Veterans for Trump: The Death of Honor

Canvassing in York County today I said hello to a veteran wearing a cap with Vietnam service and campaign ribbons.  Since my canvassing list was only democrats, I assumed he was a Republican. I said hello because we were the only two people outside for as far as I could see on the very straight street.

We talked civilly for a few minutes. He told me he enlisted in the Army reserve in 1970, served six years in the United States and left the military.  "I should've stayed," he said.  I told him I enlisted in 1972 and served until 1985, getting out and re-enlisting twice, then re-enlisted once more in 2007 and went to Iraq.  

I told him I never got closer to Vietnam than Utah during the war.  He made clear he was a Vietnam-era veteran.  

Shortly after he asked if I lived in the neighborhood. I said no. I live in Lancaster and was canvassing for Janelle Stelson for Congress. He said, "Don't try to tell me to vote for a democrat! I'll never vote for a democrat."

I told him I was only going to democrats and just said hello because we were both veterans.  He then went from smoldering anger (I assume a usual state given his demeanor.) to lecture mode.  "Stelson doesn't live here. Perry does. I'm voting for Perry. And Harris let in all those migrants. The country is overrun."

I waved and wished him a nice day.  "We won't have a country if Harris wins. Too woke!" he said to my back.  

When I told another veteran about the encounter he knew right away what was wrong.  Both of us served during the Vietnam War but not in the war. We are careful to say that.  The grumpy veteran's hat said something very different. It says Vietnam service.  Of course, inflating one's service record is as common as fisherman talking about "the one that got away." When I was first in the military, lying was stunning.

For me, another effect of Trump was to make draft dodging and this sort of mendacity normal. Fifty years ago, that veteran would have been ashamed to claim war service. Honor would have prevented him.  

Dishonor is the default when a bragging coward like Trump is the head of a party.  

In 2016 I saw draft dodgers become defiant now that they had a coward who bragged about draft dodging as their leader. 

Canvassing Empty Streets and Sidewalks: No One is Outside

 

In six weeks of canvassing, I have knocked on a thousand doors in cities and suburbs across south central Pennsylvania.  I walked empty streets and sidewalks between those houses.  

Empty.

It was not the weather. I canvas in the daytime. Generally the temperature was between high 60s and mid 70s. Wonderful weather.  

No kids. No walkers. No runners. No bicyclists. Just the occasional driver with windows closed of course.  

Is it social media?  I can't tell, but it seems like a good explanation.  I spend two or three hours in neighborhood.  If anyone was going to walk, run, ride, play games, sit on the porch or something else outside the house, I am likely to have seen them.  

Some of the houses I canvas have kids in the family. They peek out of the windows when I ring the bell or cling to mom's leg while she talks to me. But I have not seen kids outside.  

A couple of times as I walked down sunlit empty streets I thought "The Last of Us" and other dystopian stories.  Whole neighborhoods with no sign of life. 

My Exceptional Neighborhood

By contrast, my own neighborhood in Lancaster city has walkers, runners, cyclists, people that sit outside, kids, dog walkers and other signs of live community. If there is a social media plague keeping everyone inside, I'm glad I live in a place with social media antibodies.  

I'll be knocking on doors until the election; I will definitely write if I find a neighborhood besides my own with signs of life. 

A Very Complex Story: The Arc of a Covenant: The United States, Israel, and the Fate of the Jewish People by Walter Russell Mead

This book is a history of the relationship between Israel and the United States.  Like so many relationships, the partners look back and rewrite their history as the years recede.  And the more they love each other, they more they tend to rewrite history into rose-tinted myth.  

I knew very well how badly America (and most of the world) acted toward Jews during the Nazi era and the Holocaust. So when I read about America's support for Israel from the first moment after Israel declared itself independent, I was ready to fill in continuous support from 1948 to now.

I was wrong.  

Walter Russell Mead showed me the actual, bumpy complex history of America's support (and not) for Israel.  

Yes. President Harry Truman recognized Israel from the moment of its founding, but he did it on condition that he get to recognize Israel before anyone else: 11 minutes after the announcement.

To his credit, Truman believed the Jews had a right to a country of their own.

But. 

Truman also set up an arms embargo on the new nation of Israel.  If the arms embargo had succeeded the Holocaust would have been repeated as six Arab armies invaded Israel. Truman's state department was more concerned about their relationship with the Arab nations than the survival of Israel.

When America let Israel  twist in the wind, a very ironic triangular relationship developed that saved Israel and led to Israel's victory over the invaders.  

Along with the US, the Soviet Union recognized Israel.  The relationship only lasted until 1953, but it was long enough to allow Israel to exist.  

