I have interspersed his e-mail with my replies.
I find your critique of Stauffer's analysis interesting. I agree that if his analysis is structured as you say, it is a good critique...
Except, that --
1. The constitution does not authorize the federal government to "guarantee loans" or even send "foreign aid". There is a provision for the federal government to borrow money, but none to loan money, or guarantee loans. There is , of course, no provision for it to take American money by force and intimidation, and give it to foreign governments. You almost admit as much, when you draw a carefull distinction between private funds voluntarily sent to Israel, and foreign aid. As a libertarian, I oppose all foreign aid. As an American of Irish descent, I am incensed that American Zionists do not support their favorite cause as the Irish American community was forced to do for generations-voluntarily.
Brendan, "American Zionists" did and still do support their "favorite cause" with their own time and money. Stauffer lashed out against that as well, noting that American Jewish charities and philanthropists have made grants or bought Israel bonds worth $50-60 billion. He called this expenditure of private funds by private citizens "a net drain" on the American economy. Much of that funding over the years went to reclaiming the desert, making a barren wasteland into an agricultural heartland. Irish-Americans' favorite cause, if I may be so bold, was the Irish Republican Army and its war of terror against Protestants and the British.
I realize that your libertarianism makes it hard for you to comprehend why the U.S. government should support anyone, let alone a foreign country, but when that country provides so much benefit both to us and to the world, I don't fear loneliness in my position of support for them.
2. The Arab embargo was largely the result of Nixon's delinking of the dollar to gold. When Nixon did that, the Arabs knew inflation was on the horizon, and banded together to guarantee the price of oil by raising it in terms of a weakened dollar. The war of 1973 also, of course, played a part. But, Arabs love gold, and will take the necessary steps to insure that oil buys gold at the same rate.
Fair enough. That just further supports my point that Israel, and American support for it in 1973, were only a minor influence on the Arab decision to enact an embargo.
3. Despite all your claims that Israel guarantees all these rights, it is still a socialist nation, with enormous debt . Whether or not a "democracy" exists in the Middle East has no real bearing on our vital interests there. The Arabs will sell us oil simply because we are the largest market, and they want to make money. Over time, this capitalist exchange will ameliorate the policial and economic conditions in the Middle East. Nothing that Isreal does or "stand sfor" is an any way a positive for that most basic principle--trade brings prosperity, prosperity raises living conditions, a raised standard of living brings more social concern and justice. By functioning as a thorn in the Arab mind, Israel is a hindrence to raising the standard of living in the Middle East. Pure and simple. Isreal should exist as a nation solely if the voluntary assistance from global citizens is sufficient to help it exist. If its existence is due primarily to foreign aid promoted by ethnic voting blocs and championed by collective guilt over Christianity's complicity in anti-semitism, then in my opinion it should not exist.
Oh, if only Israel would go away, Arab countries could become prosperous and democratic? Actually the exchange in oil and other services seems to have limited use in transforming Arab society. Radical Islamists drink Coca-Cola, listen to Britney Spears, and pledge "Death to America." Somehow, I think that our desire for commerce is not the only cure to what ails them.
Israel's socialist-leaning economy troubles me -- and it troubles Israel as well. The crunch they now face, after their own equivalent of the dot-com-bomb, may lead to changes in their long-running economic morass.
Ethics and morality, in the end, are why we support Israel. As a commentator on my article pointed out, it would be easier not to support Israel; easier to prop up Arab autocracies and appease Islamofascists in return for oil and temporary safety. But America is not about doing things "easy" just for their own sake. America is about working hard and trying to do the right thing, for ourselves and, when we conceivable can, for the rest of the world. Because we know that if we don't do it, no one else will fill the void.
<< Home