http://sultanknish.blogspot.co.il/2012/07/when-governments-elect-another-people.html

Elections are won by demographics. No soup company blindly dumps cans of its newest “Turkey Coconut Bouillon with Nutmeg and Omega 3″ in Aisle 6 of the supermarket without testing to see what demographics such a hideous concoction might appeal to. Will the product appeal to lesbian single mothers, divorced Asian firefighters or eccentric Latvian millionaires? Politics is no different.

A political party has its base, definable groups who groove to its message, who eat up the red meat that its candidates toss their way. It has the demographic groups which will always vote for it and those who might swing its way. It knows them by race, gender, age, class, sexuality, home ownership and a thousand other statistical slices of the pie. It has those numbers broken down by states, cities and neighborhoods so that it has a good estimate of its chances in a given place and time based on the demographics of the people who live there.

This kind of information is helpful for winning elections– but showing up to play the electoral hand you’re dealt is for suckers. And by suckers, I mean conservative parties.

Breaking down the demographics is like looking at the cards in your hand. Once you’ve done that, the only remaining variable in a static game are your opponent’s cards. With election demographics, players can see all the cards everyone has. That makes the game static. Hands will inevitably be won or lost… unless you can draw some new cards.

The most obvious way to play the demographic game of thrones is with gerrymandered districts. A gerrymandered district is shaped to include a majority of the winning demographic leading to a nearly automatic victory for the party. It’s the political equivalent of stacking the deck.

Gerrymandered districts are of dubious legality, except when shaped to create a majority minority district, in which case it becomes an obligation under civil rights laws. This stacks the deck, creating permanent sinecures for some horribly incompetent politicians and permanent seats for the Democratic Party.

But that is just a matter of rearranging the cards in the deck. What if you could bring in cards from outside the deck? What if you could change the value of some cards? Then you would be on the way to being the best card sharp in Washington D.C. or London or Paris.

Sure you could win elections by creating a few gerrymandered districts, but you couldn’t win a country that way. To do that, you have to change the national demographics.

Suppose you were running our fictional soup company and you discovered that “Turkey Coconut Bouillon with Nutmeg and Omega 3″ isn’t popular with key demographics. The only people who like it are unemployed Pakistani immigrants, lesbian single mothers and divorced Asian firefighters.

Sure you could take a shot at putting out another flavor, but damn it, you like this one. And you also spent your entire advertising budget for the next three years promoting it, and thanks to your ad campaign, everyone now associates your company with “Turkey Coconut Bouillon with Nutmeg and Omega 3″. And if people don’t like it, then your company is doomed.

You could try to change people’s minds, or you could try to change the demographics to ones that favor your soup. To do that, you would have to bring in a lot of Pakistani immigrants, create a poor economic climate, promote divorce and homosexuality, and create some public sector jobs.

Luckily, no soup company can do that sort of thing. But governments can.

That’s the neat thing about governments, if they want to change national demographics, bring in more immigrants, create more single-parent families and more unemployment; they can do all those things easily.

Suppose, for example, that instead of running a soup company, you are a UK Labour politician. They say you’re bright, and while that may be debatable and some time later the very people who said it will spit in disgust at the idea, but you are young and you can see the writing on the wall. After Thatcher, there’s no future for the kind of cheap labor radical who threatens to take the workers into the streets at every opportunity. The working-class vote that your party identified with is on the way out. And even if it wasn’t, it won’t survive the leftward drift of your party.

Following is an excerpt from the letter that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu sent to Shaul Mofaz on Tuesday:

“I regret your decision to give up on an opportunity to make an historic change. After 64 years, we were very close to a substantial change in the division of the burden. I gave you a proposal that would have led to the conscription of ultra-orthodox and Arabs from the age of 18. I explained to you that the only way to implement this on the ground is gradually and without tearing Israeli society apart, especially at a time when the State of Israel is facing many significant challenges. I will continue to work toward the responsible solution that Israeli society expects.”

President Obama said in an interview that he has failed to advance the Middle East peace process “the way I wanted.”

“I have not been able to move the peace process forward in the Middle East the way I wanted,” he told WJLA-TV, the ABC affiliate in Washington on Sunday, in response to a question on whether there was “anything you believe you failed at, not because Congress wouldn’t play ball, but that rests squarely on your shoulders and has you desperate to get that second term to atone for it?”

