|
|||||||||
Posted June 20, 2002
Settlement Trust
Really enjoyed ... [Ran HaCohen's] thought-provoking essay "How Jews Can Support Israel: Support the People, not the Government" which was forwarded from Antiwar.com to me by a friend in Not In My Name, a Chicago group.
...One of the most straightforward, visible and least provocative ways of moving an idea like yours forward might be for "Peace Jews" and others to establish a market in settlement houses and other property. I.e. give settlers who wish to leave a willing buyer who will give them a "fair market price" (perhaps on the condition they agree to move somewhere / anywhere outside the West Bank / Gaza for some period of time). The buyer (perhaps called something like "The Settlement Trust") then holds the settlement property in trust for ultimate disposition to Palestinians following the establishment of an independent Palestine. Sort of like the Nature Conservancy and other groups that buy up rain forest and other lands as a way of preserving / protecting them. (Alternatively, rather than donating money to a not-for-profit trust, people might buy shares in a for-profit corporation that purchases the houses. Not really expecting any money back -- though that would always be a possibility. But with this approach there might even be a way under U.S. tax law to realize capital losses that would result in reduction of US taxes for stockholders -- which would be one way to get US government to help subsidize the repatriation of settlers and reduce the cost to "Peace Jews".)
Such approaches seem to have a number of advantages along the lines you spell out. In particular, it's all voluntary, it's "market friendly" (which wins political points in certain circles), it doesn't involve "charity", helps Israelis and Palestinians, gives "us" control of the property after settlers leave thus reducing the stock of settlement housing available, opens the possibility that the money spent may ultimately be recouped (in whole or in part -- or even make a profit!) when/if the property is finally sold, allows non-Jews to participate if they wish, etc.
It also of course is reminiscent of traditional Zionist land purchase projects which makes it "familiar" to Jews and also makes a statement in a language that means something to Jews. And, as your challenge implies, it's something that American Jewish organizations could at least potentially support, which would give people here two different ways of promoting this effort: 1) directly; 2) lobbying for support by such organizations (or even the US Congress).
On the other hand, if the Israeli government / IDF can simply re-appropriate the property we might find a cycle emerging where settler property is sold "Peace Jews" only to be appropriated without compensation and then resold to new settlers (assuming there are some people still interested in moving out there). (On the other other hand, it might be useful to generate a test case in court.)
Anyway, I hope the idea continues to develop.
Looking forward to hearing more from you.
WND/Repetitious Dialog
Justin, your latest ratings of websites is spectacular, and to the point. The most poignant was your assessment of WorldNetDaily and Joseph Farah's love affair with Israel. As a long time reader of WND I am chagrined at their repetitious dialogue on the problems of Israel, excluding the pain and suffering of those under Israel's grip. They seem totally fixated with their Lindseyite take on the Mideast, and write of nothing else. Hal Lindsey, with his pre-millennial take on the end times, seems to be their leader, where their columns are concerned. Sad indeed!
WND/Political Diversity
I
was a bit
surprised to read that in Justin's
opinion, "the new, and not-at-all-improved post-9/11 WND is marked
by its ideological uniformity."
He doesn't seem to be reading WND very closely, as WND currently publishes a fairly wide variety of political commentary ranging from Bill O'Reilly, David Limbaugh and Jane Chastain on the Republican moderate right to Harry Brown and myself on the libertarian extreme.
About the only point of view we do not represent is the Left, with the exception of the daily Out of Left Field selection. Of course, WND is philosophically opposed to leftism, so this should come as no surprise and there are plenty of other places for people to get their leftist fix, from the watered down variety provided by ABCNNBCBS to the purified forms at The Nation and other rags.
I believe I can speak with some authority when I say that WND has a wider degree of political diversity than any publication for which I have written, including the Star Tribune, the Atlanta Journal/Constitution and the Boston Globe. It is true, however, that there are probably more Christians writing editorial for WND than for those three publications combined.
In any event, I appreciate both your site and Justin's commentaries. I did not send this email to complain, but only to suggest that perhaps a more detailed sampling of WND's columnists is in order.
~ Vox Day, WorldNetDaily
Atheist Sites
I enjoyed your bookmark column and I am a fan of Ayn Rand. I am surprised you have no links to any of the Atheist and Free Thought sites (here's one to get you started: http://www.infidels.org/wire/index.shtml).
They are very good and they do not let demons and devils and hucksters like Falwell get in the way.
Bloggers
...I thought ... [Justin Raimondo's] "bookmarks" column was dead-on.
Even though I operate a blog, I agree with his comments about the bloggers he mentioned.
Incompatible Ideologies
Kudos on Justin Raimondo's excellent article "Turn Toward The Left". I spent most of the 1989-2001 period disgusted by the increasing conservatism, and pandering to conservatism, of some libertarians. I think that this article may well end up much more important than anyone currently suspects, in that it signals, or at least reflects, a developing "post-9/11" anti-imperialist shift in the orientation of the mainstream libertarian movement -- a shift that will eventually have unforeseen (and in my opinion major) effects on the course of American and world history, once the US Empire starts to spiral down the toilet (as all Empires do).
I thought that this article was not only important enough to forward to numerous friends, but to give a permanent front-page link at the Nation Of Liberty website.
Thank goodness libertarians are starting to wake up from the misguided conservative/libertarian rapprochement of the Bush I / Clinton era -- a process which even seduced Murray Rothbard in his last years. Libertarianism and conservatism are two radically different and completely incompatible ideologies; conservatism being inherently reactionary and libertarianism being inherently revolutionary. Perhaps the revolutionary "liberleninism" of the late '70s/early '80s Libertarian Party Radical Caucus (LPRC) -- in which Justin was involved -- was merely 20 years ahead of its time, rather than a quirky political fad.
~ Peter Brow, Webmaster, Nation Of Liberty
Daily Trial
What has happened in the Milosevic trail? The world press has probably suppressed it because he was doing so well.
Managing Editor Eric Garris replies:
You are
correct. You can check the daily trial on video at:
http://hague.bard.edu/video.html.