The True Intentions (and Actions) of the State’s Founders

Did Ben Gurion want a Jewish state?

Ben-Bayit has an important post which I will reproduce with some translation:

Amnon Lord in a recent column claims the answer is NO. In a wide-ranging discussion of the recent “revelations” that Teddy Kollek served as a British “informer” prior to 1948, Lord comes to the conclusion that what drove the Mapai during the 1940’s was enabling absolute political hegemony over the “Yishuv” and in order to do that they cooperated with the British in 2 crucial areas: 1) keeping the local Jewish population quiet insofar as to what was happening to Jews in Europe. and 2) cooperating in uprooting the Jewish underground groups such as the Irgun and the Lehi.

According to Lord, the Mapai’s purpose in all of this was to maintain political control – not necessarily to advance the cause of an independent Jewish state. For that matter he claims that Mapai was perfectly happy remaining in political control as a British vassal – as long as they had political control.

ב-1945, נוכח המאבק המתפתח בין בריטניה לבין המעצמות העולות – ברית המועצות וארצות הברית – על ארץ ישראל והמזרח התיכון, היה האינסטינקט הפחדני של הנהגת הסוכנות, קרי בן-גוריון ושרת, לקבל חסות ופרוטקשן מהשלטון הבריטי הקיים. מפא”י בכלל לא חתרה להקמת מדינה יהודית, אלא עודדה את הבריטים להישאר; המדינה היהודית הוקמה כמדינת אין-ברירה כאשר היה ברור שהבריטים זונחים את בן-גוריון וחבריו ומפקירים אותם לגורלם, אולי בציפייה שאלה יזעיקו אותם חזרה כדי להינצל משחיטה.

In 1945, in light of the conflict which was forming between Britain and the rising superpowers, the USSR and the USA, it was the cowardly instinct of the Agency leadership, that is Ben Gurion and Sharet, to receive protection from the British regime. Mapai made no efforts to establish a Jewish state, rather it encouraged the British to stay; the Jewish state was created as a “no-other-choice” state when it became clear that the British are abandoning Ben-Gurion and his friends and are leaving them to their own fate, perhaps with the hopes that this group [Ben Gurion] will call [the British] back in order to same themselves from [Arab] slaughter.

מבחינה מדינית, התנהגות כמו ההלשנה של טדי קולק יכולה לקבל צידוק רק אם האוריינטציה החד-צדדית לכיוון בריטניה מוכיחה את עצמה. אלא שהנהגת היישוב לא קיבלה שום דבר בתמורה לשיתוף הפעולה שלה במשך שנות המלחמה. עד 1942 ניתן היה להעלות ארצה אלפי יהודים כדי להצילם מידי הגרמנים, אך הבריטים לא אפשרו זאת, והנהגת הישוב המפא”יניקית לא לחצה עליהם ואפילו סייעה לעצור ספינות עולים. אותה אוריינטציה בריטית לא הניבה שום פרי גם אחרי המלחמה, באותה תקופה גורלית שבין מלחמת העולם למלחמת העצמאות. בניגוד למיתוס האקדמי התעמולתי הנפוץ היום, כאילו “העולם” שהרגיש אשם בגלל השואה הקים את המדינה היהודית, הבריטים, שהיו חלק קובע ב”עולם” הזה, בלמו עלייה לארץ והתנגדו נחרצות להקמת המדינה. הם גם עודדו את הערבים לתקוף את מדינת ישראל לאחר הכרזת העצמאות. לא ברור אם כך איזו תועלת לאומית ומדינית יכלה לצמוח ממדיניות הסזון. נראה שבאותה תקופה פוסט-מלחמתית שיתוף הפעולה של תחילת שנות ה-40 כבר הפך לעסק מושחת, לסימביוזה שארוחה אנינה של צדפות, רוסט-ביף ויין טוב, כפי שמופיע בדיווח על הפגישות בין קולק למפעיליו, מסמלת את מהותה.

