The Jews of Europe--a Brief Partial History of their Persecution and Survival

   

The Jews of Europe--a Brief Partial History of their Persecution and Survival

Very few of the Ladino-speaking Sephardic Jews of Andalusia in southern Spain would have survived the 1400s, after the expulsion from there of the Muslim Moors (during whose rule the Jews had flourished), without the main refuge they found, across the Mediterranean, in the Muslim-majority countries of North Africa and West Asia. 

 
A few of these Sephardim, also escaping by sea, found refuge instead in other places, including Protestant countries such as the Netherlands and England, where they congregated in cities like Amsterdam and London, contributing to the growth of business and finance there.
 
Very few of the mainly Yiddish-speaking Ashkenazi Jews, who had settled in Eastern, Central, and Western Europe, would have survived the 1930s and 1940s in Europe had it not been for those same refuges in the Muslim majority countries across the Mediterranean (that had not been occupied by the German and Italian militaries) plus the refuge provided by the USSR--and the eventual liberation of the survivors in Eastern and Central Europe by the Soviet Red Army.
 
Some of the Ashkenazim of Central and SE Europe reached the Mediterranean ports of SE Europe via Yugoslavia and Greece, aided by the multiethnic, communist-led guerillas, based mainly in the Balkan mountains, fighting the German occupation.

This occurred even as the Croatian fascists in Yugoslavia were killing Serbs and were also handing over Jews to the Germans, much as the collaborating governments and groups had done in France and elsewhere in Europe. 

 

************
 
We should note that the Anglo countries had shut their doors to all but a few select Jews during the Shoah or Holocaust that lasted from the 1930s to the end, in 1945, of WWII in Europe.  During this, millions of Jews were killed, along with Gypsies and others, while Slav prisoners were being worked to death.
 
Close to 3 million people were killed, during WWII, in the USSR alone, a number close to those killed in China.
 
However, had it not been for the existence of the USSR, in which they were protected, even more Jews would have been killed by the Nazis and their many collaborating governments and groups. 
 
It was the Soviet Red Army that fought the long, hard land war in Europe that eventually liberated all of Eastern Europe, including especially its surviving Jews, Gypsies, and other minority groups, took Berlin and drove deep into the rest of Germany, where they waited for their Anglo allies to arrive in the last stages of WWII in Europe. 
 
The main contribution of those allies to the fight against the Axis powers in Europe had been the aerial war, waged mainly out of Britain, against the Axis powers in Europe.
 
In sum, had it not been for the Arab, Turkish, and other Muslims, starting in the 1400s, and for the communists and socialists of Eastern and Southeastern Europe in the 1930s and 1950s, there would have been even fewer European Jews left.

 

************
 
The history of mutual animosity, over many centuries, between Jews and at least European Christians, led sadly by the Catholic Church, is well known, as are the atrocities carried out by the European Christian crusaders against Jews and Muslims in Palestine and the rest of the Levant.
 
Shamefully, some Jews, both secular and religious, have been intent, over my lifetime, starting earlier, on doing to the natives of Palestine and adjacent areas what the Romans did to many of the Jews there long ago and what the Catholic Church in medieval times and the Nazis and others, in the 1930s and 1940s, did to the Jews of Europe—with the history of the pogroms in Europe bridging these two great expulsions and massacres of the Jews in that continent. 

I cannot do justice to the sad history of those pogroms in this brief outline.
 
The Jewish Zionists have been strongly supported in this settler colonial venture in Palestine by their Christian Zionist allies, beginning in Britain and later and currently in the USA. These believe that the Jews of Europe and elsewhere must be congregated in Palestine for Jesus to come there and convert the Jews to Christianity, with those resistant to this being cast into Hell.  

A strong "anti-semitic" (meaning anti-Jewish) prejudice has been present within parts of the Christian Zionist movement from its start in Britain and still remains strong among some of its members in the USA.  

One should note that the terms "semite" and "semitic" make sense, much like the term "Indo-European" only as a grouping of languages. Hebrew, along with Aramaic, Arabic, Amharic, Ge'ez, and various other languages, past and present, of Ethiopia, West Asia, and adjacent areas belongs to the Semitic family of languages. The speakers of all of these languages, just like the speakers of English, Hindi-Urdu, and Malay, are typically of many mixed genetic and cultural ancestries.

************

Zionism was strongly resisted among Jews themselves, especially the religious Jews, until the horrors of the 1930s and 1940s in Europe. Sadly, some religious Jews have become some of Zionism's most extreme adherents. Others, along with many secular Jews in the USA, Europe, and elsewhere, remain strongly opposed to the creation and extension of a settler-colonial, apartheid Jewish state in Palestine and adjacent areas, at the increasingly lethal expense of the natives there, and to the detriment of Jews everywhere.

