Gil

You Can Not Own Land

by

“You can not own land.”
“Yes I can!” “Prove it.”
“Uhhhh…”

(Americans in particular will not like this politically incorrect post 😀)

An object can be made or bought from the person who made it. Whether it’s big or small, the claim to ownership is clear.

Land is not an object. It was not created by a man and can not be bought from its Creator. Land “ownership” is a murky claim that exploits confusion in language.

In legal terms, land is an area of jurisdiction, the place to which our agreement to live lawfully together extends. In economic terms, land is a collective resource for the entire community associated with it. In ecological terms, land is a foundational part of an intricate living system.

In religious terms, land is a sacred home, in which all are welcome so long as we live moral lives.

Capitalism is a good system for exchanging objects but over the years I’ve come to realize that on the core issue of land “ownership” – which has structural, cultural, and political ramifications across society – it is inadequate to reality and fails to provide an effective or ethical systematic approach to the issues prior to the exchange of goods and services.

True, alternatives like Bolshevism were a disaster and central economic planning has often proven ineffective in many ways, and often results in systemic injustice – but thankfully there is more than one flavor of Socialism.

So the question is:

How do we, as Zionists in the 58th century, restore our relationship with this land to its proper mode?

Ode to Jerusalem

by

Jerusalem is not just my home of 15 years.

It is not just a sprawling city of hundreds of thousands nestled among the Judaean Hills.

It is not just a political hotspot or a contested capital.

It is a symbol of the most basic collective human dream – of society together in harmony and fellowship.

It transcends the pettiness of politicians, the exploitation of capitalists, the violence of racists.

It is an emblem of a new and holy world order, founded on the idea that the human being is a living ikon of the Creator and created by the choices we make on a daily basis, in the halls and in the streets of this great city, to give respect, love, and grace.

It is a home for all seekers and lovers, and if you’ve ever gazed across its amber, twinkling lights from a moonlit rooftop and contemplated its past and its future, you know I do not lie.

Jerusalem call us and transforms us, and ever grows to embrace new souls and their lives, their sins, and their dreams.

No one – not one person, not one million people – can ever lay exclusive claim to Jerusalem.

Jerusalem is beyond the ownership of any group of men – it is the inheritance and the destiny of all humankind.

The day will come when Jerusalem is united, when the Big House stands again atop the ancient hill, when the poor man is saved and the vulnerable are protected, in the name of God.

We build towards that day.

שיבנה בית המקדש במהרה בימינו

Lincoln and Jefferson Trade Insults

by

I use AI every day for important things. Sometimes I like to use it for silly things. Some of these really cracked me up.

Lincoln: Mr. Jefferson, I hear Virginia wit is very fine. Shall we test it?

Jefferson: Gladly, Mr. Lincoln. Though I warn you: I drafted a Declaration. I can draft insults.

Lincoln: Then I’ll begin. Yo papa was so formal, when he sneezed, he wrote a preamble first.

Jefferson: Admirable. Yo papa was so tall, he had to ask Congress for funding just to buy a hat.

Lincoln: Yo papa was so fond of classical learning, he named the family mule “Cicero” and still lost the argument.

Jefferson: Yo papa was so frontier, his idea of interior design was “more log.”

Lincoln: Yo papa was so aristocratic, he called muddy boots “an agrarian crisis.”

Jefferson: Yo papa was so plainspoken, when he read Latin, Latin apologized and became English.

Lincoln: Yo papa was so committed to liberty, he freed a chair from the table and called it philosophy.

Jefferson: Yo papa was so honest, he returned a borrowed insult because it had too much interest.

Lincoln: Yo papa was so fond of architecture, he designed a chicken coop with columns and called it “Monti-cluck-o.”

Jefferson: Yo papa was so rural, his campaign slogan was “Four score and seven chores ago.”

Lincoln: Yo papa was so Enlightened, he tried to reason with a thunderstorm and lost by lightning vote.

