly lit maze of narrow streets to Khaled’s home. A small gathering of men, women, and children stood across the street, distancing themselves from the armored military vehicles holding Khaled inside.

We were a World Council of Churches international team of four Ecumenical Accompaniers living for three months in a farming village forty kilometers northwest of Jerusalem.   As we approached Khaled’s home, the front door opened. The family clustered around as we entered: mother, father, two young children, and a grandfather who leaped from a mat on the floor against the far wall. We were invited to sit on the mat while the grandfather demonstrated what had happened. Speaking Arabic and greatly agitated, he raced back and forth across the sparsely furnished room showing how the soldiers had forced open the door armed with United States M16 rifles, asked for Khalid, herded the family into the far bedroom, rousted Khalid from sleep in the other bedroom, put him in handcuffs, and took him outside to the waiting vehicle while they searched his room leaving his possessions scattered.

By the time the grandfather had finished his pantomime, tea had been served and the military vehicles had driven away with Khalid. His parents, speaking English, explained the soldiers had refused to give a reason for taking Khalid and would not tell the parents where they were taking him. We sat with them as they vented their helplessness, fear, and controlled anger.

We learned later that while we had been listening to this family, a sound bomb had been thrown into a home in another part of the village and another teenage boy had been taken away. These incursions into this Palestinian village in the Israeli occupied Palestinian territory were repeated four times during our three-month stay. They continue in Palestinian villages and refugee camps to this day.

A United States State Department Human Rights Report released in March 2017 highlighted “grave violations against Palestinian children living under Israeli military occupation.” Among the issues cited were the ill treatment of child prisoners and denial of fair trial rights. Other violations included excessive use of force against children and unlawful killing, use of administrative detention (held without charges), and coercing Palestinian Arabic speaking children to sign confessions written in Hebrew. The report noted a “significant increase in detention of minors in 2016.”

Between 2012 and 2015, No Way to Treat A Child and the American Friends Service Committee reported that 97% of children had no parent present during interrogation or access to legal counsel. 84% of children were not informed of their rights. Three-quarters of detained children endured some form of physical violence. “Interrogators used position abuse, threats, and isolation to coerce confessions… 66 children were held in solitary confinement, for an average period of 13 days.”

Our experience with Khalid’s family and these human rights reports challenge the relationship between the United States and Israel. Vice President Penze said on March 31, “President Trump and I stand with Israel… because her cause is our cause, her values are our values, and her fight is our fight.” This statement is disconnected from the plight of Palestinian children. Our country’s cause is not to inflict military injustice upon children. The Israeli military’s abusive treatment of Palestinian children since 1967 does not reflect our values. The United State’s fight is not against Palestinian children.

Therefore, in order to “stand with Israel,” the United States must negotiate common values to support the relationship, guided by the State Departments 2017 report on human rights in Israel – Palestine concerning children. Meanwhile, consistent with U.S. values and considering 50 years of continuing violations by Israeli’s military, U.S. Senators’ and Representatives’ actions should include withholding military aid to Israel until acceptable uses are defined. The U.S. Foreign Assistance Act supports such action. It states that no assistance will be furnished to “any unit of the security forces of a foreign country if the Secretary of State has credible information that such unit has committed a gross violation of human rights.”

With its over $3 billion a year military aid to Israel, the United States is complicit in the military injustices inflicted on Palestinian children. Before any more aid is given, the Israeli military must cease human rights violations, insure basic due process rights, and establish an absolute prohibition against torture and the ill treatment of detained Palestinian children. Requiring these actions is not only consistent with our own values and sense of justice but also supportive to the many Jews and Israelis who are speaking out against the Israeli military’s unjust treatment of children in the occupied Palestinian territory.