This occurred to the Jews in the countries of North Africa and West Asia, who had been living there for centuries and even millennia, speaking the local languages, who began facing resentment and violence after the Naqba or Palestinian Catastrophe in 1948, during which most of the natives of Palestine were expelled, being faced with widespread, organized, terrorist violence carried out by the well armed and organized Zionist militias there. 

The movement of many of these "Mizrahi" Jews from their ancestral lands to what had suddenly become Israel, and what they faced when they got there, has been chronicled by Israeli historians such as Avi Shlaim, who was born in Iraq but had to move with his family to Israel as a young boy.
 
Many of the natives of Palestine, be they Christian, Muslim, Samaritan Judaic, or other, might in fact be the closest descendants of the inhabitants of Palestine in ancient times, including the Jews who were not expelled later by the Romans, soon after the time of Jesus of Nazareth. They may also be still carrying the genes of the Canaanites and others who were there even earlier, along with those of the Arabs and others who arrived there later.
 
2025 December 15, Mon.
Berkeley, California
 
Note: This began as a reply to a nasty comment on Facebook by Jarod Keren. 

Language and Ethics—Tentative Thoughts

Go to Note added

 
Language and Ethics—Tentative Thoughts-2025-10-11
  
1. The learning of language and ethics

  
A first language is learned, not by any formal instruction, but rather by a sort of absorption that appears to be innate in young children but fades away in later years. 
 
So also, a “first ethics” may be learned, starting at a young age, by a similar absorptive process. Typically, the learning in this case is again based less on any formal instruction than on observation and replication. 
 
So just as a first language is probably best taught and learned through the practice of the language—conversation—so also, a “first ethics” is probably best taught and learned through the practice of ethics—ethical behavior. 
 
So the first ethics, just like the first language, is passed on more by example and imitation than by formal instruction.
 
In both cases, the learning process appears  to proceed largely at a subconscious level . There is still a place, however for more deliberate teaching and learning. This becomes more important in the learning of a second or third language—especially at an older age, and particularly for a language that is foreign or is no longer spoken in conversation—as for a scriptural or classical language. So also, this more deliberate or formal teaching and learning becomes more important in the acquisition of what might be termed a “second ethics”.

 

2. The core functions of language and ethics
 
Language is, at its base, a means of communication between individuals. This makes the “sum” of two or more individuals greater than its parts, allowing for all kinds of things that would otherwise not be possible. 
 
One should note here that language can bridge great distances, as through letters—and now electronic communications. It can also bridge the same in time, as it does each time we read (or nowadays listen to) something written or spoken in the past, be this a few minutes or thousands of years ago. 
 
Indeed, in this way, language can even serve as a (one-way) bridge between the dead and the living.
 
Ethics is a means of regulating the interactions between individuals. This again makes the “sum” of two or more individuals greater than its parts. This is because ethical behavior builds trust and so allows for cooperation that would otherwise not be possible.
 

3. Deception versus honesty: an example of an interaction between language and ethics
 
Language can be used to inform—and so also to deceive. In communities where there is prolonged contact between individuals, including from birth onwards, lying is likely to be detected sooner or later. This can not only spoil the relationship between the liar and the lied to, it can ruin the reputation of the liar throughout his/her community. This serves as a strong constraint against this practice within such communities. This further reinforces the value of honesty, which is part of almost every known human ethical code.
 
Truth-telling can also have its hazards, as we all must know. There can be occasions where it is better to remain silent or even to lie. This can be to protect oneself or else to protect others. However, remaining silent or, even more, lying, also have their hazards, beginning, but not ending, with the breakage of the ethical code and the guilt that this can engender in otherwise honest individuals. As mentioned earlier, the major hazard is the likely loss of trust and the consequences of this loss, especially if the dishonesty occurs within a closely bound community. 
 
At a deeper level, we cannot function as either individuals or groups without access to reality. Anything that comes in the way of this is ultimately harmful. However, at times it may be necessary to shield vulnerable individuals, especially children, from the harsh impact of reality. 
 

4. The basis of ethics and the golden rule
 
Ethical codes vary between societies in their details. However, there are some fairly common elements on which all ethical behavior, and so also most ethical codes, are based.
 
i) Truth-seeking and truth-telling: In order to deal with reality we have to recognize it. We cannot function as a group without assisting others in this recognition. Deception actively distorts the perception of reality, putting those who are deceived at a disadvantage.
 
ii) Empathy: This is an innate capacity that allows us to “feel” what another being is feeling. Without the development and exercise of this capacity, we are likely to become isolated from one another, to act in ways that are hurtful to others, and to not offer help when it is needed. This capacity can at times be painful to its exerciser. He/she may find it easier to turn away from this discomfort. However, this leads both to social disintegration and to individual numbness, apathy, or even cruel depravity. 
 
iii) Justice: This is an innate instinct for fairness or equity, which allows us to live together amiably without festering resentments.
 
iv) Respect: This means valuing others, beginning with tolerance of differences, but going beyond that. We feel valued when we are respected, and we come to appreciate the worth of others through respecting them. These two things combined makes working together easier, and utilizes better the potential in each individual.

