Michael Lerner Discusses Hope, Politics and the Middle East
by Peter Ryan
On November 2nd, in a speech and discussion at Occidental College in Eagle Rock, California, Rabbi Michael Lerner, head of the Interfaith peace organization Tikkun, spoke about U.S. politics, the "war on terrorism," global poverty, spiritual activism, the power of hope and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
On the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Rabbi Lerner urged Israelis to end the Occupation and Palestinians to seek out a "rigid and principled" strategy of nonviolence. A true commitment to nonviolence would have to make room for "the humanity of the Other" and must be unwavering in its rejection of violence. Lerner acknowledged, however, that nonviolent resistance was always difficult and is, at times, unpopular with oppressed groups. "Many people often asked me," Lerner told the group, "How he can you tell the Palestinians to use nonviolence when so much violence was being perpetuated against them?" In the U.S. civil rights movement, Lerner noted, groups like the Black Panthers were bewildered by Martin Luther King's call to nonviolent resistance and his willingness to recognize the humanity of his oppressors. Whites had been using violence against blacks throughout the entire nation's history and now they were expected to resist nonviolently? At the time, many felt that Martin Luther King was simply being naive, Lerner pointed out, but history seemed to show that the strategy of nonviolence had turned out to be far more effective.
"Oppressors are always afraid that if they lift the their boots from the necks of the oppressed, that the oppressed will stand up and do the exact same thing to them," Lerner said. And, because of this, they cling to their oppressor roles. This, he reminded us, was a dynamic understood by leaders like Nelson Mandela when they used nonviolent civil resistance to fight against Apartheid in South Africa.
Rabbi Lerner also lamented the current state of affairs in Israeli politics, which seemed unable, currently, to develop a strong progressive movement. Israeli society, from his perspective, had become completely dominated by the ideology of fear. And there seems to be no reason to believe that this will change anytime in the near future.
He described Ariel Sharon's plans to remove settlements from Gaza as a "mixed bag." On the one hand, he observed, anything that relieves the presence of soldiers in that part of Palestine and improves the daily life of Palestinians is a good thing. He also noted that the precedent of dismantling settlements could be seen as a positive development, potentially giving momentum to additional settlement dismantling elsewhere. But Lerner does not see this as a genuine gesture toward peace on the part of Sharon. "The unilateral nature withdrawal," he said, "Is really stupid from the standpoint of Israeli security. It weakens the voices of Palestinians who want to make peace with the Israelis. It weakens the moderates and strengthens the extremists." He was also very skeptical of Sharon's intentions, realizing that the Prime Minister would most likely use this move to justify solidifying hold of many settlements in the West Bank. Israel still controls the borders of Gaza and hundreds of thousands of Gaza residents are facing hunger and food shortages because Israel is not letting supplies enter the area. Control over borders also means that Israel also will continue to continue to control Gaza militarily, being able to launch incursions into towns and cities whenever it sees fit.
But Rabbi Lerner criticized those on the left in the United States who would seek to paint the country of Israel as the "paradigm of evil," while ignoring human rights issues elsewhere. "Israel has done many stupid and bad things," he said, "but it is not the stupidest and baddest of the countries in the world." The United States, he pointed out, had done things just as bad or worse during its history.
The Politics of Hope and the Politics of Fear
The day that Michael Lerner addressed an audience at Occidental college was November 2nd-election day-and by all accounts it was going to be a close race between John Kerry and incumbent George W. Bush.
"The struggle today in American politics," Rabbi Lerner told the crowd, "can only be understood if you understand the several thousand year struggle between two different ways of understanding reality."
The first way of understanding reality, which Lerner referred to as the "cynical realist worldview," was based on the assumption that we are "thrown into this world as lone individuals, everyone out for themselves. Everyone looking out for number one." The rational response to the world of those who take this perspective is simply to place themselves in a position of advantage over other people before some else gets the advantage over them. In other words, it both assumes that everyone must fend for themselves in order to get out on top.
In the second understanding of reality, what Lerner calls the worldview of "realistic optimism," we are all fundamentally connected with each other. Our very first experience in the world, in fact, confirms this, according to Lerner-we survive as an infant only because we are given nurturing care by a mothering individual. Even those who have horrendous experiences with a parent, at some point, received a degree of support, otherwise they would not have been able to survive. This worldview is what Lerner associates with a genuine spiritual or religious politics-it assumes interconnectedness, moral responsibility and an abiding sense of hope.
