Letters Letters
Kudos on ‘Arab Awakening’ Shoreline, Wash. Your special issue on the Arab Awakening [Sept. 12] is one of the best in years. Great in-depth coverage we’ll never get in the commercial press, giving real dimension to the various movements and changes in the Middle East and North Africa. Thanks to all your contributors and editors. CHRIS NIELSEN Love and Honor but, Above All, Obey Shippensburg, Pa. Katha Pollitt’s examination of the contradictions in which Michele Bachmann has become enmeshed—putting herself forth as a leader while at the same time holding to St. Paul’s directive that wives be submissive to their husbands—is right on target; it reminds me of the heartfelt denunciations decades ago by a bestselling novelist of such biblical passages [“Subject to Debate,” Sept. 12]. Pearl S. Buck, who grew up in China the child of American missionaries and who knew a thing or two about the fundamentalist mindset, wrote in her bittersweet 1936 biography of her mother, The Exile: “Since those days when I saw all her nature dimmed I have hated Saint Paul with all my heart and so must all true women hate him, I think, because of what he has done in the past to women like Carie [Buck’s mother], proud free-born women, yet damned by their very womanhood.” In his February 12, 1936, review of the book in The Nation, Mark Van Doren quoted these powerful lines, which are, unfortunately, back in the news long after we would have thought they’d be relevant only to historians. ROBERT SHAFFER Shrinking Prisons? Ionia, Mich. The Sentencing Project’s report that Michigan “has closed twenty-one facilities” since 2002 is misleading [“Noted,” Sept. 12]. I have watched from the inside for twenty-nine years. Many of the reported closures have simply been consolidations. In the 1980s and ’90s Michigan built regional brick-and-concrete prisons (population about 1,200) with adjoining “temporary” prisons (pole barns, population about 1,000). Many of the temps have been closed on paper in the past decade and placed under the administration of the adjoining regional. The total population of the remaining prison is the sum of the temp and the regional. People are still in the beds of these “closed” prisons. RAYMOND C. WALEN JR. Bigots Turn on the Spigots Los Angeles Mark Oppenheimer needs to spend less time reading philosophy and more time reading the newspaper [“Sentimentality or Honesty?” Aug. 29/Sept. 5]. He claims that in the United States “even outright bigots tend not to think anymore that their bigotry should be written into the law” and that “America pretty uniformly sides with liberal democracy.” Is Oppenheimer oblivious of the fact that in a convulsion of Islamophobia, bigots in more than twenty-one states are pushing legislation to ban Sharia? Or that across the country bigots have tried to write their bigotry into law by persuading zoning boards and land commissions to block the building of mosques? We have a long way to go before we can blithely conclude that America uniformly sides with liberal democracy. STEPHEN ROHDE Oppenheimer Replies New Haven, Conn. I am grateful for Stephen Rohde’s letter, a useful reminder that many Americans, in particular Muslims, still face bigotry. I do not think I was being “blithe” when I wrote that in the United States the bigots “tend” not to push laws promulgating bigotry; a useful contrast would be France, where the movement to ban the burqa has wide and vocal support, or Germany, which truly oppresses Scientologists. In America, what is extraordinary are not the predictable outbursts of xenophobia but the strong resistance to them. We Americans get a lot wrong—our wars, our drug laws, our tax code—but we get religious liberty right. MARK OPPENHEIMER Spirit of Japan Laramie, Wyo. Re Hitonari Tsuji’s contribution to “Life After Fukushima” [Aug. 29/Sept.5]: What a beautiful way to express conditions in Japan after the double disasters of March. Tsuji’s words sum up for me what I have always felt was, and is, the spirit of the Japanese