 

Various cultures have summarized these precepts in their ethical codes and religious beliefs in what has come to be known as the golden rule. This has both negative formulations, as in:

 

     Do not do to others what you would not want done to yourself.

 

and positive formulations, as in:

 

     Love and do for others as you love and do for yourself.

  

5. The applicability of ethics

  
i) Comprehension and agreement
 
Each human language is shared by a set of individuals. The number of individuals within this set can vary in size from very small to very large. A particular language can only be used to communicate with those who either know that language or its rudiments, or else know another language that is similar enough for communications to proceed without too much hindrance.
 
Ethical codes are also shared by a set of individuals, with the number in the set again varying from small to large. Clearly, ethical codes cannot be used to regulate behavioral interactions between individuals or groups whose ethical codes are widely divergent. The codes need to be close enough for interactions to proceed and trust to be cemented without too much hindrance.
 
ii) A deeper question 
 
Clearly, humans do not always treat strangers as they would treat those they know. There are circles of kinship and friendship, within each of which there is more trust and more bonding than there is with those outside that circle.
 
Let us illustrate this with an extreme example: most of us are far less constrained or energized by ethics in our interactions with flies then we are in our interactions with humans.
 
However, there have been many cases in which humans seemed to have had as little regard for fellow humans as they had for flies; so they treated those humans no better than they would treat flies. This is not just part of our shared past. This is also part of our shared present and so also our future. 
 
So the question of the zone of applicability of ethics remains a vital one. 
 
2025 October 11, Sat.
Berkeley, California
----------------------------------------------------------------  

  

Note added: Multiple first languages and/or “first ethics” 

 

It can happen that a child learns more than one language in the first few years of its life, doing so either simultaneously or in fairly rapid sequence, during the course of infancy, early childhood, and what follows soon after. 

 

Thanks to the extraordinary, sponge-like language-learning abilities of young children, the child may become almost equally proficient in these multiple first languages, speaking and comprehending each of these as well or nearly as well as a native speaker of exclusively any one of these tongues.

 

The two or more languages learned could be very similar, even to the point of being called dialects, or they could be very different—including in sounds, intonations, vocabulary, grammar, syntax, etc. 

 

None of these differences seems to interfere much with the absorptive process characteristic of language learning in children, although the production of certain sounds, for instance, may take longer to learn to perfection. 

 

Indeed, the main difficulty may come when the languages resemble each other too closely, as with neighboring dialects, causing some overlap and confusion in their use.

 

Of course, it is also possible that there are variations in the child’s proficiency in these multiple first languages, typically depending on onsets of exposure, amounts of exposure, and opportunities of use.

 

A child will typically switch between its multiple first languages depending on context—using, for instance, one language with its mother, another with its paternal grandmother or other person closely involved in its care. These parallel proficiencies and this switching ability may be maintained well into later age, including adulthood.

 

So also, is it possible for a child to acquire two or more “first ethics” simultaneously or in fairly rapid succession, become equally or almost equally proficient in each, and switch between these depending on context? 

 

This might perhaps be possible. Surely, something like this should be possible for two or more later-acquired “second ethics”.

 

Shifting between languages does not usually involve any internal conflicts. Switching between ethical codes might.

 

2025 October 12, Sun.

  

The Growths and Deaths of Empires

 
The Growths and Deaths of Empires
 
Classical military empires had typically expanded in oceans of blood and gore. They had often retreated and collapsed in the same way.
 
History is full of examples of both processes. 
 
To remain stable and strong, military-economic empires that have been established over multinational, multi-ethnic domains need to secure not just the submission and compliance of the subjugated groups, but also some measures of willing participation, belonging, and loyalty from the subjugated nationalities or ethnicities--or at least from subgroups or classes within those.
 
Indeed, the military personnel of successful, stable empires of the old-fashioned sort almost invariably consisted largely of conscripts recruited from the ranks of the subjugated populations. 
 
Many of us know this from our own family histories of service in the military forces of the British Empire recruited from the subcontinent. These were utilized not just in the subcontinent and adjacent areas such as SE Asia, but in distant theaters, such as West Asia, North Africa, and Europe.  
 
Without the willing contributions of labor and skill from a fair number of those who had been subjugated, an empire is unlikely to last for long.
 
So some measure of inclusivity is needed for the longer-term survival of an empire, distinguishing it from a shorter-term raiding and looting venture. 
 