From a political perspective, behavior such as the informing on Jews by Teddy Kollek can only receive legitimacy if the one-sided orientation towards Britain proves itself. Unfortunately, the leadership of the settlement receive nothing in return for their cooperation during the years of the war. Until 1942 it was possible to bring to Eretz Yisrael thousands of Jews in order to save them from the Germans, but the British did not allow this, and the Mapai leadership of the settlement did not pressure them and even aided them in capturing [illegal] immigrant ships. The same pro-British orientation did not give any fruit even after the war – during that fateful period between the world war and the war of independence. in contrast to the propagandistic academic mythology which is so popular today, as if the “world” which felt guilty because of the Holocaust established the Jewish state, the British, who were key players in this “world” obstructed immigration of Jews and firmly opposed a Jewish state. They also encouraged the Arabs to attack the state of Israel after the declaration of independence. It is thus unclear what kind of political or national benefit could have arisen out of the policy of informing on Jews [the “season”]. It seems that in that same post-war period, the cooperation of the early 40s had been transformed into a corrupt enterprise. [It transformed] into a symbiosis whose essence is captured by refined clam dinners, roast beef and good wine (as meetings between Kolek and his operators are described).

It is worth noting that not only was Kollek involved in informing on underground fighters, but he was also the one, as Lord points out, who handed over Joel Brand to the British – thus preventing his attempt at rescuing Hungarian Jewry.
באוטוביוגרפיה של שמואל תמיר, שיצאה שנים לאחר מותו, יש תיאור מפורט של “קליטתו” של יואל ברנד בקושטא על ידי אהוד אבריאל וטדי קולק. מי שקורא את הקטעים האלה לא יכול שלא להגיע למסקנה שמעצרו של ברנד על ידי הבריטים באחת מתחנות הרכבת בוצע בעזרתם הפעילה של קולק ואבריאל, כלומר שהם תפקדו כסוכנים בריטים. הסגרתו של יואל ברנד, שבא להציע לבריטים את העסקה של אייכמן להצלת יהודי הונגריה, נועדה קודם כל למנוע ממנו לקומם את דעת הקהל בארץ ובעולם היהודי. אפשר להתווכח אם היו סיכויים כלשהם לביצוע עסקת ה”משאיות תמורת דם”; אבל ודאי שניתן היה, בעזרת יואל ברנד, לבצע הרעשת עולמות על טבח יהודי הונגריה. זה בדיוק מה שהנהגת היישוב פחדה ממנו לאורך כל תקופת השואה, שמא דעת הקהל היהודית בארץ תצא משליטה.

In Shmuel Tamir’s autobiography, which was published years after his death, there is a detailed description of Joel Brand’s “absorption” in Istanbul by Ehud Avriel and Teddy Kolek. Whoever reads these sections can not help but arrive at the conclusion that Brand’s arrest by the British in one of the train stations was achieved through the active aide of Kolek and Avriel, that is, that they acted as British agents. The handing over of Joel Brand, who came to offer the British Eichman’s deal for the rescue of Hungarian Jewry, was intended primarily to keep him from stirring public opinion in Eretz Yisrael and in the Jewish world. One can argue whether there was any chance of success for the “trucks for blood” deal; But it is certain that it was possible, with the help of Joel Brand, to create a world-wide shakeup regarding the slaughter of Hungarian Jewry. This is precisely what the leadership of the Yeshuv feared throughout the entire Holocaust, lest the Jewish public opinion in Eretz Yisrael will move beyond its control.

So on this Holocaust Memorial Day and Independence Day period all I could think about was two things: 1) How the leaders of the Zionists (and later the State) will often do anything to maintain political power – and thus can’t be trusted with our welfare and 2) How miraculous it is that the Jews have a state despite of all this.
Chag Sameach!!!
From Chardal, here.

תחשוב לבד!

ביאור הגר”א משלי ו’ ט’:

עד מתי עצל תשכב ע”ד מ”ש אם אין אני לי מי לי ואם לא עכשיו אימתי והן נגד ב’ דברים חכמה ומעשה.