But, in the aftermath of 9-11, the realistic-optimism worldview has been marginalized and the American political scene has become almost obsessed with the rhetoric of fear. Nowhere is this more evident than in the "war on terror," which seems to be the American governments attempt to make itself more secure by killing off those who would seek to harm us. The problem with this approach, Lerner pointed out, is that it simply doesn't work. In the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, he pointed out, the strategy of simply killing off terrorists has increased terrorism. The same, in fact, can be said of Iraq. Already by most estimates there are far more insurgents today in Iraq than there during the beginning of the U.S.-led occupation, despite the rate at which we have been attacking and killing off members of these groups.
In place of this, he offered an alternative strategy of proactive involvement in the world, what he called "the global Marshall plan." After World War II, the U.S. poured billions into Europe to help it recover from the devastation of the conflict. Today, according to Lerner, a similar strategy is needed for the Third World. "One out of three people living on the planet," he told the crowd, "survives on two dollars a day. America, which represents five percent of the world's population, has forty percent of the world's wealth. If the U.S. wants real security, then let the U.S. be and be perceived to be the greatest global force against poverty and homelessness in the world. If the U.S. wants real security, then let the U.S. be and be perceived to be the greatest force seeking to rectify the looming ecological disaster facing our globe." If we acted as an overwhelming force for good throughout the world, rather than merely seeking out our own military and economic interests, it would be much harder for terrorists to pick up new recruits.
Because we have shifted sharply toward the politics of "cynical-realism," most people are likely to interpret Lerner's suggestions as "naive" even though, for the same cost, they clearly would have been a more effective strategy than the invasion of Iraq, which is increasingly being seen as a defeat, rather than a victory, in the so-called "war on terror." Just as Martin Luther King's "naive" call to nonviolence developed into a sophisticated civil rights strategy, couldn't Lerner's suggestions also prove invaluable in easing political tensions throughout the world?
Either way, both sides, I think, would agree that we no longer have the luxury of ignoring the rest of the globe. Because we are all interconnected, Lerner reminded us: "We will never have true peace and security until the whole world has peace and security."
"Rather than simply saying 'God bless America,'" Lerner said, "We should be saying 'God bless America-and everyone else on the world as well.'"
--------------------------------
This article is a Middle East Window exclusive. It cannot be republished without the prior written consent of the editor. For information about republication rights, please contact: peter@middleeastfellowship.org
On November 2nd, in a speech and discussion at Occidental College in Eagle Rock, California, Rabbi Michael Lerner, head of the Interfaith peace organization Tikkun, spoke about U.S. politics, the "war on terrorism," global poverty, spiritual activism, the power of hope and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
On the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Rabbi Lerner urged Israelis to end the Occupation and Palestinians to seek out a "rigid and principled" strategy of nonviolence. A true commitment to nonviolence would have to make room for "the humanity of the Other" and must be unwavering in its rejection of violence. Lerner acknowledged, however, that nonviolent resistance was always difficult and is, at times, unpopular with oppressed groups. "Many people often asked me," Lerner told the group, "How he can you tell the Palestinians to use nonviolence when so much violence was being perpetuated against them?" In the U.S. civil rights movement, Lerner noted, groups like the Black Panthers were bewildered by Martin Luther King's call to nonviolent resistance and his willingness to recognize the humanity of his oppressors. Whites had been using violence against blacks throughout the entire nation's history and now they were expected to resist nonviolently? At the time, many felt that Martin Luther King was simply being naive, Lerner pointed out, but history seemed to show that the strategy of nonviolence had turned out to be far more effective.
Above: Rabbi Lerner lecturing at Occidental college.
"Oppressors are always afraid that if they lift the their boots from the necks of the oppressed, that the oppressed will stand up and do the exact same thing to them," Lerner said. And, because of this, they cling to their oppressor roles. This, he reminded us, was a dynamic understood by leaders like Nelson Mandela when they used nonviolent civil resistance to fight against Apartheid in South Africa.
Rabbi Lerner also lamented the current state of affairs in Israeli politics, which seemed unable, currently, to develop a strong progressive movement. Israeli society, from his perspective, had become completely dominated by the ideology of fear. And there seems to be no reason to believe that this will change anytime in the near future.