Among the more recent empires, we see instances of more stability and so also often more inclusivity in, for instance, the developed Mughal, Ottoman, and British Empires. 
 
We saw this also in the USSR, which inherited the Russian Tsarist Empire. This did not, however, save that vast multiethnic giant from collapse after eighty years of communist party rule that had granted the various regional nationalities and ethnicities far more recognition, including of their diverse cultures, beginning with their languages, than the Tsarist Russian Empire ever had, along with more relative autonomy, while still preserving highly centralized structures.
 
The collapse of the Ottoman Empire saw the rise of strong ethnic nationalisms, such as Turkish, Greek, Armenian, and Kurdish. The mayhem that ensued has still not abated.
 
The British Empire contracted after WWII, with varying degrees of management and violence. The ethnic nationalisms that rose and clashed in the subcontinent also led to mass mayhem and displacement. The echoes of the cries of that bloody partition can still be heard and may even be building in volume, with ominous implications. 
 
In Africa, the British often did not leave without much violence. Kenya is a case in point. 
 
The French did not generally manage their exits from their colonial ventures as adroitly as did the British. One notes the instances of Algeria, a horror story, and Indochina--which had to also deal with imperial Japan and with the USA, with lethal tolls in each case. 
 
One notes what occurred in Yugoslavia during its own collapse. Although, like present-day India and even more so, it could not be considered to be an empire, it was a large, multiethnic state with a history of internecine warfare, mainly that of competing regional kingdoms and empires. Its central government and its diverse populations had been able to overcome that legacy--until the horrors of the 2000s. 
 
One prays that India will not go the way of Yugoslavia--or of Pakistan as occurred in 1970-71.
 
The collapse of the USSR appeared for quite a while to have managed to be an exception to the general rule of multiethnic empires collapsing into violent conflicts between their constituent nationalities.
 
However, there was Chechnya, which was in some ways, though not all, an extension of what had begun in Afghanistan under US-Pakistani-Saudi auspices, spreading even as far into the Soviet interior as to strike Moscow, while metastasizing globally.
Putin, who emerged as the Russian strongman, appealing to Russian nationalism even as other fierce, exclusive nationalisms arose in the former components of the USSR, "solved" that Chechen rebellion with brutal force, as he did the one in Daghestan.
 
Since the Western-backed coup in Kiev in 2014, a lethal civil war had been ongoing in Eastern Ukraine, with the USA, especially during Trump's first term and continuing into Biden's presidency, pouring huge amounts of arms into Ukraine. Then came the Russian invasion of 2022 February. The mayhem continues and widens.
 
Within the US homeland, we note the increase in inclusivity that was the trend during parts of the last century and the first quarter of this century, embracing, to varying degrees:
 
- the long-exploited and oppressed descendants of African slaves;
 
- the few surviving members of the indigenous peoples;
 
- the large numbers of newer immigrants, including those from places other than Europe. 
  
Sadly, we have been seeing sharp reversals of these trends over the past several months, with slower ones accruing over some past administrations.  
  
Is it possible that the federation that is the US  homeland will break up in the near future? One cannot rule that out, although that would be a grim chapter.
 
2025 September 18, Thurs.
Berkeley, California
 

The Wages of Sin in the USA

 

The Wages of Sin in the USA: the consequences of non-collective mindsets, of yielding to short-term competitive pressures, of absentee governance, and of a captive political class 

 
As a domiciled USAn, residing, studying and working in the country for over half a century, watching this short but telling video hurts. 

https://youtu.be/uf_GCOSZ2bA

Setting that hurt aside, however, I recall being perplexed and worried, even in the 1980s and 1990s, as the US establishments—within both the private sector and government, seemed to be focused on short-term profits and fixes, and not on the longer-term good of the people of this country, let alone of others. 

From the 1990s onwards, we saw the outflow of US manufacturing jobs to countries with lower costs of production, with large US corporations leading the charge. 

Little or no thought was given to maintaining a manufacturing base for essentials here, so as to preserve basic national self-reliance, ensure security, and protect workers, including with training to help them adapt to a changing manufacturing world. 

Surely, the government, as well as consortiums of corporations, should have had a role in this, as individual corporations are often caught in competitive races, with cost of production, including the cost of labor, being a very important consideration, as is share price value. 

The focus on stock price values, projected changes in which helped determine the inflows and outflows of investments in a corporation, seemed indeed to drive much of the decisions of business executives, with longer term considerations being set aside for shorter term ones. 

Soon enough, remote service jobs began to move abroad as well, and that trend has continued and accelerated ever since.

Corporate takeovers and mass firings of employees to boost shareholder values, and other such profit-taking actions added to the mayhem. Job stability and pensions came to regarded as liabilities by private corporations and were basically done away with.