The “phone” still rings since I’ve returned to my home in Concord. We still receive posts on Facebook from Palestinian friends, “last night the Israeli military came into our village at 3AM and took away two of the children.” As Jews, Muslims, and Christians, we need to support our leaders’ efforts to withhold military aid to Israel until the military no longer perpetrates fear and hopelessness against desperate Palestinians crying out for justice. Then, perhaps, the next communication from a Palestinian will be the joy of a great olive harvest or the success of the youth volleyball team. (names in article are fictitious)

Note:  The United Church of Christ General Synod; June 30 – July 4, 2017; will consider the resolution:  A Call for the United Church of Christ to Advocate for the Rights of Children Living Under Israeli Military Occupation.  See <ucc.org> General Synod resolutions for detail.

alternative healthcare debate

March 15, 2017

The debate about the Affordable Care Act, the attempt to repeal and/or replace it, is an invitation to examine the core values embedded in the various assumptions of the discourse. Three values that have become apparent are: the primacy of financial considerations, an individual’s freedom, and the right to health care for every human being.

Financial implications, for example, are emphasized in the March 13, 2017 email issue of “The White House” proclaiming, “Americans were promised that Obamacare would bring down healthcare costs Americans were promised that Obamacare would not raise taxes on the middle class.” Senator Rand Paul said on Face the Nation, “we’re not going to vote for it” (Ryan’s plan) because it creates a system of refundable tax credits. In addition, the recently released Congressional Budget Office analysis focused on costs of insurance premiums and federal deficit reduction.

Representative Paul Ryan, speaking on CBS’s Face the Nation, March 12, 2017, advocated for the primacy of the value of an individual’s freedom. He seeks to eliminate any mandate on individuals to buy insurance saying, “People are going to do what they want to do with their lives because we believe in individual freedom in this country.” He proposes a plan where people are free to buy insurance in the private market. Also, National Public Radio interviews with people who are critical of ACA reveal a positive attitude toward acquiring health insurance but a resistance to any “mandate” telling them they must have it.

The problem with being guided by the primacy of economic considerations traps us in a debate about the value of a healthy human being and which of us has earned the right to be healthy. Adhering to the mantra of ‘individual freedom” leads us into a society where every person must fend for him/her self. Both of these approaches are divisive and contrary to the vision of freedom and justice for all. They ignore the reality that we’re all in this together. The freedom and health of each individual affects the freedom and health of our communities and nation.

However, there is a value that can serve us well in the debate about health care in our country. Senator Annie Kuster, in a March 10, 2017 e-mail, suggested valuing the importance of health care for every human being. She wrote, “I am ready to get to work to… find ways to help improve healthcare for every citizen.”  Logically extending her focus on improving health care for every citizen invites us to begin a serious discussion by first seeking agreement to value good health for all human beings, no matter who they are, their economic situation, or where they live.

Some cynics will suggest that it is the nature of human beings to center on individual and family fortune. For example, in the current debate of ACA some healthy young people say, “I don’t need health insurance so why should I pay for the coverage of those who are unhealthy?” However, there is another side of human nature that may be worth cultivating. Consider the times and situations that bring out empathy and care for others. How often have we observed the ways people rally after a natural disaster or a tragedy in the life of an individual, a family, or a community. People are energized and heartened as stories are told about volunteers contributing their time, skills, and money to support victims. People celebrate these situations as evidence that human beings are really good people supportive of their neighbors. It seems, in times of crisis the glorification of rugged individualism is subverted. The people of our country have a history of standing with each other. In the early years it took a village to raise a barn. Not so long ago, neighbors would help one another get the hay in before a thunderstorm descended.

It is time to refocus the healthcare debate based on personal economics and individual freedom values to the basic value of communal support for every person in our society. Contributing to this discussion can be the many stories and examples of empathy and commitments to helping others in need. In the course of the conversation the evolving nature of the human condition may surface. Could it be that rugged individualistic self-interest is giving way to communal concern? The task for elected officials and the American people will be to embrace this new possibility.