In 1948, the Soviet Union needed hard currency. In February the Soviet Union took over Czechoslovakia in a Coup.  The small country was home to the Skoda works. Skoda made weapons for the Nazi army under Nazi occupation.  They had a massive inventory of German weapons.  

Also in 1948, Israel declared independence in May and future Israel Prime Minister Golda Meir began crisscrossing America raising money for the fledgling state of Israel.  That money could have bought  tons of surplus America weapons consigned to destruction, but the embargo prevented that purchase.

Instead, the money flowed back to Israel and from there to Skoda and to the Soviet Union.  When Israeli representatives visited the Skoda factory, they were delighted to find tons of weapons at bargain prices. It was also made clear that the Soviet Union was ready to circumvent the American arms embargo--for cash.

American money paid for surplus German weapons which were then smuggled by Soviets around an American embargo. Those weapons allowed Israel to defeat six Arab armies and exist as a nation.  

America continued to ignore Israel until 1967.  After the huge victory in the Six Day War, Israel suddenly looked like a regional power and America became friendly.  The new warmth was timely because the French, Israel's principle arms supplier in the 1950s and early 60s, were backing away from Israel because of internal politics.  

With the Soviets openly arming the Arabs, America started selling arms to Israel.  The relationship between the US and Israel became closer after the 1973 Arab-Israeli War.  But the first actual treaty between the two countries was made by President Ronald Reagan in 1987, almost 40 years after Israeli independence.  

The book is full of insights about the relationship between the US and Israel which I did not get from the many histories of Israel I have read.

It's an interesting book for anyone who wants to know about the complex history of the US/Israel relationship.  

Signs of the Times: As I Canvass for Candidates I See the Parties in their Signs

 

Recently, I was canvassing on a lovely day in a suburban Philadelphia district divided very closely between left and right. The houses I visited were all in a township that has a "No Solicitation" law. Violations can result in a fine of $375-$1,000. 

A few of the "No Solicitation" houses had a black box near that door that announced "You are under video surveillance" as I approached. One woman opened the door to ask, "Did you not understand the no solicitation sign?"  I replied that the law does not cover free speech including political speech. She shut the door.

It did not affect my canvassing because political and religious solicitation is exempt. 

I passed many houses with signs for democratic candidates and others with signs for republican candidates.

The only houses I passed with "No Solicitation" signs posted on the door that were identifiable as one party or the other were Republican. 

Last week I walked past two houses in Lancaster side by side on a city street. Both houses had two signs out front. The first house had a "Harris-Walz" sign and another that said "Love Thy Neighbor." The second had a "Trump-Vance” sign and another that said "No Trespassing."

War and Peace by Leo Tolstoy: Beauty and Deep Irony Unlocked by Hannah Arendt

Irony can be lovely in literature. The current living master of irony in my reading is Kazuo Ishiguro especially in his book The Remains of the Day. Another sad and beautiful master of irony is Walter Miller Jr. in his book A Canticle for Liebowitz. Miller and Ishiguro intend irony.

Leo Tolstoy did not, but there is more irony at the center of War and Peace than in the biggest Soviet-era Russian steel mill.  The deep love stories that swirl through this beautiful book are set in tragedy a time of war. The story begins in the gossip and whirl of upper class city life and ends with country family life.  

At intervals throughout the book, Tolstoy interrupts the narrative to tell us with increasing stridency that great people, and all people, have no real influence on life and history.  The collective spirit of the people, and chance, and fate, and the will of God guide events.  The great people believe they are in charge, but they are merely corks bobbing on a river flowing where God and nature intend.  

While he is telling us great people have no influence, Tolstoy fills hundreds of pages of this 1,500-page book with the actions of Napoleon, Marshall Kutuzov, Emperor Alexander, as well as mayors, generals and other leaders.  To learn how great people have no influence, we learn a lot about what they do.  

My current reading of War and Peace was on a Kindle in the translation by Pevear and Volokhonsky.  In the late 80s I read the Constance Garnett standard translation.  In 2000, I read the Almyer and Louise Maude translation.    

Since 2000, I have gone to war and after returning from that war read all of the works of Hannah Arendt.  The year in Iraq showed me how deeply Tolstoy was affected by his service in the War in Crimea and how he turned that experience into art.  Reading Arendt showed me why I disagreed so completely with the philosophy that fills hundreds of pages of Tolstoy's longest novel.  