Within the USA, outsourcing, automation and competition with immigrant labor added to the pressures on workers. The rise of the Internet marketers, led by Amazon, dealt a series of blows to retail businesses with physical stores and to their sales- and other employees.

Free trade agreements such as those concluded, through NAFTA, with Mexico and Canada, and then with the Pacific rim countries, unconstrained by input from workers' organizations and even from legislators here and abroad, added to the outflow of jobs, as had been predicted, for instance, by the self-financed, billionaire presidential candidate, Ross Perot.

This was largely ignored by both the Republican and Democratic establishments. Obama even sided with the Republicans and against the majority of Democrats in Congress in trying to push through free trade agreements with China and other countries that were predicted to hurt workers here and did. 

Both the Republican and Democratic establishments continued to focus on and celebrate economic booms that mainly benefited only certain sections of workers as well as those with surplus income that they were able to invest wisely.

These booms also greatly benefited, of course, the ever more wealthy and powerful oligarchs who exert great influence over both the major political parties here and so also largely determine or strongly constrain legislative and executive actions at federal, state, and municipal levels, over time also affecting the composition of the judiciary.

The alliances between the Zionist lobby, very affluent corporate and individual donors, the war hawks in the two parties and in the military, and the arms manufacturers and marketers led the USA into multiple regime-change operations abroad, including through coups, covert operations and overt military assaults. 

In retrospect, one sees more clearly the influence of AIPAC and its allies in the involvement of the US in multiple highly destructive wars and other destabilizing actions in West Asia and North Africa.

All of this involved massive military and other expenditures, even as Republicans, especially, but also corporate Democrats like Andrew Cuomo waged what one sees, again in retrospect, as austerity campaigns within the USA, at all levels.

These put increasingly hard squeezes on many workers and those with limited means, with what remained of the labor unions increasingly coopted and crippled.

Moving to more current times, the economic pain and anxiety inflicted on large segments of the US working classes manifested themselves not only in things like rising suicide rates and the lethal opioid epidemic, but also in resentment against the increasingly affluent elites that had benefited from what was effectively a massive “upward” transfer of wealth withiIn the USA.

This transfer began in earnest during the 1980s, in the Reagan years, and has continued through subsequent administrations, both Republican and Democratic, accelerating more in the Republican ones.

Rising awareness and resentment of this led to the Occupy Wall Street movement, the identification of the role of the “1%”,  and subsequently to the rise of populist movements within both the major parties.

The movement within the Democratic party was genuinely social-democratic and inclusive, led by Bernie Sanders in his Democratic-primary challenge to Hillary Clinton in the lead-up to the 2016 general election. 

The corresponding movement within the Republican Party was strongly nativist, capitalist, and reactionary in the dictionary sense, coalescing around Donald Trump.

I began to notice and be startled that many working-class residents of New York City, including  long-term Democratic voters, were moving towards supporting Donald Trump, and that they did in fact vote for him. 

Some had supported Bernie Sanders but could not stomach Hillary Clinton, with her very close ties to the Wall Streeters, her support for and even active involvement in wars of aggression abroad, etc. 

She had also been subject to many smears from the Republican propaganda machines during and after Bill Clinton’s two terms. Some of these smears have stuck.

Unfortunately, many Democratic politicians, with exceptions such as Zohran Mamdani, remain blind and deaf, as it were, to some of the genuine concerns of many USAns whom they lump together as MAGA morons.  

I noticed this recently in the clever but arrogant comments made by Mehdi Hassan in an encounter with mainly MAGA folk, including many young people. 

He repeatedly dismissed their economic concerns and their worries about competition from new immigrants for scarce good-paying jobs.

In one case, he noted that the GDP and employment had been rising during the Biden years and that he himself, a recent US immigrant, had founded a company and had hired workers here in the USA.   

It is noteworthy that Bernie Sanders has been getting record crowds at his rallies, including in "Red" (Republican) areas.

One can be against blind, callous nativism, the hero-worship of a narcissistic, bullying clown, and other such problematic developments. 

There is also no doubt that newer immigrants have long helped to power, in multiple ways, the economy of the USA, in addition to providing many essential services. 

One should still be careful not to be blind and deaf oneself to genuine human concerns. 

The Democratic establishment has not even come to grips yet with our deep complicity in the daily, deliberate, systematic slaughter of trapped, defenseless civilians, mainly women and children, in Palestine and adjacent areas, ongoing now for almost two years. 

Here again, they have lost touch with much of their own electoral base. 

