Other Questions

Dear friends,

It's been quite a hectic time since Halloween and the double Rob birthday, which was the last time I wrote to all of you, so I am taking advantage of the relative quite when nothing happens and everything is closed on Christmas. I'm not going to talk too much about December in this email, because that would take to long, but if the fates align I will send an email about December in the next few days (or I might just wait until I arrive in Thailand to describe the whole journey).

I did a lot of things during November, which has not been typical during this trip. Usually I've spent more time trying to develop a routine. But somehow because I did so much more, talking about what I did seems duller than normal, so instead this email will be more about what has been going through my head, with stories about what I've been doing used as accompanying examples. I hope you enjoy this reading material during your break, and more than ever, I welcome your thoughts, comments, feedback, and whatever else, both because I want to hear about you, and because neither of the two main themes here are well resolved, or really resolved at all in my head, and I find new ideas good for complicating and growing my own opinions.

Exploring Spirituality, Areté, Quality, Unity, Energies, or Whatever Else You Want to Call It

Naming the Nameless 

In the past few months, more so than ever before, I have been dabbling, learning about, and developing my own thoughts and belief regarding the supernatural, or those things that are not detectable by the five senses or explainable by current scientific method. One of my difficulties has been giving this thing a name. Many people who dabble in such forces do so through organized religions and are therefore happy to refer to these forces as God or gods. My opposition to organized religion and my disdain for the way in which I find the word God to be used on a regular basis means God didn't even make the short list in the title. But I've found that every other word is also loaded in its own way. Spirituality is the broadest term but brings up ideas of voodoo or of actual spirits to most people, and that is far from what I am looking into. The other terms are ones borrowed from various sources that I've encountered the past months and years. Some of my favorites because they are not usually seen in this context are Quality and Arete, borrowed from Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance. Quality is tough because it is a commonly used word for something entirely different (or so we think). I was excited about Arete because it is not a common word, so I could ascribe whatever meaning I wanted on to it, use it more as a shorthand than a reference. But when I did some research on the word, the real meaning turned out to be too far from what I was looking to describe. So I will probably jump around and use different words, as one feels more or less suitable to any given sentence.

My Path to Superstition 

I've always had a certain fondness for superstitious beliefs, for the idea that holding certain objects can change an outcome, that things happen for a reason and that the bad is meant to lead me to a greater good later on (or to punish me), and that my mindset can alter the reality in front of me. Even during my most anti-spiritual, scientific oriented years in high schools, I still enjoyed toying with the idea, believing and not believing at the same time. In other words, I was predisposed to develop these ideas further since I was very little. Furthermore, I have been involved in activities and circles that posit that energies can affect outcome for a long time, even if those energies are scientifically based. I have been practicing meditation in some form or another since I was very little, and in all of my leadership work, the central idea always revolved around creating positive attitudes, energies, and atmospheres. We can come up with complicated psychological, sociological, physiological, and chemical reasons why these things may work scientifically, but ultimately the unscientific equation was simple: positive energy creates more positive energy, negative energy creates more negative energy.

Sometime in college, when asked about religious beliefs, I started answering that though organized religions had no appeal to me, I was very open to the idea that there are forces out there beyond our detection through the five senses or scientific instruments. This was already a big leap for me, but very passive. Now we fast forward to this past summer. Before heading out to Kalamazoo I spent a couple of days in Ann Arbor and met up with Camille. Camille and I hardly ever meet, have spent very little time together, but somehow every time I meet her she sets my brain working over time. This time we had a long discussion about this topic of spirituality. The word "unity" in the title is borrowed form her. None of what she said was particularly new to me although it was all framed in a new way. In the end we agreed that we are probably looking at the same thing just from different sides. But she said something during the conversation: once you understand the existence and brilliance of this unity, what could be more important than to explore it further? (not a direct quote). Both that question, and realizing that I was looking at the same thing, opened me up to listening. And I think this was in many ways the most important step because many of the same messages were around me all the time but I just brushed them off instead of really observing them. For example, during my birthright trip one of my friends talked about how much happier she is in a plant filled nature than in the city because the city is full of heartless concrete and in nature she exchanges energy and love with the plants around her. I am fairly certain I used to hear comments like that all the time, but brush them off as metaphorical or silly. But this time I really listened, and really believed.