“There were a bunch of things that didn’t get done that I think are important…” the president answered. “The things I can do without Congress tend to be in the foreign policy area. In that area I have not been able to move the peace process forward in the Middle East the way I wanted. It’s something we focused on very early, but the truth of the matter is that the parties, ultimately, they’ve got to want it as well. So we’ve got a lot of work to do…”

Republican candidate Mitt Romney’s position on the Israel-Palestinian peace “process” is not fundamentally different from Obama’s. Last October his campaign stated: “With regard to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Mitt Romney will reject any measure that would frustrate direct negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians. He will make clear to the Palestinians that the unilateral attempt to decide issues that are designated for final negotiations is unacceptable.”

But, much like Obama, Romney is committed to the idea of the 2-state solution.

JTA content was used in this report.

Once again I am disappointed at the Charedi reaction to a possible draft in Israel. This time it is attorney Eytan Kobre, who reacted in his weekly Mishpacha Magazine column Text Messages. And that’s all it is. A reflexive knee-jerk reaction. It is not any kind of rational argument to make his case that Charedim in Israel should not be drafted.

Unless you consider “Because the Gedolim say so” to be a rational argument. This of course assumes that there is universal opposition by rabbinic leaders to a draft. That would be false – since Religious Zionist leaders are in favor of it. Nonetheless his rabbinic leadership assumes that a universal draft will change the Charedi paradigm of learning full time. Which they consider a Yehoreg V’Al Yaavor.

First, I do not concede that this is a foregone conclusion.  Secondly, I don’t think that is a bad thing if it is done the right way – a position I’ve explained many times in the past but beyond the scope of this post.

My problem with Mr. Kobre is his assumption that anyone who is in favor of a universal draft is out to ‘get him.’  By ‘him’, I mean Charedim.  What motivates those of us who favor equalizing the draft, he says, is our distinct mission to destroy Torah Judaism. That is how he frames the issue.

There is not a single word addressing the question about the lack of equal sacrifice by all. No explanation about why all Charedim should be exempt. For Mr. Kobre it is all about ‘Good versus evil.’ The good guys being the Charedim - and the bad guys are anyone who would dare to suggest that Charedim should not be given an automatic exemption.

What makes matters worse is he impugns religious Jews as the worst among his detractors. He prefers that the opposition were coming from a secular or even anti-religious sources. That would of course make it easier for him to claim that this is all about anti-religious secular government.

His rhetoric is quite angry. He  accuses his detractors of false piety and lying about their motives. As though the true motive was to destroy the Torah!

What prompted Eytan’s rant was an interview in the previous issue of Mishpacha of Aviad Friedman, a Charedi member of the Plesner committee – charged with coming up with a proposal for a universal draft. Which they did.

Mr. Friedman who seems to have impeccable Charedi credentials supported drafting as many Charedim into the IDF as possible.  For this he was vilified and called a liar – applying to him the tired cliche of ‘showing his true colors.’  As if it is impossible to be Charedi and support the draft.

What was his lie? He said that he didn’t think that there is any real hatred of Charedim in Israel.  Really? That’s a lie? Yes – there may be some hatred by a few on the radical left, but for the most part, there is no mass secular hatred. Only a sense that an element of fairness is missing in the way the secular Jew is treated versus the way the Charedi Jew is treated – especially  when it comes to army service.

I take strong issue with Mr. Kobre’s description of religious Jews as the enemy just because they support a universal draft. That is a canard!

Just to be clear I will restate my own position on this issue. Israel should apply its conscription law equally to all demographic segments. Exemptions and deferrals should be applied equally to everyone.  If a solider needs to be put in harms way – every able-bodied citizen – no matter what segment they belong to should be subject to the that possibility. No entire segment should get and an automatic exemption from danger.

If the draft is going to be equally applied, religious sensitivities must be guaranteed to all. This means that the infrastructure must be created and enforced so that Charedim will be able to practice Judaism as they  best understand it.  The bottom line for me is that no Charedi mother should ever be faced by a Chiloni or Religious Zionist mother asking the question, “Why did my son have to die in battle while your son was safe in a Yeshiva?”

Just a few days ago, I bumped into a former student in the supermarket. When she saw me, she stepped away from her shopping cart full of fruits and vegetables and warmly hugged me. “Mrs. Schonfeld, I wanted to tell you something that you said to me a few years ago that has stayed with me until today.” We had worked together on social skills to help her feel more comfortable when meeting new people. I tried to jog my memory and remember something specific I had said to bolster her confidence, but nothing particularly stood out. Instead, I smiled and said, “Yes, Sarah, what was it that I said?”