He described Ariel Sharon's plans to remove settlements from Gaza as a "mixed bag." On the one hand, he observed, anything that relieves the presence of soldiers in that part of Palestine and improves the daily life of Palestinians is a good thing. He also noted that the precedent of dismantling settlements could be seen as a positive development, potentially giving momentum to additional settlement dismantling elsewhere. But Lerner does not see this as a genuine gesture toward peace on the part of Sharon. "The unilateral nature withdrawal," he said, "Is really stupid from the standpoint of Israeli security. It weakens the voices of Palestinians who want to make peace with the Israelis. It weakens the moderates and strengthens the extremists." He was also very skeptical of Sharon's intentions, realizing that the Prime Minister would most likely use this move to justify solidifying hold of many settlements in the West Bank. Israel still controls the borders of Gaza and hundreds of thousands of Gaza residents are facing hunger and food shortages because Israel is not letting supplies enter the area. Control over borders also means that Israel also will continue to continue to control Gaza militarily, being able to launch incursions into towns and cities whenever it sees fit.
But Rabbi Lerner criticized those on the left in the United States who would seek to paint the country of Israel as the "paradigm of evil," while ignoring human rights issues elsewhere. "Israel has done many stupid and bad things," he said, "but it is not the stupidest and baddest of the countries in the world." The United States, he pointed out, had done things just as bad or worse during its history.
The Politics of Hope and the Politics of Fear
The day that Michael Lerner addressed an audience at Occidental college was November 2nd-election day-and by all accounts it was going to be a close race between John Kerry and incumbent George W. Bush.
"The struggle today in American politics," Rabbi Lerner told the crowd, "can only be understood if you understand the several thousand year struggle between two different ways of understanding reality."
The first way of understanding reality, which Lerner referred to as the "cynical realist worldview," was based on the assumption that we are "thrown into this world as lone individuals, everyone out for themselves. Everyone looking out for number one." The rational response to the world of those who take this perspective is simply to place themselves in a position of advantage over other people before some else gets the advantage over them. In other words, it both assumes that everyone must fend for themselves in order to get out on top.
In the second understanding of reality, what Lerner calls the worldview of "realistic optimism," we are all fundamentally connected with each other. Our very first experience in the world, in fact, confirms this, according to Lerner-we survive as an infant only because we are given nurturing care by a mothering individual. Even those who have horrendous experiences with a parent, at some point, received a degree of support, otherwise they would not have been able to survive. This worldview is what Lerner associates with a genuine spiritual or religious politics-it assumes interconnectedness, moral responsibility and an abiding sense of hope.
But, in the aftermath of 9-11, the realistic-optimism worldview has been marginalized and the American political scene has become almost obsessed with the rhetoric of fear. Nowhere is this more evident than in the "war on terror," which seems to be the American governments attempt to make itself more secure by killing off those who would seek to harm us. The problem with this approach, Lerner pointed out, is that it simply doesn't work. In the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, he pointed out, the strategy of simply killing off terrorists has increased terrorism. The same, in fact, can be said of Iraq. Already by most estimates there are far more insurgents today in Iraq than there during the beginning of the U.S.-led occupation, despite the rate at which we have been attacking and killing off members of these groups.
In place of this, he offered an alternative strategy of proactive involvement in the world, what he called "the global Marshall plan." After World War II, the U.S. poured billions into Europe to help it recover from the devastation of the conflict. Today, according to Lerner, a similar strategy is needed for the Third World. "One out of three people living on the planet," he told the crowd, "survives on two dollars a day. America, which represents five percent of the world's population, has forty percent of the world's wealth. If the U.S. wants real security, then let the U.S. be and be perceived to be the greatest global force against poverty and homelessness in the world. If the U.S. wants real security, then let the U.S. be and be perceived to be the greatest force seeking to rectify the looming ecological disaster facing our globe." If we acted as an overwhelming force for good throughout the world, rather than merely seeking out our own military and economic interests, it would be much harder for terrorists to pick up new recruits.
Because we have shifted sharply toward the politics of "cynical-realism," most people are likely to interpret Lerner's suggestions as "naive" even though, for the same cost, they clearly would have been a more effective strategy than the invasion of Iraq, which is increasingly being seen as a defeat, rather than a victory, in the so-called "war on terror." Just as Martin Luther King's "naive" call to nonviolence developed into a sophisticated civil rights strategy, couldn't Lerner's suggestions also prove invaluable in easing political tensions throughout the world?
Either way, both sides, I think, would agree that we no longer have the luxury of ignoring the rest of the globe. Because we are all interconnected, Lerner reminded us: "We will never have true peace and security until the whole world has peace and security."
"Rather than simply saying 'God bless America,'" Lerner said, "We should be saying 'God bless America-and everyone else on the world as well.'"
--------------------------------
This article is a Middle East Window exclusive. It cannot be republished without the prior written consent of the editor. For information about republication rights, please contact: peter@middleeastfellowship.org