In Israel I seem to have fallen in with a more spiritual crowd. It started with the Lakatim trip (which you can read about in the last update) which was full of energies which we can't smell or taste, of connection with trees, with people, with a group, and with the planet. More specifically there was one person in the group who I spoke with a lot. She is involved in a movement in called Love Revolution (http://www.loverevolution.co.il/ Hebrew only) that holds that we need to start the fixes for the problem in the world by actively displaying love towards one another. They have a lot of activities, ideas and politics like anywhere else, but the basics and the principles are very lovey-dovey hippie-dippie. I used to listen to people in those spaces purely out of politeness, wait for their out of this world explanations and solutions, and then smile to myself and think something like "they're so cute". But something had shifted and I was open. All of the sudden I was listening earnestly, learning, absorbing. I wouldn't say I agreed with or believed in everything, but I was having a meaningful discussion, or meaningfully learning at the very least. And the amazing thing is, the more open I became, the more I either ran across people and things connected at this different tether, or I started noticing it were I hadn't noticed it before. Suddenly every book I read was about destiny and fate, about controlling your reality with mind and thoughts, making reality with our minds. It seemed like very person I met at a party or every time someone picked me up hitchhiking, they would actually be actively working or studying some branch in this wide amorphous field. And I was gobbling it all up. Perhaps the most meaningful encounter leading me along was one of my couch hosts, Gaya, who is one of those who really lives in this world. She talks about people shaping their reality with their thoughts and about the universe conspiring to bring us where we need to be not as an idea or a theory or a point of exploration, the way I feel about it. For her it is the truth staring at her. But somehow, Gaya is down to earth in many ways, she is connected, and she does not pretend to be enlightened or have the answers, and in that way her ideas are that much more believable. I was able to develop and organize my ideas even more under her guidance.

My Experience with New Forces 

Aside from hearing and learning about these ideas from others, I have begun to experience them on my own in various ways and places in my life. The clearest example is in hitchhiking. Since the Lakatim trip I started hitchhiking all over Israel, and now have been doing my fair share in Europe as well. When I was taught to hitchhike, I was told that it is 99% attitude. You have to feel good in the spot, you have to make a connection with the drivers coming by, you have to be in the right state of mind and connected to the right energies, otherwise it will never work. The results have been impressive and surprising. Every once in a while I'll stand in a spot that looks good, but after a couple of cars go by I'll feel that something is off. For good measure I'll stand there for 10-15 minutes, but no one will pick me up. Once I move to something that feels more right, I get picked up in two to three minutes. And I've been picked up twice now by people who tell me they never pick up hitchhikers. One specifically told me that she has not picked up a hitchhiker in at least 20 years. But apparently she could see my aura and could therefore tell both that I was a good person and that she needed to talk to me. Like any other belief, and especially a non-scientific belief, although we see this in science as well, it's easy for me to give myself the explanations I want for what happened and to remember the near past incorrectly to fit my theories. So maybe it is only after I leave a spot that I realize it felt wrong all along, and maybe it is only after I get picked up that I realize a spot felt very good. With this unmeasurable power and energy, it is easy for me to make myself believe a causal circumstance based on the outcome. But even if this explanation is true, I feel that there is something else at play.

Regardless of the complete Truth of these experiences and forces, they are a lot of fun, and very comforting. It explains in some way the belief in religion, though I find religion too rigid. I enjoy that I have complete control over how I believe these forces interact and don't have to confer with someone else, and even if I do, I have full power to reject their ideas. By more fun, what I mean is that I can weave a full story for myself out of my lucky strikes and misfortunes. If I believe that my attitude and ideas set a destination or a target and that the universe conspires to bring me to the target, I can come up with whole stories for anything that happens to me. So my inability to find a boat could be to avoid a big storm, or to make sure I go a certain route. And my flat tire could be to teach me something about patching for the future, or to make sure my friend's bike will hold up some time in the future when he really needs it. The past month has been a series of one failure and difficulty after the other (I will relate those in the next update). But this new belief makes it easier for me to laugh at the misfortunes and obstacles, learn from them, try to find a silver lining, but most importantly, try to imagine what the universe has in store for me, and when it will come about. Amazing links have already been made in my life through random occurrences. Just as an example, four years ago when I visited Israel, on my way back the airline I was on went on strike during a lay over and I was stuck in the airport in Rome for 2 days. During this time I befriended a woman from Romania, who I will probably visit and spend New Years with this year.