people. His words moved me as words have not done for a long time. “Even in the flood zone thick with mud, the cherry blossoms bloomed.” I hope they will continue to do so for a very long time. JO AELFWINE Easy Writer Gunbarrel, Colo. Kudos to The Nation for running Heather Hendershot’s meaty arts piece on the BBS boxed set from Criterion [“Losers Take All,” May 30]. While Hendershot’s otherwise freewheeling and perceptive analysis is focused on the “rise and fall” of the New American Cinema of the late ’60s and early ’70s and the “heroic new directors” who led the charge, nowhere are writers to be found in her mythological remixing. Saying Easy Rider “owes its coherence entirely to Nicholson’s performance” roils the ghost of Terry Southern—who based the George Hanson character on a Faulkner archetype miles beyond Hopper’s or Fonda’s literary ken. My father’s deft touch (much sought-after at the time) is evident throughout the film—from its American gothic tone and “iron in the soul” world-weary hipsterdom to the clear-speaking, dope-infused dialogue (also found in Terry’s Red Dirt Marijuana) that lyrically articulates the irrelevance and danger of establishment culture’s lingering and violent prejudices. As the creative team’s “elder,” and the only one with credibility at the time, Terry provided cohesion on the page and on the set, and helped secure Academy Award nominations for all three “writers.” While the BBS story is inspiring, my father’s oft-forgotten producing role on Easy Rider is a dark unspoken mark against the Raybert team—their decision to cut him out of their “big score” with Columbia clearly paved the way for what nice guys could expect from old friends in the new era of independent film. NILE SOUTHERN Hendershot Replies Brooklyn, N.Y. Terry Southern was undoubtedly treated poorly by Raybert (the predecessor to BBS), as well as by Peter Fonda and Dennis Hopper. One suspects that much of the blame lay with Hopper, whose behavior teetered between erratic and psychotic throughout the production of the film. A fully verifiable account of l’affaire Southern will probably never emerge, given that so many of the witnesses were high as events unfolded; but the upshot is indisputable: Southern received a flat fee and no share of the film’s impressive box office profits. Regardless of who really wrote Easy Rider and who deserved credit (or cold hard cash), though, I would maintain that the film’s strength is not its script. Some of the dialogue may be clever, but much of it is sluggish and heavy-handed, and the plot is underwhelming. The film’s photography and music are responsible for most of its compelling moments. Nicholson brings terrific energy to the picture as well, playing a character with only a modicum of screen time and not enough depth to evoke Faulkner, for this viewer at least. Nile Southern is quite right, though, to observe that the New American Cinema was not a utopia of “nice guys.” Their treatment of the women in their lives was particularly reprehensible. Luckily, the films often transcended the flaws of their makers. HEATHER HENDERSHOT Correction Patricia J. Williams’s column “Sex, Lies and the DSK Case” [Sept. 19] contained an inaccuracy regarding Nafissatou Diallo’s asylum application. Diallo did not lie on her application about being gang-raped in Guinea. Rather, she falsely claimed to prosecutors that she had been gang-raped and that she had reported the fabricated incident on her asylum application.
Sep 27, 2011 / Our Readers, Mark Oppenheimer, and Heather Hendershot
Letters Letters
Readers respond to the August 15/22 special issue on sports—only the second in the history of the magazine.
Sep 20, 2011 / Our Readers
Letters Letters
The power of community; CCP on voter ID; welcome, sluts!
Sep 14, 2011 / Our Readers and John Nichols
Visions and Revisions: On T.S. Eliot Visions and Revisions: On T.S. Eliot
Two volumes of T.S. Eliot's letters elucidate how the momentous achievements of his art were determined by moments of awful daring.