Her eyes filled with tears and she revealed, “You mentioned that when I smile, I often smile with my eyes too and that my whole face lights up. You told me that my sincerity comes through when I genuinely smile. As I was going on shidduchim, I would always remember what you said about my smile and would hope that others felt the same way. And then, when I went on a shidduch with someone who seemed really special, I had a stronger belief in myself. Most importantly, I didn’t hesitate to smile. And, now we are married and already have our first child.”

I congratulated Sarah, chatted with her for a few minutes, and then continued with my shopping. As I was picking out my string beans, I began to think a troubling thought. One comment that I had made to Sarah several years ago had influenced her in wonderful ways. Yet, I did not even remember making the comment. Of course, in this instance, the comment I made was positive and helpful. However, what about comments that might have indirectly hurt one of my students? Years later, an accidentally ill placed comment could still have a negative effect. Simple words can have such a huge outcome on those around us. That’s why we have to be so careful about both what we say and the way we say it.

Sticks and Stones Can Break My Bones,
But Words Will Last Forever

Many of us remember our parents telling us that if people called us names or hurt our feelings, we should simply tell ourselves, “Sticks and stones can break my bones, but words will never harm me.” Unfortunately, that logic does not hold true. In fact, verbal abuse can be as harmful, if not more, than physical abuse.

The New York Times reported several extreme instances of verbal abuse or bullying. In March, 2007, 17-year-old Eric Mohat shot himself after a long-term tormentor told him in class, “Why don’t you go home and shoot yourself; no one will miss you.” More recently, Carl Jospeh Walker-Hoover, an eleven-year-old boy from Springfield, Massachusetts hung himself after being incessantly hounded by classmates about his appearance.

The instances above are radical cases of verbal abuse and bullying; however, they illustrate the power of words and their effect on children’s psyches. Often, we underestimate the consequences of our comments, but even seemingly innocuous comments can have disastrous results. A poem by Chani Zirkind beautifully demonstrates how five simple words can change a person’s life:

WORDS

I burst out laughing when I heard her say,
The funniest joke I heard all day.
She didn’t say one, she didn’t say two,
I marveled at what her humor can do.
I was sitting here just moments ago,
A little bit bored and a little bit low,
And in she walked with her comments and all,
And my gloominess left with no trace at all!
I wondered what part she had in the play,
I heard took place in the school yesterday.
I sat and imagined the friends she attracts,
Her lucky campers with whom she interacts.
Baruch Hashem for a talent like hers!
Creating happiness just out of words…
Words
I’m not so sure
Words
There’s more to her.
What I thought
isn’t true
Because of what
words
can do.
I’ve seen her true self with family at home,
But once she steps out her humor’s unknown.
Yes, she’s tried to tell others her jokes,
But what occurred put down her hopes.
Someone said five words, no more,
That closed her in, closed up her door.
Her self-confidence to never give up,
Was lost in a comment,
“I thought you grew up.”

Adult Impact on Children

Miriam Adahan’s book Sticks and Stones: When Words are Used as Weapons transplants the discussion of verbal bullying into the realm of Jewish thought. Rashi explains that Lo sonu (Vayikra 25:17) refers to hurting others with words – ona’as devarim. There are multiple examples of ona’as devarim:

Who is Mashiach? What is Mashiach? What’s he all about? Strange as it may seem, we learn about Mashiach from the wicked Bilaam, in the Torah portion of Balak. While the verses are obscure, the Rambam explains them in The Laws of Kings and Their Wars. Since many Diasporians picture the Mashiach to be some type of fairytale hero who will whisk them back to Israel on some kind of magical carpet when he flies down to earth dressed like Superman, with super powers and X-ray vision, we will try to present a more realistic, down-to-earth picture.

The name Mashiach (often translated as the Messiah) is derived from a Hebrew word meaning the “anointed one” – Hashem’s anointed king. The belief in the Mashiach’s coming is one of the Thirteen Fundamental Principles of our faith (13 Principles of the Rambam, Principle 12). Since in our very time, the Almighty has been gathering our scattered exiles to Israel from all over the globe, Rabbi Tzvi Yehuda Kook made a point to explain the concept of Mashiach to his students at the Mercaz Harav Yeshiva in Jerusalem, emphasizing that the Mashiach wasn’t only the ideal Jewish king, but also a gradually developmental process which evolves over time.