With this groundwork, the means of developing a healthcare system of economics that shares wealth and benefits and a society that recognizes freedom to be supportive of one another will begin to fall into place. Returning to the barn-raising example, once we agree that a barn is needed to shelter a given number of animals and store a given amount of hay, the details of the shape and size of the barn will soon be resolved. In the same way, when we agree we are together responsible to provide adequate healthcare for all people, the economics to make it happen will take shape. It will be a triumph for our basic cooperative human nature working for a greater America.

 

 

 

 

Methods to Silence dissent

When Senator Elizabeth Warren questioned Senator Jeff Sessions qualification to be the nominee for Attorney General, the Senate voted to silence her from further participation in the debate. Her crime was declining a “Hobson’s Choice.” Hobson was an English keeper of a livery stable, 1544 – 1632. He required customers to take either the horse nearest the stable door or no horse at all. There would be no discussion about the qualifications of the proffered horse. Senator Warren, by choosing to question the proffered choice, was in effect suggesting Sessions might not be the best candidate and the motives of the person nominating him might not be fully transparent. The Senate declared these suggestions broke the rules and were unacceptable.

This incident is an example of one of the several methods used to silence dissent since the new administration took office. It is important for citizens to recognize and name these techniques to discredit anyone who opposes an idea or action of the President or the majority party in the House and Senate. The issues needing attention in our country are too important to be overshadowed by such duplicity.

In addition to Hobson’s Choice, we have recently been subjected to innuendo, double speak (simultaneous opposing positions), shifting the focus, making up information, fear/bullying, and divide and conquer. Innuendo serves to plant suggestions of possible impropriety without stating it as a fact. Slippery language is employed such as, “I’m just asking whether…” or “people are wondering about…” For example, President Trump said about the Iran nuclear agreement, “some people say it’s the worse than stupidity… There’s something going on… I’m not saying that, half the people in this room are saying it.” (The bold is my emphasis for demonstration). Commenting on the appellate court ruling against reinstating his refugee and immigration executive order Trump said, “I don’t ever want to call a court biased, so I won’t call it biased.” However, he has planted the suggestion that the court is biased.

An example of double speak is affirming two conflicting positions. For example, one day Trump criticized the CIA for its ineptness. A few days later he tells a gathered group of 200 CIA employees that they are great and their work is outstanding.   However, he not only takes two opposing positions, he then shifts the focus to the untrustworthiness of the press. He declares the press falsely reported that he criticized the CIA. At another time he sends a double message when he says, “America has always been the land of the free and home of the brave” while he signs an order blocking people from entering our country to seek freedom from persecution and war and rejecting brave people who have put their lives in danger by aiding the United States as military translators and with other duties.

Then there are times when information is created with no basis in reality. Trump insists that at his inauguration there were “a million and a half people” filling the mall all the way back to Washington Monument.  However, photographs show several blocks empty of people.   Trump proclaimed “a million and a half people” were there, contradicting photographs and the statistic of only 500,000 people passing through the transit system.   And when the Mexican president canceled a meeting with Trump, Trump followed up the announcement with the claim it was “a mutual decision.”  Another example is his claim of voter fraud in New Hampshire without any evidence to back up his statement.

Initiating a climate of fear and bullying has also become a familiar ploy.  Concerning reports of protests against his immigration executive order Trump tweeted, “Professional anarchists, thugs and paid protesters are proving the point of the millions of people who voted to MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!” (Feb.3, 2017).

He lashed out at the judge who put a temporarily hold on the order: “The opinion of this so-called judge, which essentially takes law-enforcement away from our country, is ridiculous and will be overturned!” And feeding fear he tweeted, “Just cannot believe a judge would put our country in such peril. If something happens blame him and court system. People pouring in. Bad!”   Packed into these tweets are name-calling, labeling, misinformation (paid protesters), threats ( blame the judge), and fear.