2025 Sep 4., Thu.
Berkeley, California

https://youtu.be/uf_GCOSZ2bA 

Linear Directional and Cyclical Views of Human Affairs--Plus Absolutism versus Relativism

 
Linear Directional and Cyclical Views of Human Affairs
—and their possible association with absolutist/purist and relativist/accommodative views of the same 

A) Forward Moving (or Linear Directional) versus Cyclical Views of Human Affairs

The main issue I have with Marx's view of human affairs, which I otherwise admire, is the same as I have with many other views that might perhaps be traced most directly to Europe and: 

- initially, its admirable "Renaissance" (rebirth), sparked by the entry and reentry of knowledge and analytical thought into southern, Mediterranean Europe (mainly southern Spain and then Italy) through the Muslim, mainly Arab, Mediterranean North Africa and Asia

- subsequently, and perhaps more significantly, Europe's equally admirable "Enlightenment". 

The roots of these views extend further in space, including, most obviously, North Africa and West Asia, but also the rest of the Old World, and also further back in time.

The common element in these "modern" views, with which I have some issue, is the idea of a "forward" direction in our collective and perhaps even individual human affairs. 

On the Left, the view behind the words "progressive" and "reactionary," as applied to political directions, is one manifestation of this basic view of human affairs. 

However, this same view (and the drive issuing from it, with its benefits and its harms) can be found in many other human attitudes and endeavors.

This includes, in politics, views prevailing on the political and economic Right, despite its adoption of the term "Conservative" in Britain and the USA. 

This “conservative” view also assumes a linear path in human affairs, with the purpose being to either resist any movement away from the current state of human affairs, or else to move this state "backwards" towards what is viewed as a better state.

Then there are all the views in the economic sphere, be these on the political-economic Left or Right, that advocate a particular economic system and its consequences. 

This can be contrasted with the cyclical views that had long been prevalent in many human cultures previously, as especially evident in the philosophical and religious literature and scholarship in Asia, including China, especially, but also India. 

So, just as the yin rises within the yang and vice versa and just our own multiple biological rhythms, along with the tides, the days and nights, and the seasons of the year, keep cycling through, so also, in this view, empires and other human constructions rise and fall and various currents in human affairs surge and ebb.

*************************************************

B) Absolutist and Relativist Views of Human Affairs

In association with these two world-views, one finds also, in general:

- an intolerance for other views, or absolutism/purism, often accompanying the first, "forward moving" or “linear directional” view;

- a tolerance for other views, or relativism/accomodation, accompanying the second, "cyclical" or “mingling, spreading, and circulating” view.

Absolutism in the Abrahamic Religions

One possible historical manifestation of this association of absolutism/purism with a "forward moving" or “linear directional” view, often also seeing the world as a struggle between polarized opposites, might perhaps be found in some of the precepts and practices of the "Abrahamic" religions, each of these faiths being again admirable in many ways in its other teachings and practices.

These Abrahamic religions, among which Judaism is usually accepted to constitute the common, shared base, are of ancient and medieval provenance, originating and finding stable form, in the case of Judaism, in West Asia and North Africa, spreading later, mainly as proselytizing Christianity and Islam, into parts of the rest of the Old World and subsequently, via Europe, as Christianity, into much of the rest of the human-inhabited planet.

The "forward moving" view within the "Abrahamic" religions may be most evident in the proselytizing views and practices of Christianity, which were followed historically by those of Islam, with possible influences from Zoroastrianism and perhaps Mithraism and Buddhism, with Judaism remaining mainly (with some important exceptions) a hereditary, tribal religion.

Interestingly, though perhaps incidentally, both Zoroastrianism and Buddhism, though otherwise different, were radical reform and revolutionary movements that had arisen within adherents of polytheistic religions practiced initially mainly by speakers of Indo-Iranian languages. Among other things, both developed strong ethical codes that extended to all humans, and even, in the case of Buddhism as also in Jainism, all sentient beings.

The two major proselytizing Abrahamic faiths (Christianity and Islam, with their various branches) are closely linked to each other, and also to Judaism, with these linkages most clearly understood, accepted, and respected in Islam. The ethical codes in Christianity and Islam are based on that which existed in Judaism, but are further extended, in keeping with their generally more inclusive views on humans. 

The three major Abrahamic religions share, to varying degrees in their various branches, a core absolutism/purism and so also an often-accompanying disrespect towards and intolerance towards other faiths, especially non-Abrahamic ones, with this absolutism/purism and intolerance being inherited from Judaism.

Indeed, Judaism, at its hard, resistant core, extends this disrespect and intolerance even to Christianity, especially, but also, to a lesser extent, to Islam.

Christianity typically extends this intolerance to Islam and also, in historical practice, to Judaism. 

All of this said, it is possible to find many historical and current exceptions to these general patterns in all three Abrahamic traditions. 

While Islam has, both in core precept and general practice, generally respected both Judaism and Christianity (though regarding Jesus as a prophet, not as an incarnation of divinity, a concept as alien to Judaic thought as it is part of the religious traditions of the Indo-Europeans and others) its attitudes and actions, again in both precept and practice, has rarely been truly free of this absolutism (and consequent intolerance) that is rooted in Judaism.