The Rambam writes:

“Anyone who does not believe in the Mashiach, or who does not anticipate his coming, not only denies all of the prophets, he denies the validity of the Torah and Moshe Rabenu, our teacher, since the Torah gives witness to him, as it says, ‘When all these things will come upon you (all the tribulations of exile), then the Lord your God will turn your captivity and have compassion on you, and return and gather you from the nations’” (Rambam, Laws of Kings and Their Wars, 11:1).

Believing in the Torah means believing in the Mashiach and yearning for his arrival. As part of the 13 Principles of Faith, we say, “I believe with complete faith in the coming of the Mashiach, and even though he may delay, nevertheless, I look forward to his coming every day.”

This means that when a Jew in the Diaspora is eating a bagel and lox and reading The New York Times, or The Jewish Press, or when he’s going to watch the new Woody Allen movie on Motzei Shabbat, he should be yearning for the Mashiach to come. In the Gemara, Shabbat, it is written, “At the hour when a man faces heavenly judgment, they say to him, did you yearn for the salvation of Israel?” (Shabbat 31A). Yearning for the coming of Mashiach, and the salvation he will bring, is complete Emunah/faith. Thus, the Ramban writes, someone who does not believe in him, or anticipate his coming, denies the prophets of Israel and Moshe, our teacher, since the Torah gives witness to him.

How does the Torah give witness to him? The Rambam answers with the verse, “When all these things will come upon you (all the tribulations of exile), then the Lord your God will turn your captivity and have compassion on you, and return and gather you from the nations” (Devarim, 30:1-3).

Please notice, my friends, that the ingathering of the exiles is proof of the Mashiach. As the Rambam makes clear, the incredible ingathering of our outcasts to the Land of Israel, an occurrence we have witness in our time, this is a revelation of Mashiach, an actual stage in the days of Mashiach, through the concrete aliyah of Jews from all over the globe, and not through miracles.

During the long generation we spent in galut, Mashiach became a misunderstood concept. Partly due to the pernicious infiltration of Xtian doctrines into our collective subconscious, Mashiach was envisioned by many people as a religious superhero who would arrive on the scene in a flash of miracles and wonders, and lead all the Jews out of the ghetto and back to the Promised Land. Helpless and impotent in galut, and constantly at the mercies of the goyim and their governments, we had no way of actualizing our dreams of returning to Zion, and thus this Superman fantasy of Mashiach seemed to be the only way we could be redeemed from the harsh realities of our lives. When centuries passed in waiting and disappointment, a philosophy of passivity arose. We were to pray and wait, and the Mashiach would do all the work when he came. The demand arose that the Redemption occur all at once, and be complete from the start, and not in a gradual, natural, process of historical development and events which came to completion with the passage of time (See our book, Torat Eretz Yisrael, Chapters 11 and 12, from which this essay is condensed.)

Life’s petty annoyances…

Dear Rachel,

What can I do about a sister-in-law who dresses like a slob? When she comes to visit us for Shabbos, it is embarrassing for me to be seen with her or to have other company over. I’ve even offered to take her shopping, but she finds excuses not to take me up on it and doesn’t really seem to care. Truth is she lives in Brooklyn and we are in Long Island, and so we don’t get to see one another much on weekdays.

I should say that her husband (my brother) isn’t too bothered by his dowdy-dressing wife so soliciting his help wouldn’t do a thing. My husband says live and let live and doesn’t understand my obsession with this or why it gets to me at all.

Do you see any way for me to knock some style sense into her?

Chic she’s not

Dear Chic,

You’re trying too hard. Designer labels are not for everyone and the fashion police won’t issue her a summons for failing to be fashion conscious. The reality is that some people simply can’t be bothered fussing with a wardrobe and are perfectly content and comfortable wearing loose-fitting and casual clothes that may strike another as colorless and boring. As the saying goes, to each his own.

Instead of focusing on your sister-in-law’s exterior, try concentrating on her inner qualities and talents. For her birthday you can make the effort of presenting her with a nice sweater or top that was “on sale” and that you thought would go well with the color of her eyes or that skirt she seems to favor. Other than that, give it a rest; surely your energy can be put to better use.

Dear Rachel,

There is a couple in my neighborhood whose marriage is on the rocks and from what I’ve been led to believe, her relentless nudging may be a contributing factor. They’ve only been married a few months but it seems that the wife is constantly berating her husband for not going to shul on time on Shabbos mornings.

How would I know? Her husband confided in mine, and I would just like to put the message out there for wives to stop berating their husbands and treating them like babies.