There is another practice that manipulates citizens: divide and conquer. This narrative includes declaring the press untruthful. It defames government officials, the elite, scientists, and intellectuals. “I’m going to drain the swamp,” quoth Trump. He cautions against untrustworthy immigrants, refugees, and Islamic terrorists, and contrasts them with persecuted Christians. Among all of these groups, the only true American people worthy of praise are those who thrived in the post second world war society and who agree with the Trump agenda and his judgment of all others. As American people we are being pitted against each other. Meanwhile, the very wealthy are able to continue advocating only for themselves: increasing their wealth, power, and influence over the government and the bulk of the American people.

These contrivances to “Make America Great Again” take us back to when women were second-class citizens. When there were segregated schools, bus stations, and lunch counters. When gays felt they had to hide their orientation or risk their jobs or sometimes their lives. When Christianity was the only acceptable American expression of faith in God. When Arabs were depicted as aggressive, evil, and backward. When Jews were not able to buy a home in some of our New Hampshire communities.

It is imperative to expose and reject all of these duplicitous efforts to deceive and divide Americans. The alternative is to focus on issues instead of people. When workers loose their jobs we all loose. When the wealthy get richer, the rest of us struggle. When injustice exists none of us are free. We will be a greater America when our unity as human beings guides our dependence upon one another and responsibility to one another, no matter who we are or from where we come. Focusing together on the issues of wages, health care, pensions, infrastructure, international relationships, and the environment can nurture the skills and wisdom inherent in humanity.   Now that, Hobson, is a real choice.

FUTURE OF HUMANITY

When we read and see on television and the internet the horrible ways that human beings treat each other it makes me despair of the nature and future of humankind. What is the dynamic that makes possible the kidnapping and recruitment of 10-year-old boys to be taught to torture, kill and commit suicide? What in human nature justifies the incarceration and shooting of Palestinian children by the Israeli military. How can people in the United States tolerate 33,000 people being killed in gun violence each year.

What is the thinking of the Texas legislature with its vote to permit concealed carry of guns on the state university and college campuses or the New Hampshire legislature allowing guns to be carried into the legislature chamber? And what drives a Christian church in Texas to hire armed guards to be present at its services of worship? The television report showed men with body armor and automatic rifles standing against the walls on each side of the church sanctuary.

During this election cycle, what is the human condition that drives grown adults to insult, defame, discredit, and hate others under the guise of being strong, truthful, and a winner? In contemporary society, how is it that beliefs and actions of civility and tolerance are twisted into perceptions of weakness, gullibility, and looser mentality?

The Southern Poverty Law Center conducted a survey from March 23 – April 2, 2016 concerning the effect of the 2016 Presidential campaign on school children and classrooms. The results of the survey included, “Gains made by years of anti-bullying work in schools have been rolled back in a few short months.” Students have been emboldened to use slurs and engage in name-calling. Some have become fearful of the people in power in our country. Other children justify their language and blustery behavior as they “point to candidates and claim they are just saying what everyone is thinking.” In New Hampshire, “one high school teacher… wrote, ‘A lot of students think we should kill any and all people we do not agree with.’”

These observations invite us explore the nature of humanity, where we have been and where we are going as the human species on this earth. There are two possibilities. One, humanity may be too broken to override violence and hatred that cling to our society and world. Commitment to striving in the same historic ways of domination through coercive power and using the ways of more lethal weapons, xenophobia, gender bias, and racial constructs may be advancing the extinction of humanity.

However, there is a second possibility. Humanity may be on the verge of becoming a new kind of influence in our world. It may be that we are experiencing the last gasps of people resisting the progress and change of humanity. It may be that we are moving toward a future where the relationships among people and between people and the natural environment is exchanging violence for empathy, caring, cooperation, and the complexities of diverse cultures. It could be that we are experiencing the birth pangs of a future where the intellect and the heart join together to resolve the challenges and stresses of humanity and its relationship with creation.