Again, one can find many exceptions to these general remarks, both in practice and in the core teachings of these three religions. 

This absolutism has generally persisted and prevailed in all the three major Abrahamic religions, with large variations in their branches and over time. 

As religious faith and affiliation waned in many countries over the last century, so also did this absolutism, at least in the religious sphere if not in others. 

However, we have been seeing resurgences of religious faith and affiliation, for better or worse.

Unfortunately, there have been accompanying surges, typically associated with weaponizations of religions for political-economic purposes, of absolutism, disrespect, and intolerance.  

These surges have not been confined to within the branches of the three Abrahamic religions. They have been very strongly evident in non-Abrahamic ones. 

Absolutism in Economics, Politics and Other Human Affairs

In the economic and political spheres, we again encounter absolutist views, with "statist" opposed to "democratic", "capitalist" opposed to "socialist", etc.

In the closely associated social sphere, one finds again "individualist" and "collectivist" views, with extreme versions of each being, typically, intolerant of other views and practices. 

In various other human endeavors, be these in medicine, education, science, engineering and other technology, industry, commerce, or whatever, as well as in all the humanities, arts and crafts, one also often encounters "absolutist" views, at times presented as "optimal" ones. 

In these views, anyone who disagrees with there being "one best way", or one set of "best practices" or "one right way" is regarded as a woefully misguided nuisance at best and, too often, as a dangerous crank who needs to be silenced and eliminated. 

In many of these cases, one may detect a strong association of these absolutist views with "forward moving" views of human affairs, and a disassociation of these with more "cyclical" and so also often generally more relativistic and accommodating views of human affairs.

2025 February 3, Mon.
Berkeley, California 

The Future of the Left-Some Preliminary Reflections

 
The Future of the Left—Some Preliminary Reflections

The Rise of Rightist Domination and Extremism

I lack knowledge and experience in politics and economics. However, based on whatever news I have had of events and trends around the world, combined with my own experiences and observations over the course of my life, I find myself increasingly alarmed.

Among other things, one notes the increasing resurgence of the Right, manifesting in extreme forms, such as the increasing concentrations of wealth and power, the consequent growth of inequalities, the very close, incestuous relationships between big capitalists, government, and military industries, the associated capture of the mainstream media, the rise of authoritarian governments headed by dictatorial “strongman” figures, exclusive hyper-nationalism, incitement of divisive and violent ethnic conflicts, the demonization of minorities, and the persecution of those who try to speak out against oppression and exploitation, or try to act against these.

This persecution is directed not only against the few who resort to armed resistance, which is to be expected, but also to those whose attempts at resistance to discrimination, subjugation, dispossession, injustice and violence are through the courts, through organizing of collective movements, theough peaceful protests and publicity, and through other nonviolent means.

****** 

Liberty, Equality and Fraternity

Because of all of this and more, many of us are searching for some means of hope for humans and others in our times as well as for those who will hopefully survive and succeed us.

In this context, I find myself returning to the ideals and practices most clearly expressed and utilized by what came to be known (by a historical accident of seating in the French parliament during the French Revolution of the late 18th century) as “the Left”. 

In particular, I find great value in the three basic principles, ideals or impulses articulated, in that early revolution, as “liberty, equality and fraternity”. I believe that these should form an essential part of the basis of our interactions with at least others of our own species, with each of these three impulses being constrained by the other two. 

One could go into some detail about this, but I will leave that for now as a mental exercise for the reader.

******

Difficulties and Mistakes

That being said, if one looks back at the known history of the Left, including what became of the French Revolution itself, and how the later “communist” revolutions, beginning in Russia in 1918, ran their courses, one has to pause and reflect, with some sobriety, on the difficulties encountered and the mistakes made. How can we learn from and avoid these difficulties and mistakes? 

******

Current Problems

Looking next at the current state of what is left of the Left, one notices several things, including the following:

a) Most countries, including the affluent ones, had not only retained significant levels of inequality of income, wealth, opportunity, and access to resources, but have, over much of the past four decades, been moving steadily towards increasing levels of these.

b) There has been disarray and disunity within the ranks of the Left, at the local, national, and global levels.

c) There has been a movement, especially in the more affluent countries, away from the prior main focus of the Left. This had been on reducing economic inequality and exploitation. Over time, the focus has shifted more towards what has come to be known as “identity politics”. 

Each of the longstanding issues associated with our less pliable human identities, such as ethnicity, gender and sexual orientation, surely deserves attention. Among many other things, the following, well publicized movements come to mind: 

 - the struggle for voting rights for women;

 - the attempts to combat the very long legacy and consequences of caste discrimination in India;  

 - the struggle for basic civil rights and against segregation and other forms of discrimination by African Americans in the U.S.A.;

 - the struggle against apartheid rule and its consequences in South Africa;

 - the attempts by gays, lesbians and others to be free of discrimination and gain basic rights all over the world.