The worst thing a wife can do is to make her man feel inadequate or worthless. Chances are he’s been getting up early all his life and was nudged by his mother in his single years about getting to shul on time. Now is his chance to be independent, to do his own thing, and his wife should let him.

In time, especially with kids in the picture, he is bound to come around and get up on time on his own. Right now, the wife should mind her own responsibilities and keep mum about his. He is a grown boy and knows what he has to do.

Marriage is not about nagging

Dear Nagging,

Right you are. The last thing a husband wants is a mother figure in a wife. If nothing else, voicing her displeasure is not likely to motivate him to get to shul on time.

She can try getting up early herself to fix him his favorite morning beverage and then prepare to join him enthusiastically on his walk to shul. He may even start looking forward to making it on time. What is certain is that you can catch more bees with honey than with vinegar.

Dear Rachel,

How do I stop a yenta from minding everyone else’s business? I work in a large office with many other girls and this one woman is always questioning me about my personal life. At first I thought this was just her way of being friendly, but before I knew what was happening I was bombarded by twenty questions, from my age and where I live, to how many kids I have, when I got married, where my husband’s from and what my sandwich consists of (no kidding; we were in the lunch room).

Am I being too sensitive? I am sort of a private person and old school; details of my personal life are no one’s affair unless I volunteer to share them. How do I handle this type of situation and what should be my comeback to Ms. Busybody when she next intrudes on my lunch break?

The nerve!

Dear Nerve,

Dear Dr. Yael:

I am very happy and successful in my line of work. However, I am having trouble with a coworker and hope you can help me.

A few months ago, a new woman began working at my office. We share a workspace and often have to work together on projects. This woman seemed nice, but there have been several awkward situations between us that are really bothering me. First, she often acts like I am cutting her off during a conversation. Whenever I talk she makes a loud comment or sigh, indicating that I have done something wrong. Thus, I am always feeling like I hurt her or upset her in some way. I try to be very sensitive, but inevitably there is that sigh telling me I must have done something “wrong.”

She also tells other coworkers that I can’t make early morning meetings because I have a hard time getting to the office early. This is true, as I am married with several young children. But it’s the manner in which she says it – as if to make me look unprofessional. She could just say that since we are not required to be at work until 9 a.m., it does not make sense to schedule an 8:30 meeting – just in case anyone has outside obligations. Why must I look like the one who “cannot get here early” when we aren’t expected to be in then anyway?

I know it may seem as if these are not major issues, but I am having a hard time working with this woman and do not know how to improve the situation. She tries to be nice and there are times that we work very well together. But then there are other times.

Another coworker recently asked me why I am always apologizing to this woman. I replied that I might have said something to hurt her and feel badly because I don’t want to hurt anyone’s feelings. This coworker urged me to stop worrying about it, because it was clear this woman was not treating me well. I know that my co-worker is right, but I am the type of person who wants to get along with everyone. Additionally, I have a hard time hurting anyone, even inadvertently.

In short, here’s my dilemma: I don’t want to be consistently taken advantage of, nor do I want to hurt anyone’s feelings. How do I walk this fine line?

An Exasperated Coworker

Dear Exasperated Coworker:

It appears that your new coworker may be somewhat jealous of you. Perhaps she is envious of your success at work or the fact that you have a family. With her behavior seemingly inappropriate, something else may be going on that is causing her to act this way. Is she going through a difficult time personally? Is she an insecure person? Perhaps the answer to both questions is yes, as insecure people generally need to put down others in order to feel good about themselves. Maybe your new coworker tells others that you cannot make early morning meetings as a subtle putdown.

Writing about your quandary demonstrates that you are obviously a caring person who wants to do the right thing. If you feel that your new coworker would be receptive to discussing this issue with you, initiate a meeting with her. You can say something like, “Am I doing something to hurt you? I feel like you are often upset with me and this confuses me because I always try to do nice things for you and treat you with respect.” Ideally, your coworker will realize what she is doing and will begin to change her ways.

However, be prepared that this may not happen, as jealousy is a powerful emotion. Even if your coworker has no idea why she is subtly disparaging you or making you uncomfortable, jealousy is probably one of the main reasons.

If you must continue to work with this woman, it would be a good idea to “kill her with kindness.” You need not continuously apologize to her, but you can try to be extra nice to her, even buying her a small gift on occasion. I know this might sound odd, but when you give to someone, you begin to like that person more. For their part, most people who receive preferential treatment and presents from others tend to have a hard time criticizing the givers.