You see, just as I begin to think that evil and depravity are overwhelming us, I remembered where we have been. I think about attitude changes, just in my lifetime, concerning issues of anti Semitism, racism, sexism, the rights of the GLBTQ community, care for the environment, and many others. I read accounts of people sacrificing their own wealth and wellbeing to serve the needs of others. I read about people running into burning buildings to rescue victims. I read about a person running across a university plaza under sniper fire to retrieve a fallen student.

On August 6, I witnessed a group of people demonstrating on the Concord statehouse plaza against the proliferation of nuclear weapons. A family from out of town, who happen to be walking by, joined them. Together they walked to the edge of the Merrimack River to confess and to grieve over the people killed and maimed by the U.S. bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. They threw flowers into the river in their memory. At the riverside, they meet a family picnicking and fishing. The woman wore a hijab. This family also threw flowers into the river.

Then I listen to the account of an educator in Tucson, Arizona who hosts a classroom of 3-5 year olds. Together, they build a caring community of children who support each other while they learn through questioning, exploring, and experimenting. They try out ways among themselves to solve conflicts, celebrate successes, and be with someone who is sad. They practice ways of hospitality as they welcome new children, parents and friends into their classroom and include them in their community. When these children move on to the first grade, their new teachers recognize the children from this pre-school classroom by the way they are energized to learn and by their skill in mediating and negotiating difficult behaviors among their peers.

Many religious faith traditions envision the progress of humanity from bearers of weapons to people armed with powers of persuasion, reason, empathy, community, love and care. The prophet, Micah, envisioned, “They (human beings) will hammer their swords into plows and their spears into pruning knives.”   When Peter drew his sword against Roman occupiers seeking to arrest Jesus, Jesus said, “Put away your sword.” Muhammad urged charity toward people in need.

Governments may refuse to relate to populations with compassion and nurture. Some people may resist movement toward equality and freedom for all people in favor of the ways of domination. But some, during this season’s election cycle, will let the vision of a common humanity guide our words and our votes for candidates.   Some will give support to teachers as they provide relationship skills for children. Some will encourage gun-free suburban – urban neighborhoods and churches. Some will reject our government’s plan to fund a renewed nuclear weapons arsenal. We have the memory, the will and the imagination to define humanity’s future.

September 8, 2016

 

Published in “My Turn”, Concord Monitor, September 15, 2016

U.S. Must Push Israel on Justice for Palestinians.

August 3, 2016

On July 27, during the Democratic National Convention and a week after the Republican National Convention, it was reported that 20 single and multi-family Palestinian homes were demolished in East Jerusalem by Israeli authorities. One Palestinian, Noor, reported that he found a demolition notice tacked to his door less than twenty-four hours before the destruction of his home. He had no opportunity to dispute the order, show his papers of ownership, or remove the family possessions. His home was one of the twenty single and multi-family homes destroyed that night. There have been 76 demolitions thus far this year in the Jerusalem municipality. In 2015 there were 74 and in 2014, there were 52 demolitions.

Also on July 27 it was reported that a 52 year old woman, Miriam, living in the Gaza strip was refused a visa for the third time to enter Israel for medical treatment in the hospital where she had previously been treated for cancer with chemotherapy, surgery, and radiation. She now experiences bone pain and seeks follow-up examinations in the same hospital using equipment that is not available in Gaza. This equipment is forbidden by the Israeli government to be imported into the Gaza Strip. (Noor and Miriam are not their real names).

These incidents of injustice are important to lift up because such injustices are not recognized in either the Republican or the Democratic platforms concerning the relationship of the United States to Israel. Both platforms commit to an unexamined uncritical relationship of United States with Israeli political, economic and military policies.

Israel/Palestine may not be a primary concern for the electorate choosing a new president and congressional delegation. However, in the sections on Israeli relationships with the United States, both Convention platforms are blind to the conditions of injustice toward Palestinians such as the two incidents above. This should trouble the conscience of any citizen who values equal rights and justice for all people living in a democracy.