Sep 6, 2011 / Books & the Arts / James Longenbach
Letters Letters
Words as weapons, austerity in the eurozone, Francis Perkins, stop the foreclosures
Sep 6, 2011 / Our Readers
Exchange: Birthright Israel’s Jewish Journey Exchange: Birthright Israel’s Jewish Journey
Alexandria, Va. Congratulations to Kiera Feldman for her important article “The Romance of Birthright Israel” [July 4/11]. Arising out of concern about the decline in affiliation among young Jewish Americans, the Birthright Israel program is, as Feldman points out, an effort at “the selling of Jewishness to Jews.” This program has thus far sent more than 260,000 young Jews from throughout the world on free trips to Israel. “Welcome Home” is a predominant message, a reference to Zionism’s view that all Jews outside Israel are in “exile” and that Israel is the “homeland” of all Jews, who should immigrate to that country. Beyond concern over the propaganda aspects of the program, heavily influenced by advocates of the settler movement, the reason for a lack of involvement of many young Jewish Americans in organized Jewish life is precisely that Israel, not God or Jewish ethics or the traditional Jewish idea of tikkun olam (repairing the world), has become “central” to Jewish life. Israeli flags fly in many US synagogues; and many “religious” schools are teaching Israeli culture and Middle East politics, not religious concerns about what it means to lead an ethical life. A study by social scientists Ari Kelman and Steven M. Cohen found that among American Jews, each new generation is more alienated from Israel than the one before. Among American Jews born after 1980, only 54 percent feel “comfortable with the idea of a Jewish state.” The reason, Cohen explained, is an aversion to “hard group boundaries” and the notion that “there is a distinction between Jews and everybody else.” Israel claims millions of men and women who are citizens of other countries as being in “exile” from their real “homeland.” Why is it not content to be the homeland of its own citizens? There is a silent majority of American Jews who are not represented by the national organizations that speak in their name. Kiera Feldman’s report indicates why so many idealistic young people—seeking a world of justice for all, as the Hebrew Prophets did—are alienated from the Jewish establishment. They deserve something better. ALLAN C. BROWNFELD, publications editor American Council for Judaism (acjna.org) New York City As the largest funder of Israeli civil and human rights organizations, we at the New Israel Fund have a vested interest in young progressive Jews embracing a critical, fully informed and firsthand experience of Israel. The relationship between the American Jewish community and Israel is complex and ever-changing. Birthright is one of a number of organizations attempting to address this relationship. While there are some valid criticisms of Birthright, the portrayal of its agenda as monolithic is incomplete. While we disagree with Birthright’s decision to block a J Street trip, we have also seen it open itself to pluralistic content and politics on a broad range of views. Between 2006 and 2009, we partnered with Israel Experts to provide nearly a half-dozen trips titled “Peace, Pluralism & Social Justice.” These trips visited real Bedouin shanty towns in the Negev and Arab villages halved by the ‘67 line; they discussed Israel’s security measures and human rights extensively. These visits were accompanied by social change grantees of the New Israel Fund. Without Birthright, we could not have inspired these young Jews to grapple with Israel’s complicated reality. The full picture of Birthright, its funders and the Jewish community, like the Middle East itself, is more nuanced than presented in Feldman’s article. BEN MURANE, director of New Generations New Israel Fund New York City Although I’m a longtime critic of Israeli policies, I’m disturbed by Kiera Feldman’s article. It could have been written as straight fact, without the anti-Zionist innuendoes. If Birthright Israel has become an anti-Palestinian, pro-occupation enterprise, we need to know this. But Feldman also implies that it’s wrong for American Jews, part of a historically persecuted people, to promote a connection with Israel and their fellow Jews. In her zeal for the Palestinian cause, Feldman neglects to mention that some major Birthright funders are liberals. This includes Charles Bronfman and S. Daniel Abraham. Abraham is a major contributor to the Democratic Party and a dove who founded the Center for Middle East Peace. Yossi Beilin, an originator of the idea of Birthright, whom Feldman cites as a Labor Party “stalwart,” left the party and has headed the very dovish and left-wing Meretz Party for most of the past decade. He remains a stalwart