אם אין אני לי מי לי הוא לענין חכמה כלומר שאם אין אני אחשוב בשבילי מי יחשוב בשבילי ואם לא עכשיו אימתי הוא לענין מעשה שאם עכשיו לא אעשה אימתי אעשה ואמרו עכשיו ולא אמרו היום כלומר אפילו באותו יום עצמו אם לא אעשה עכשיו אימתי.

וזהו ג”כ כאן עד מתי עצל תשכב הוא בהעדר המעשה כי כאשר שוכב אינו עושה כלום אבל יכול לחשוב. מתי תקום משנתך הוא בעדר המחשבה כלומר אם אין אתה עושה עכשיו אימתי תעשה ואם אתה אינך חושב בשבילך מי יחשוב בשבילך.

Want a Proven Segulah for Speaking in Public?

Say this:

דָּבְקָה לֶעָפָר נַפְשִׁי חַיֵּנִי כִּדְבָרֶךָ

דְּרָכַי סִפַּרְתִּי וַתַּעֲנֵנִי לַמְּדֵנִי חֻקֶּיךָ:

דֶּרֶךְ פִּקּוּדֶיךָ הֲבִינֵנִי וְאָשִׂיחָה בְּנִפְלְאוֹתֶיךָ:

דָּלְפָה נַפְשִׁי מִתּוּגָה קַיְּמֵנִי כִּדְבָרֶךָ:

דֶּרֶךְ שֶׁקֶר הָסֵר מִמֶּנִּי וְתוֹרָתְךָ חָנֵּנִי:

דֶּרֶךְ אֱמוּנָה בָחָרְתִּי מִשְׁפָּטֶיךָ שִׁוִּיתִי:

דָּבַקְתִּי בְעֵדְוֹתֶיךָ יְדֹוָד אַל תְּבִישֵׁנִי:

דֶּרֶךְ מִצְוֹתֶיךָ אָרוּץ כִּי תַרְחִיב לִבִּי:

.From Mar’eh Hayeladim in HebrewBooks, here

Manipulating the Rabbis

יעור ויסלף

(Rav Hirsh Peysach Frank, zt”l)
I have a tough time with letters like this the one about to be posted, simply because it may not fall in line with the opinions of my rabbeyim. However, the lessons we can learn from these letters are immeasurable. We need them to show how the zealots not only manipulated public opinion today and for generations to come, but they also managed to sideline important players while they were still alive. They sold the world a pack of lies, all under the guise of “Frimkeit.” Another topic of interest – person of interest, rather – is Rav Hirsh Pesach Frank, zt”l, Ravof Yerushalayim. The zealots have a real problem with him, since he accepted the job as Rav of the Rabbanut Yerushalayim, but they can’t deny his greatness like they do with others. So they came up with this story of how he lost 2 children to hunger – which is true, I think – and that’s why he HAD to take the Rabbanut job. That would be OK were it not for the following letter, which shows what he thought of the Hungarian Kanoyim. The letter was written to his Mechutan, who was active in the Mizrachi.Manipulating

‘As I wind up my letter, I should let his honor know a bit of the affairs of the town [Jerusalem], though it is not my way to write such things, for we could not write enough. However … directed us to inform his Honor. According to … his Honor has the ability to correct things. Having heard that it will of benefit, I find myself obligated to uncover the mystery enveloping the conduct of our city.