Central to Hannah Arendt's view of the human condition is natality.  She says that each person when born has the potential to influence the world.  Each new life is a new beginning.  Further, in her book titled The Human Condition Arendt divides human activity into Labor, Work and Action.  Labor is work done that leaves no trace--factory work, cleaning, cooking.  Work is creating things that endure--furniture, works of art, jewelry.  Action is influencing others.  

When we act, we influence others who have wills and ideas of their own, so we never know what will come of our words.  Leaders persuade people to act but the message strikes each individual in a different way. So what seems a mass from the outside is really individuals, each moved in their own way by the message. In fact some may hear the message and become opponents while others follow. 

Natality, in Arendt's description, brings unique possibilities into the world in the life of every individual.  After reading Arendt, reading Tolstoy's philosophy gave me the same feeling I have when reading Sam Harris and other determinists.  I understand why they believe what they do, but cannot agree.  Natality gives me billions of reasons to know that something new could come into the world begin by one person and change the world, for good or ill.   

In the first epilogue of War and Peace Tolstoy says his book is not a novel.  It's his book, so he can say whatever he wants.  But the story itself is wonderful on its own terms.  The philosophy underneath it does not affect the intricate beauty of the story Tolstoy tells.  If I read it again, I will skip the philosophy and enjoy the story.

The Declaration of Independence

Thomas Jefferson. The sole author of 

the most influential document in the history of the world.

The Declaration of Independence 

In Congress, July 4, 1776

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America, When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.--Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.

He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.

He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.

He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:

For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:

For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:

For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:

For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:

For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences:

For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:

For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:

For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.

He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our Brittish brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

When the Invader Intends Only Evil: War is Right

Sam Harris, noted Atheist, Meditation Guru

In the wake of the Hamas attack on Israel on October 7, 2023, the Jewish atheist meditation guru Sam Harris became one of my rabbis.  In the midst of  tragedy, he spoke calmly and sensibly about the situation in Israel and for Jews in the rest of the world.  

The sexual violence and murder of the Hamas attack was followed by worldwide support for the attackers: and complete silence by women's rights groups. The progressive left, especially on college campuses, defended and exalted Hamas.  Black Lives Matter Chicago used a hang glider like those used by Hamas as a symbol of freedom at a rally days after the attack.

In that moment, Sam Harris said the world could choose between Jihad and civilization. We cannot have both.  As long as Hamas, Boko Haram, ISIS, The Iranian regime, the Houthis and Hezbollah exist, civilization is at risk.  

The proper response to Jihadi terror is war.  

In the past few weeks I have spoken to many people who believe war is always wrong. 

I believe they are wrong.  War is the right response implacable evil.  

War against the Nazis and the Death Cult of Imperial Japan was right. War against Jihad until they have no ability to rape and slaughter is right. 

Right now, Israel is the only nation to make the affirmative choice to fight against armies that have vowed in their founding documents to destroy Israel and kill Jews.  If the Jihadis win, the rest of the civilized world is their eventual target.   

Hamas has lost most of its fighters, but refuses to negotiate, preferring death, especially the death of Gazans other than themselves.  The Houthis attack ships to  close the Red Sea to world trade. Iran threatens to build and use a nuclear weapon.  Hezbollah planned another rape and slaughter attack on Israel but was thwarted recently when Israel killed and maimed thousands of Hezbollah leaders in a series of sabotage attacks.   

For those who do not know what real evil sounds like, Sam Harris posted a transcript of a Hamas murderer bragging about the ten Israelis he killed.

--------------------------

Another war of necessity against an evil foe who intends destruction of their nation is The War in Ukraine.  Russia invaded Ukraine to carry out a program of Imperial expansion by Vladimir Putin.  

The majority of Americans support Ukraine seeing it as the front line of  a fight against Russian expansion in Europe.  I have supported the Ukrainians in every way I can since the beginning of the invasion.  

In the strategic sense, Ukraine is defending America as it defends itself.  Russia has lost a million soldiers killed and wounded since the war began.  We have sent only weapons to Ukraine. No American soldiers are fighting and dying in Ukraine, only Ukrainians defend their homeland.

---------------------------

In both wars, if the invaders stop fighting, the wars will end.  If either Israel or Ukraine stops fighting, their nations will cease to exist and their people will be enslaved or killed. 

Every person I spoke to who is against these wars and against all wars said, "Why don't they negotiate?'

Which only makes clear they know nothing of negotiation.  To make a deal, both sides have to have something they will compromise on.

Jihadi terrorists want the destruction of Israel and the death of Jews.  

The ground for compromise is?????

Putin believes Ukraine is not a nation and that he, as ruler of Russia, is the rightful ruler of Ukraine.

The ground for compromise is?????

War, in those circumstances, is right.