for peace and a Palestinian state. Yes, J Street’s effort to organize a Birthright trip was rejected on the dubious grounds that it was too “political,” but it was intended as the kind of progressive trip that had been permitted under Birthright to a campus-based group called the Union of Progressive Zionists. The UPZ merged with J Street two years ago and was renamed J Street U, which has just independently undertaken a progressive tour of Israel similar to the one UPZ made through Birthright. With this kind of article, The Nation is not promoting reason and moderation in the public discourse about the clash of rights that is the Israeli-Arab conflict, but rather serving up more red meat for people who believe that everything about Israel and Zionism is bad. RALPH SELIGER New Orleans Kiera Feldman points to abuses in the Birthright Israel program. Abuses there are, both on the part of recipients, many of whom know a freebie when they see one, and the donors. Birthright Israel is propagandistic. It shows only the chauvinistic Zionist side and ignores Palestinian suffering. The strong sexual desires of the young participants are manipulated to create, through brainwashing, an army of twentysomething Zionist hardliners. Good points. But Feldman’s article smacks of bad faith. What did she expect when she accepted the free trip? She knew very well who was offering this free junket and why it was offered to her and not to the other 98 percent of the American people. By her own depiction of her journey she was more interested in laying out her objections to Israeli mistreatment of Palestinians and revealing the right-wing orientation of the underwriters than learning anything new on the ground. Israel could very well be a racist state, but it is clear that Feldman’s views on this matter were solidified before she arrived in the country. Finally, she vividly describes how directors of Birthright Israel have harnessed the strong hormonal forces of the young participants to a political agenda, complete with a suggestive photograph. The intense level of her scorn and mockery, however, makes one wonder whether her feelings had been hurt in one of those arranged flirtations with Israeli soldiers, the mifgash, whom she so pungently portrays. She shouldn’t feel bitter, though. Birthright Israel paid for the trip and The Nation Institute paid her to write it up. Not bad. LEO LAVENTHAL Feldman Replies Brooklyn, N.Y. Thank you for your thoughtful letters. I join Allan Brownfeld in lamenting the rise of Jewish nationalism in America. In Birthright, we see its demands and consequences. Ben Murane and Ralph Seliger point to the “Peace, Pluralism & Social Justice” trip offered by the tour provider Israel Experts (in partnership with the New Israel Fund and the UPZ) to illustrate Birthright’s “progressive” side neglected in my piece. Yet, out of 260,000 participants, only 200-odd Birthrighters traveled on this (long ago canceled) heterodox tour. As the recently nixed J Street trip demonstrates, ultimately Birthright is fabric of the same cloth of its founders and funders. Some of them might be considered liberal on issues unrelated to the Middle East, yet most share hawkish Israel politics and AIPAC ties. Seliger incorrectly uses “dove” to describe Birthright funder S. Daniel Abraham, an AIPAC board member. (Seliger also disputes my portrayal of Yossi Beilin, yet Labor Party “stalwart” accurately describes a politician who spent the bulk of his career—from 1977 to 2002—in the party.) In May, Israel Experts CEO Joe Perlov was named AIPAC’s “Ally of the Year.” “What did she expect when she accepted the free trip?” asks Leo Laventhal. (Answer: not the racist breeding project I encountered.) Especially since it’s free, should we not all the more closely examine the nature of the “connection” to Israel that Birthright fosters? Consider this: Birthright spokesman Jacob Dallal was previously the spokesman for the IDF. It is the purview of the left to imagine an alternate future, which brings us to Jewish Voice for Peace’s satirical website, Birthright for Us All. Criticizing Birthright’s fear of “miscegenation” and promising to “bear witness to the occupation,” the fake trip is advertised for Jews and Palestinians. Barry Chazan, the architect of Birthright’s curriculum, told me that such a mifgash would never happen on Birthright. “This is about a Jewish journey,” he said. One wonders where it will lead. KIERA FELDMAN
Aug 30, 2011 / Our Readers and Kiera Feldman
Exchange: Blueprints for a New Economy Exchange: Blueprints for a New Economy
Reimagining capitalism.
Aug 24, 2011 / Our Readers and William Greider
Letters Letters
Vouching for vouchers; Elizabeth Warren for president; three kinds of Republican idiots; Borgesian grammar
Aug 10, 2011 / Our Readers and Peter Schrag