Jefferson: Yo papa was so melancholy, even his jokes wore black.

Lincoln: Now that one had some bark on it.

Jefferson: And yours had rails, sir.

Lincoln: Yo papa was so wordy, his grocery list began, “When in the course of human hunger…”

Jefferson: Yo papa was so lanky, when he stood up, the weather changed.

Lincoln: Yo papa was so attached to states’ rights, he gave each sock its own constitution.

Jefferson: Yo papa was so Union-minded, he tied his shoes and called it national reconciliation.

Lincoln: Mr. Jefferson, I concede: your wit has elegance.

Jefferson: And yours has aim.

Lincoln: Then let history record: neither papa was harmed.

Jefferson: Only lightly amended.

Jewish Trinity

by

Love of Israel is love of humanity is love of Hashem.

3 loves = 1 love

It’s the Jewish trinity.

R Shim’on ben Yohai

by

Tonight does not mark the passing of R Shim’on ben Yohai – it marks his celebration.

After all the thousands of students of the founding father of the rabbinic movement, R ‘Aqiba, died en masse – he went south and ordained five judges in the sacred law of Israel.

R Shim’on was one of those five.

The Zohar paints a picture of his joy on that day – not only of his coming into his own, of being authorized to give guidance by none other than R ‘Aqiba himself, but of the foundation of Hebrew society being preserved under the threat of empire and colonization, after having suffered wave after wave of destruction.

The Jewish polity survived thanks to R ‘Aqiba – and some would say the Jewish soul survived thanks to R Shim’on.

That’s something to celebrate.

Hard Conversations With Soldiers

by

We need to talk about what too many soldiers in the IDF are doing.

But imho our brothers and sisters, sons and daughters, nieces and nephews, cousins and childhood friends, who go through the hell of war and put their lives on the line to defend us, because they love us and trust us, deserve far more than a public statement or debate, whether on a talkshow or a social media post.

They deserve conversations of respect, appreciation, compassion, and safety – personal conversations, private conversations, even though they may be truly hard conversations.

It takes no small amount of courage, love, and trust to sit with someone you love, for someone who put their life on the line for you, to hold space for them and for their lived experiences, and to ask difficult questions that must be asked, from the very roots of our soul.

What did you see?
Why didn’t you say anything?
Did you participate?
What did you do?

These questions are too complicated, too charged, too personal, to ask or address in a public forum, imho.

But they are too important for us not to ask at all.

May the Lord bless and guard our soldiers.

May the Lord’s countenance shine upon them and grant them grace.

May the Lord grant them his loving attention and place upon them peace.

Don’t Pick a Side

by

You can say I support genocide and apartheid all you want…

You can say I support terrorists and am a naive traitor all you like…

But you live in a movie and every day I devote my thoughts, words, and actions to doing my part to build a better world for my children’s future children, a home for Israelis, Palestinians, and anyone who wants to join the party as full and equal citizens of this amazing country in this beautiful land, with all the rights and responsibilities that come with being members of civil society in the 21st century.

Full stop.

The future is Pro-Israeli, Pro-Palestinian, Pro-Humanity.

Don’t pick a side.

Two Sides to a Flag

by

This post is definitely politically incorrect but I’ll be honest…

I have a problem with the 🇵🇸 flag.

For me, it represents a history of exclusionary Pan-Arabism and organized violence against innocent people.

I have seen it used, again and again, as a symbol of the denial of legitimacy to my country. The denial of humanity to my people.

People waving the 🇵🇸 often mean harm to me and my family, and sometimes it’s hard for me to separate between the flag and the waver.

BUT.

I am painfully aware that many people could say much the same thing about the 🇮🇱 flag.

For them, the flag represents a history of exclusion and marginalization, dispossession and disenfranchisement; it is the flag of the organized violence of gangs, militias, and armies, directed towards them and their families, in their homes and communities.