The Republican platform reads, (Israel is) “The only country in the Middle East where freedom of speech and freedom of religion are found. Therefore, support of Israel is an expression of Americanism, and it is the responsibility of our government to advance policies that reflect Americans’ strong desire for a relationship with no daylight between America and Israel.”

Furthermore, the platform seeks to discredit and limit the freedom to non-violently act contrary to the Party’s advocacy of an uncritical relationship with Israel. It reads, “We reject the false notion that Israel is an occupier and specifically recognize that the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions Movement (BDS) is anti-Semitic in nature and seeks to destroy Israel. Therefore, we call for effective legislation to thwart actions that are intended to limit commercial relations with Israel, or persons or entities doing business in Israel or in Israeli-controlled territories, in a discriminatory manner.”

The Democratic Platform is briefer, focusing primarily on actions perceived to “delegitimize Israel.” It reads, “A strong and secure Israel is vital to the United States because we share overarching strategic interests and the common values of democracy, equality, tolerance, and pluralism. That is why we will always support Israel’s right to defend itself, including by retaining its qualitative military edge, and oppose any effort to delegitimize Israel, including at the United Nations or through the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions Movement.”

How do common values between the U.S. and Israel and the commitment to democracy work in Israel where the Palestinians lack freedom of movement to medical facilities, schools and the workplace or where Palestinians have limited access to Palestinian water, experience home demolitions, and taking of farmland? And what does it mean for the United States with it population diversity of race, religions, cultures and ethnic origins to bind itself to a state with such injustices? Do we in the United States want to support Israel’s oppression of ethnic and religious groups of Arabs, Christians, and Muslims? Do we want to support the perception that all Arabs, Christians and Muslims are dishonest and terrorists? Do we want to support, uncritically, a country that seeks to create conditions that will force these people to leave their homeland? Is not this support inconsistent with our American efforts to learn and grow from the mistakes we’ve made in our relationships with Native Americans, African Americans, and others?

Another issue of concern in the platforms is the opposition to United Nations approach to humanitarian law, resolutions concerning the Palestinian occupation and its administration, and recognition of a Palestinian state. Blanket opposition without deliberation, understanding, and seeking a variety of solutions may delegitimize the effectiveness of this international organization.

Perhaps, for United States citizens, the most distressing concept in the platforms is the opposition to non-violent boycott and divestment actions. The Republican platform also advocates the adoption of legislation to thwart BDS activity. Attempts to restrict boycott and divestment activity is a violation of first amendment rights to use economic measures to bring change. Boycott and divestment are tools to motivate serious negotiations to end the economic, political, and military injustices against the Palestinian people. They are appropriate non-violent actions following nearly fifty years of failed negotiations between unequal powers. They are in the tradition of boycotts that have been used to influence change in South Africa, segregation in the United States, and farm workers rights. Finally, labeling boycott and divestment as anti-Semitic or delegitimizing of Israel is spurious and dangerous to people seeking non-violent change for justice. It is also inaccurate to suggest that critique of the conduct of the Israeli government is in any way a comment on the Jewish faith.

When talking to candidates for Senate, Congress, and the Presidency this election season it is important to question their understanding of our relationship with Israel expressed in these two platforms. What is their understanding of the party platform on Israel in relationship to the injustices being perpetrated on the Palestinians in the Palestinian occupied territory of the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip?

This is the time to seek their support for justice and peace in Palestine/Israel. It is time to encourage candidates to pledge the use of economic, political, and military leverage to move the Israeli government toward actions of justice for all the people. It is time to use the billions of dollars in United States military aid to Israel as leverage for a more just administration of the occupied Palestinian territory and to advance credible negotiations toward a just peace for Israel and Palestine. Palestinians, such as Miriam and Noor, are counting on us to help them get their freedom back.