There is still a lot more exploring and development ahead of me, but I would like to end this section with the debate that rages in my head about these new ideas and pulls at different identities within me. My big concern is that these spiritualistic ideas are privileged, or are much more fitting for people in a privileged position, or at the very least that it is inappropriate for people, especially privileged people, to use these ideas when thinking about issues of oppression. Destiny and fate are tricky words because they are often associated with a preordained or unalterable future, but if we think of them simply as words to describe the trajectory and path of an individual's life, those leaning more in the direction of this spirituality I've been discussing would argue that either we are masters of our own destiny and that we can shape or reality entirely with our minds and thoughts, and/or that the universe leads us where we need to go to learn more, the universe being beyond human malleability. Anti-oppression activists, on the other hand, believe in real, albeit somewhat intangible, systems of power that are created by humans and therefore alterable by humans, that guide our path and limit our options along the way. Therefore they see a duty to fight the systems that oppress. In short, the more spiritually focused advocate for work internally and for acceptance of what comes, while anti-oppression activists advocate for work externally and for rejection of societal harms. I don't think anyone exists at a pure extreme on these, but they stand in opposition at their core. My problem is that as much as I like the idea of being able to change the world around us through changing our perceptions, I can't come to terms with the victim blaming it tends to lead to in cases of oppression. For example, one of my friends was talking about how women who suffer domestic violence tend to relapse into abusive relationships because they learn to expect abuse and if one expects abuse one wishes it onto herself. While I think there is some truth in this, and have heard some studies make a similar argument, contending that women who suffer domestic violence often seek out men with abusive tendencies in future relationships, I think there is a fundamental problem with the crux of the argument. The argument implies that if only we could teach women that they don't deserve to be abused or that it is unnatural, then it would stop. In other words, the women are the problem. I cannot accept this implication. positive reinforcement and teaching self appreciation and how to recognize abusive behavior is important. But the problem is a lot of shitty, violent men, who beat women. There may be many ways to address it, but that is the main problem, and it must be recognized and addressed head on as well. I am not willing to accept a theory that can easily slip into arguing that poor people have less because they don't believe they deserve as much or that people of color are discriminated against because they think they are worth less, because I know that isn't true. I know many people who suffer discrimination without believing in any way that they deserve it, and I know that systems of power are at play to insure some suffer while others thrive at their expense. The question I have to work out for myself is how to balance our agency to shape our own individual world and the systems of power that circumscribe our movement.

The Question of Zionism

A Definition of Zionism 

Zionism means many different things to different people. I have heard clear and subtle definitions of Zionism expressed, from Zionist and Anti-Zionist, that range from believing that Jews are better and have an unimpeded right to the whole middle east, to simply expressing a need for action against worldwide Antisemitism. Since all of these definitions are used by large groups of people, I don't think any is false, and I think much of the arguments around Zionism result from mismatching definitions. So before I delve into my thoughts about it I would like to make clear my definition and what I am referring to when I say Zionism. In my definition, Zionism is a movement that recognizes worldwide Antisemitism and see the establishment of a Jewish state somewhere in the world as a necessary and proper tool for fighting Antisemitism.

Influences on My Opinions

Having my origins in Israel means that Zionism has existed with me in some form my whole life. Zionism in Israel, especially for little kids, tends to be presented as an unquestioned good. Until I began to have conflicting influences later in high school, that was the position I held. In my later years of high school and early years of college, as I learned about oppression broadly, and the oppression of Palestinians specifically, I began to question Zionism more and more until I found it very unattractive. I don't know that I ever reached a point during that time when I was clearly opposed to Zionism, but I was close. The I had class with Dr. Elman. I never had a class that specifically addressed Zionism, but since Dr. Elman works predominantly on issues of women's oppression, especially violence against women, and issues of Antisemitism, that issue came up passively in all her classes. Dr. Elman's thought process and political philosophy (as much as I could glean from her classes), is quite unique, and in many cases is more complex, unconventional, and more seriously attacks the root, or is radical, than what any of my anarchist friends propose. But Dr. Elman often made comments in defense of Zionism as a necessary tool to fight global Antisemitism. For me this was reason enough to give pause to my growing disdain of Zionism, but the pause was not long, because in my circles in Boston, Zionism was just a specific form of racism.

Moving forward to when I arrived in Israel at the end of the summer, I was suddenly confronted daily with these thoughts and questions that I would normally only touch on here and there. When I arrived I think the best description of my opinion was that Israel's actions were inexcusable and that a Jewish state in Palestine may not be feasible, but that I still considered myself Zionist in the sense that I believed it was important to have a Jewish state somewhere to deal with Antisemitism. But over the months I I managed to have my ideas completely mixed together so that I am no longer sure what I believe. Conversations with people on my birthright trip, with international activists, with members from Anarchists Against the Wall, who chanted "A solution to racism, opposition to Zionism" on one of the marches I joined them for, all affected me. I also volunteered for a week with the International Solidarity Movement (ISM) where I attended a number of Palestinian Solidarity protests, got shot at by IDF soldiers (I was not hit but my friends were. Rubber bullets but it's still scary and hurts a lot), and had many discussions with international activists there. My final conclusion is that I have no idea what to think, but here is roughly how my thoughts break down.