For them, it is a symbol of conquest and invasion, of disruption and dislocation, of erasure.

It is a flag waved by too many people who deny their struggle, their history, their rights, their humanity, their very identity. People who at best are indifferent to violence committed against them, and who, disturbingly often, are the ones committing the violence.

While waving the flag.

What for me is a natural expression of the historic prayer to return home and build a country where we can be free to live as God intended – is for too many people a painful reminder of all that they, their parents, and their grandparents have endured and continue to endure to this day.

What for me is a symbol of fear and trauma, a pervasive and overwhelming denial of who I am and my right to be me – is actually for many people a symbol of connection, family, peoplehood; of defiance against injustice and of the ability to flourish in spite of it.

There are two sides to a flag, two sides to what it means and what it represents. Two sides to Alex Sinclair ‘s (in)famous kippa. Two sides to the story of this country.

It is natural to see one’s own side of things, at first. But it is crucial that we learn to see other sides – and to catch glimpses of ourselves through others’ eyes.

Especially through the eyes of the vulnerable and the violated in a society where we wield real power over the lives of others.

Honestly, I don’t think two states is the right solution to the problems we face… but a flag is not a solution; ultimately, it’s a symbol of the hope that solutions can be found, if we work together to build a better country.

A kippa – which itself symbolizes the life-affirming awe of the Creator of all things big and small, together – is certainly an appropriate garment with which to express that hope.

Putting a 🇵🇸 flag next to a 🇮🇱 flag on a kippa isn’t promoting one solution over another (although I’m aware Alex does have ideas on the subject) – it’s doubling down on that hope.

Doubling down on peace.

In the name and to the glory of the Creator of us all.

Can I get over my complicated feelings about a flag – and get on board with that ethos?

I should hope so.

I don’t know if I’ll wind up getting a kippa like Alex’s; I happen to like my current big black knit kippa… and I certainly am not interested in getting into unprovoked altercations with racist, fascist police officers.

But I gotta say…

I’m sorely tempted.

AI and the Target List

by

I use ChatGPT and Claude every day. Claude is better than ChatGPT – both are fascinating and powerful tools – but they both have serious, structural limitations.

In its current incarnation, AI is like a very fast but very dumb research assistant with a peculiar set of cognitive biases (of which it’s perfectly aware when pressed but to which it’s very blind in practice), highly questionable research habits, and an irrepressible inclination to make unsubstantiated (or hallucinated) claims without qualification.

I use AI every day and I’ve never had a conversation where I didn’t have to correct it, in some way, shape, or form.

I would never rely on AI for an irreversible decision. Certainly not before thoroughly interrogating its claims.

It’s therefore mind-boggling to me that our defense forces (not to mention the US armed forces) reportedly rely on AI – the same models available to the public, with augmented data and additional integrations – for creating target lists.

You don’t get more irreversible than that.

And they know AI is fallible – but as long as it speeds up the killing process and allows them to conduct rapid strikes at scale, they’re willing to accept the deaths of innocent people wrongly targeted by an algorithm.

Not to mention anyone caught in the crossfire.

In case you’re wondering, the number of wrongful deaths the strategists overseeing our defense forces were explicitly willing to accept was 3,700.

Out of a list of 37,000 targets (each reviewed for exactly 20 seconds by an actual human being) they knew that at least 3,700 of them were mistakenly identified as targets (the actual number was probably much higher) and were not actually connected to the enemy and they killed them anyway.

“Fog of war” doesn’t apply to that kind of cold calculus.

Imagine if 3,700 Israelis had died on October 7.

(Basically, take the pain and suffering left in the wake of that horrible day and double it.)

I’m still trying to wrap my head around this brutal and hypocritical approach to modern warfare. I’ll be honest, I’m not worried about actually super-intelligent AI – I’m worried about the politicians and generals who insist on blindly using the inherently limited and very fallible LLMs we have today in order to make organized mass killing more “efficient.”