The Gaon, our Master RA”Y Hakohen Kook (may he live) was accepted here at Rav by the majority of the Holy Community here. It is well known that the members of Kollel Ungarin are envious of our Russian and Polish brethren. Especially, so that the proceeds earmarked to the Hungarians should increase, it is not good for them that the Chief Rabbi of the Holy City be other than Hungarian. So what did the members of Kollel Ungarin do? A few of them gathered together … At their head the old lad … He propagandized to found Vaad Ashkenazi (Ashkenazic Council). Now this old lad is a great expert in arranging elections from all, revealed only to him. The entire electrocal process is invisible. It is difficult to describe in writing his diligence in this matter. He puts together a list of a large committee, also a steering committee. On the surface, all is lovely. On the inside, all is rotten, for from the ranks of the Hungarians and Galicians he picks … youngsters and from the other kollelim, when he sees an old man or imbecile who won’t understand his tricks, he brings him into the Vaad. So the result of the invisible election is that he is the Secretary and young fellow… the Chairman. They write and sign tens of thousands of letters to America and the entire world in the name of all the Ashkenazim in Jerusalem … that Rav Hayyim Sonnenfeld is the Rav here, when all see and know that R. Hayyim Sonnenfeld was never, and will not be, the Rav, for he is an old, frail man for whom it is not possible to get involved in the affairs of the town. But this old lad uses him and his name as a pawn to destroy an entire city. He and his gang of empty fellows publicly, brazenly insult the Gaon Kook (may he live). The old lad got together with young writers who frequent the home of the ancient Rav Yishak Yerucham Diskin (may his light shine), for this old man is under the influence of young secretaries… They manipulate him whether way they please and obtain his signature for all their antics. In my estimation, he is not guilt at all for he cannot see writing, and signing is also difficult for him The secretaries made for him a stamp of his signature which is an exact replica and they write and sign whatever they please. Woe to a generation whose leaders are such lads, little foxes.

About six weeks ago, I spoke with Rav Hayyim Sonnenfeld, and at one point, I asked him if it right that he signs himself as the Rav of the Ashkenazim in our Holy City?… He answered me that the truth is, he himself does not sign so, but they made for him a stamp and wrote this on it. The Gaon, Our Master RAY Kook (may he live) is the Rav here. All the largest institutions are under his presidency. He is the Rav of the city and carries the burden of the community. They placed new, inexperienced people to carry the load of the community … These sycophants and insolent fellows stroke these old men to their advantage. I wrote these things hurriedly, without order, as it does not fit my temperament to take care of such things. The upshot is, if his Honor can publicize the truth that the aforementioned elder sages – without disparaging them – are not communal leaders and one cannot pay attention to their signature. The affairs of the Jerusalem community, general and specific, temporal and spiritual are neither the domain of the elder sages nor their followers, who as a rule are simple folks who have put on a cloack of hypocrisy, announcing that they are zealots of the Lord. They use the names of the elders sages to blind peoples eyes, while anyone discerning sees that their aim is not truth, They employ smut sheets to stir up controversy in Israel.

His honor should let me know if any benefit may come of my words, which are but a drop of the sea of what should be known… ‘

From Circus Tent, here.

‘Stolen Capital Will Decrease, But Savings From Earnings Will Increase’

Keynesianism Is A Mystical Religion That Believes Paying Taxes To Government Makes You Richer Because The Government Is Wise

I came across this post today at Mises.org by William Anderson, reposted at EPJ, about Tax Day. It’s important to read in its entirety, then I’ll explain how it relates to mystic religion.

—–

April 15 is here and we are required to do the following: tell the government our income and send much of it to Washington.

Austrian-school economists are likely to tell you this is a bad thing and that taxes and government spending lower our living standards. In other words, the more government we are required to finance, the poorer we will be. According to the Austrians, economies grow through capital investments reflecting time preferences of individuals. Furthermore, Austrians actually claim that individual savings lead to economic growth. The more we pay in taxes, the less money we have for capital investment and saving. In other words, the more taxes we pay, the less we have for the building blocks of economic growth.

However, disciples of John Maynard Keynes, like Paul Krugman and others, take a rather different view. For them, wealth is achieved by spending, which creates economic growth. When consumers don’t spend enough, government rescues the economy by upping its spending. Because of this, should government raise taxes, it actually stimulates the economy more than individuals can do through their own spending. We could allow people to spend their money as they see fit. But, it’s better to be on the safe side and tax as much of it as possible, instead.