Idealism, Reality, and Racism

The idealist in me has an easy answer to this question. Zionism, by practically any definition, is a form of nationalism, and the idealist in me opposes all forms of nationalism and the nation-state system in general. Even if I take a step below such an extreme stance, support for a Jewish state means support for a state that by definition favors certain people over others. And that's an idea that an idealist favoring equality really can't support. But while I am currently a big fan of idealism and try to allow myself space to be idealistic (you can see my argument in favor of idealism here http://turtlejourn.blogspot.de/2011_10_01_archive.html), I do mix in some practicality with what I support and don't support.

The practical side says that it's ok to bend ideals to face the fact that we don't live in a utopian word. I may oppose capitalism but I still get jobs and use money, because that's how the world works. Many of the Anti-Zionist activists I know argue against Zionism, among other things, because it is a nationalist movement, but they do not oppose the Palestinian nationalist efforts, black nationalism, or in general, nationalist struggles of the oppressed. The breakdown is roughly like this: In a world where the state is one of the most powerful entities, oppressed communities have a legitimate right to try to access this power. One of the big differences with Zionism is that until a movement based in nationalism of the oppressed succeeds, it is a struggle against oppression, but once it succeeds, it has the power of a nation state, it is no longer a struggle of the oppressed within its protected state, and can easily turn oppressive because it is almost certainly exclusive. And Zionism succeeded in creating a state.

But let me deviate a moment to a more mainstream issue. A state that favors a group of people will be discriminatory to some extent, regardless of how the laws are laid out. And discrimination is always bad, right? Not necessarily. The classical example to dissect discrimination in the US is affirmative action. Affirmative action is a form of discrimination favored by many anti-racism and anti-oppression activist. Let me clarify, discrimination does not equal oppression, and is not reverse racism because racism is a systemic form of oppressing a people. Discrimination is a way of discerning between people and treating them differently as a result. In the case of affirmative action the discerning is based on relative power relations in US society. People who are disenfranchised in society and given fewer opportunities throughout their lives are treated advantageously to try to balance the equation as much as possible. To simply say "all people should be treated the same by government/ universities/ employers" fails to recognize that people are not treated equally by individuals or by society, and that therefore being treated the same is not being treated equally. But affirmative action instills a system that discriminates, and there are unintended consequences of the system. For example, affirmative action currently does not account for sexual orientation or gender identification. Therefore a white person who identifies as LGBTQ or is in some other ways gender nonconforming does not receive any equalizing forces for the discrimination they face. Therefore they may miss placement against someone of color whose oppression is recognized by the system. Despite this imperfection, many anti-oppression activists agree that the corrective force does more good than harm.

The question is whether the same idea could be applied to the Zionist philosophy. I can't find a reasonable justification of the Zionist state in Palestine. The necessary oppression of the Palestinian people there outweighs the possible advantages of protections for Jews against worldwide Antisemitism, at least by my calculus. However, using my definition, that is not really the question. The question goes more like this. If a group of Zionists were able to find a habitable piece of land that is mostly uninhabited, lets say somewhere in the hinterlands of Australia, and were able to strike a deal with those who did still live there that is mutually beneficial, that everyone agreed to and was happy with, that resulted in those people either leaving or staying and agreeing to the system that would be imposed, and in that place they established a Jewish state, would that be a project worthy of support or not? It starts out promising, making every effort to avoid an inevitably oppressive situation. But it still sets up an inherently discriminatory system. but it is set up in defense of an oppressed people.

I don't have a good answer, and the question is not that relevant practically because I don't know of anyone working on this project. But for me the question is important because in order to lead a good discussion or debate I have to have my personal groundwork laid out. Until I have this issue resolved, I will not be able to come out clearly in favor or clearly against Zionism, defined as I have defined it.

Sneak Peak Into Last Month and the Future

I've been spending a lot of time thinking about these things, but I've also continued  to move around. Very briefly, in early December I left Israel and arrived in Istanbul to begin my overland journey to Thailand. Because of various issues along the way, I find myself in Munich today, awaiting my Chinese visa which should arrive in the next two days. From there I will begin a fast pace trip through Russia to Thailand, which I expect to take 2-3 weeks and which should get me to Thailand sometime int the third week of January. I'll be in Thailand and China until May or June, and spend the summer in the US, mostly in Portland with some visits to Michigan. Next fall remains a mystery. I hope to see you along the way.

I hope those of you who had the day off for Jesus's birthday celebrated well, be that skiing, Chinese food, or family and friends.