However, increasingly, these struggles have become disconnected from the struggles on the more universal economic issues that affect the majority of human populations, even in the affluent countries. 

d) What is worse, the increasing focus of the Left on “social issues” has increasingly served divisive ends, disuniting us and distracting us from the core, common economic issues. 

This diversion of focus, away from unifying economic issues, has served to deepen some of the very divisions that had long hindered the formation of united fronts, at local, national and global levels, across all sorts of borders, to secure better deals for ordinary working people, and to free them from oppression and exploitation.

******

Destruction of  the Biosphere, including through Extinctions, and of Human Communities, including through Genocides

I had not mentioned the "environmental issues" that include such cataclysmic things as manmade climate change as well as a host of other things associated with pollution, destruction of habitats and extinction of species. Clearly, these affect all of us to varying degrees and need to be recognized and addressed. 

There are at least two dangers associated with this. The first is that of ignoring or dismissing these issues, no matter how lethal their consequences. The second is that of making these into niche issues, that are perceived, rightly or wrongly, as things that matter to only the affluent classes, ignoring both the basic needs of the others, and the very real adverse impacts of human activities, potentiated by technology, on their lives. 

I had also not mentioned the destructive, atomizing effects of economic pressures on communities and even families. These issues deserve a separate discussion, including things such as the physical and cultural genocides, within our own species, that have been ongoing for several centuries and show no sign of abating. 

******

What to Do?

Finally, looking forward, can the Left still contribute in meaningful, practical ways to increasing the chances of human happiness? Can it do the same for the long-term survival of our species, along with that of all the others? If the answers to both of these two basic questions are “yes”, then how can this be done?

2024 April 12th, Fri.
Berkeley, California

The Two Realms in Which We Live

 

_*The Two Realms in Which We Live*_

I had read, when young, some of the works of Erich Fromm and been touched by these. 

But rational thought is, at base, a survival tool, as are memory and imagination.  

We are driven by our instincts and emotions. These set our primary goals, with memory, imagination, and reason being tools for reaching these ends.

We, along with other sentient beings, including surely all animals and perhaps most plants, live in at least two connected realms. One is the physical, objective realm. The other is the mental, subjective realm. 

The physical realm is the one on which observations can be made by one person and independently verified by another. We access phenomena in this realm through our sense organs and instruments of observation, including those of measurement, the earliest ones being perhaps our own fingers, hands, feet, strides, etc., later standardized, along with days, lunar months, solar years, etc. 

This is the realm of study of the natural sciences, the physical universe of space and time, of matter and energy, and of information and its processing and transfer. 

This last part--information and communication--may, in fact, be a bridge between the two realms.

The physical, objective realm appears to be one that is shared by all of us and that exists independently of each of us. 

If you or I lose consciousness or die, the physical universe will continue. It was there before we were born. This is an assumption made by the natural sciences and by most of us, appearing to be a reasonable (but still far from uncontested) assumption.

The second realm--the mental, subjective realm--is the realm of experience and of the experiencer, and so also the realm of sentience/consciousness itself. 

I cannot usually access your mental realm, nor can you usually access mine. 

I cannot really "feel your pain", "experience your pleasure", sense your other sensations, including those of your five senses, or experience your emotion (beginning with fear or aversion and desire or attraction) or directly experience your thought, memory or imagined thing. 

The natural sciences cannot be applied to the mental, subjective realm. They are restricted to the physical, objective realm that we all share and in which we can independently make and verify observations of physical phenomena. 

Things such as faith and divinity exist only in the mental, subjective realm. 

Although reason, memory, and imagination are also part of that mental, subjective realm, they are limited in their reach and power, as are symbols and language. 

We usually agree that there is only one, shared, physical realm, although quantum physics and the multiverse theories cast some doubt even on that.

Is there an infinite multiplicity of mental realms, constantly being born with every birth of an individual sentience and also constantly disappearing with every cessation of sentience, including the irreversible death of a living organism?

Or is there also only one, shared mental realm of which our individual mental realms are either portals or portions, shielded from one another for functional or protective purposes, just as our individual, physical bodies are. 

I have had a couple of experiences, not communicable through reason or language, that suggest that this is so. 

I expect that many others have had similar experiences. 

We often tend to disregard these "breaks in the shielding", even if they are  consciously noticed, as misperceptions, coincidences or delusions. 

Delusions do, of course, occur, and some rationalists would group all spiritual experiences, faiths, devotions, divinities, etc. in that broad category, along with bhuuts, shaitaans, et al.

_2024-03-24 Sun._

_Berkeley, California_