The Keynesian “Balanced Budget Multiplier” makes it all possible. It is a version of 2 + 2 = 5. The tax-fueled magic is explained as follows:

  • All spending has a “multiplier” effect. Spending increases the incomes of others, who then spend their increased income, and the pattern continues indefinitely.
  • Individual savings, according to Keynesians, are “leakages” from the system, and if not offset by equal “injections” via government spending or increased exports, the “multiplier” then works in reverse, pulling the economy into recession.
  • Government tax increases, however, have two-fold positive net effects. First, government spends new tax revenues, which quickly multiplies and creates new jobs. Second, by reducing individual incomes, people must spend larger percentages of their incomes to uphold their present standard of living. (The famed Keynesian “multiplier” equals 1 over the savings rate, so the less we save, the greater the multiplier.)

The “logic” of the balanced-budget multiplier differs from the logic of taxation and spending in Denmark. There, individuals pay most of their income in taxes, but supposedly receive marvelous government services that are more valuable to them than what they would have purchased on their own had high tax rates not existed.

Instead, the “Balanced-Budget” multiplier creates wealth by destroying savings. Austrians obviously disagree, and the “reality gap” between Austrians and Keynesians is widened. Austrians emphasize savings, capital accumulation, market prices and market interest rates, profits, losses, with entrepreneurs making decisions in an uncertain climate under the umbrella of economic calculation.

Keynesians promise an easy way out. Just give money to the government, which will spend and spend, and the spending multiplies prosperity. Interestingly, modern intellectuals will tell you that Keynesianism is “real world,” while Austrian economics is “pie in the sky.”

On April 15, Keynesians will contribute to growing prosperity by sending more money to Washington. However, Austrians likely will have a different take.

——

So, we are supposed to believe, according to Keynesian economics, that being robbed means we are becoming wealthier. That government spending is somehow magical because when politicians spend the same money on their own stuff, such as killing people or giving billions to Israeli or Arab despots, it somehow creates prosperity, whereas when you spend that money on what you actually want, it makes you poorer.

So I’m in the middle now of Volume I of Murray Rothbard’s An Austrian Perspective on the History of Economic Thought. It’s such a well written book and so fantastically organized, it’s a pleasure to read. Rothbard writes like the Rambam in terms of organization, though Rothbard is more verbose. It is impossible to be more succinct than Maimonides, unless you’re Rashi, but Rambam was clearer than Rashi most of the time. Maybe I’m the first one to make that comparison.

Anyway, Rothbard writes about the history of a town in Germany where a guy named Bockelson decided Jesus wanted everything collectivized and to each according to his need etc. Sound familiar? And that everyone was going to be forcibly converted to his brand of Christianity called something or other. Anabaptism maybe? I don’t care enough to double check.

He ended up getting sieged along with his followers while everyone was starving because the division of labor broke down, as it always does in forced communism. Rothbard writes the following about Bockelson, towards the end, after he had already declared himself king and everyone was starving to death.

It is not surprising that the deluded masses of Munster began to grumble at being forced to live in abject poverty while the king and his courtiers lived in extreme luxury on the proceeds of their confiscated belongings. And so Bockelson had to beam them some propaganda to explain the new system. The explanation was this: it was all right for Bockelson to live in pomp and luxury because he was already completely dead to the world and the flesh. Since he was dead to the world, in a deep sense his luxury didn’t count. In the style of every guru who has ever lived in luxury among his credulous followers, he explained that for him material objects had no value.How such ‘logic’ can ever fool anyone passes understanding.

And then I realized, the Keynesian nonsense ‘logic’ that giving your money to politicians and bureaucrats makes you richer, is the same exact thing. All western society has been indoctrinated into a religion that essentially preaches the government as King Bockelson. Bockelson can live in luxury while the his people starve because Bockelson is beyond the flesh.

And Washington can live in luxury while its subjects are forced to pay the taxes that Washington consumes, because giving Washington money makes the people richer, since Washington is beyond the flesh. Spending makes you richer. Savings makes you poorer. The more money politicians have, the better off everyone is. The richer Bockelson is, the better off his people are.

It’s the same religion. Keynesianism and insane early protestant Christian messianic communism.

From The Jewish Libertarian, here.