Krim

Here’s a poster, I saw in a restaurant in the Ukrainian city Lviv:

The text reads:

From the very beginning of the war in Donbas, Merkel insists on peaceful conflict resolution and refuses to supply weapons to Ukraine. It’s the first time in history when we face bloodshed because of EU and European values. And it’s blood of the Ukrainians. Germany tries to do the impossible – to fight and to continue business with Russia at the same time. Danke Frau Ribbentrop.   

At the church next door, they had one board after another with photos of servicemen, who had given their lives for the defence of the Ukraine.

Lviv Airport

This was the sign at our gate for the flight from Lviv to Warsaw. The Lviv airport managers probably have an explanation.

The Joys of Train Travel

"Ich liebe Dich, ich liebe Dich..."  “I love you, I love you, do take good care of mummy, kisses, kisses”, and as the train started moving, he couldn’t rip himself away from his wife and children and waved until they no longer could be seen on the Karlsruhe station platform. Half an hour later, in Mannheim, a young woman boarded the train and sat next to him. He had been expecting her. They were very close; I would say intimate.

Britain – A Democracy?

What’s a democracy? The developments in Britain raise the question whether Britain should be considered a democracy.

Britain – a democracy?  I

The United Kingdom has 650 parliamentary constituencies and the candidate with most votes in a constituency becomes its member of parliament. All other votes get thrown in the bin. These voters are represented by someone, whose agenda they do not share.  For example, with party A getting 29%, party B 28%, party C 27% and various small parties the remaining 16% – party A’s candidate would get into parliament. In that constituency, a minority of 29% gets 100% parliamentary representation. Theoretically, this pattern could take place throughout the country. And 29% of the population would get 100% of all MPs.

This system has, for many years, produced stable parliamentary majorities, which in turn, enabled many governments to run the country, without having to constantly compromise with coalition partners.

Is it truly democratic?

Britain – a democracy? II

British politicians working to deliver Brexit, constantly argue that “the People” have voted for Brexit and therefore, the only democratic thing to do, was to deliver Brexit. That, of course, is misleading: The vote was 48.5 vs. 51.5, which means that virtually half of all those who voted, are Remainers. Would the result of 50% minus one vote for Brexit vs. 50% plus one vote against Brexit, have meant the country has decided against Brexit? No. In both cases, it shows that “the People” are divided.

But even that 50/50 result was only achieved with the help of a campaign permeated by lies and deceit. Lies are common in politics but let us not delude ourselves that this is democratic.

David Cameron and his government failed to prepare the Brexit referendum and clarify the ramifications of a Brexit outcome. Moreover, they said that the referendum would be only consultative, whereas, it is now presented as binding. The British political class seems to treat the whole process like a game of poker – you win some, you lose some. Only, if it is but a game of cards, how exactly should one reshuffle the cards, once Britain has left the EU?  

The United Kingdom has a government acting irrevocably, on the basis of a badly prepared referendum, a campaign saturated with false information and an undecided and torn electorate – a democracy?

Britain – a democracy? III

Britain’s High Court has ruled that Boris Johnson acted lawfully, when he got the Queen to shut down parliament for a few weeks.

Britain’s unelected prime minister – who was put into Downing Street, after Theresa May’s resignation, by 92,000 members of the Conservative Party in an internal vote of party members only – has gotten the unelected Queen to close the elected parliament of the country.

It might all be lawful, but democratic?

The Living Goddess

Last week’s “rape” of the Queen by the Eton Hooligan, Boris Johnson, somehow reminded me of the Kemari devi, the Living Goddess and of the discomfort that I felt many years ago in Kathmandu, with this institution and concept of the revered puppet. The Nepali goddess is revered until she reaches puberty, at which stage a replacement is sought. Becoming an ex-goddess is the price the girl pays for the benefits endowed on her and her family during the goddess years.

We were delivered an in-your-face reminder of the fact that the Monarch in Britain is just a puppet that must do what she is told. In return, she and her family are allowed to enjoy a life of sumptuous luxury, with popular reverence thrown in as an added bonus. The extent of the pretence was made painfully obvious, when the new British Prime Minister arranged for the Queen to endorse his plan to shut down Parliament during a period in which, he wishes not to be disturbed by the country’s legislative body and true sovereign.

One is always reminded of the absurdity of the role of the Queen, a sovereign who is not the sovereign, when at the ceremonial State Opening of Parliament, the Queen delivers the “Queen’s Speech”. The Queens Speech is an announcement of the government’s plans during a new legislative period. So, when the Conservatives are in power, the Queen announces that her government will reduce taxes and do other things which please Tories, whereas when the country has a Labour government, the Queen announces that her government will do the exact opposite. Thus, her speech is not her speech. Her words are not her words. She must read aloud, what she is given by the government of the day. She has no say whatsoever.

The Queen is very old and before her death, she could have shown greatness. She could have tried to save the country from the disastrous downward slide it has embarked on. She didn’t. Britain should now reconsider this arrangement, in which it has a hereditary Head of State. 

British Vulgar Press

The proof of the pudding is in the eating. People buy these newspapers. However, …

these aggressive headlines are weapons and they are meant to act as weapons. In this case they are meant to help destroy the leader of the British Labour Party, Jeremy Corbyn. He is leader of Her Majesty’s Most Loyal Opposition, the political party with the second-largest number of seats in the House of Commons.

The Daily Mail is owned by Viscount Rothermere, and the Sun is part of Rupert Murdoch’s empire. These oligarchs’ money influences elections and politics in Britain. Whereas, freedom of the press is a central tenet of democracy, this should not mean allowing the ultra-rich to use their money and influence the results of elections. A way must be found, for democracy to defend itself from such interference.

The Prince of Prussia

Three recent unconnected stories in the German press, have caught my eye:

A certain 90-year-old Ferdinand Neess, a former art-dealer and collector, has bequeathed his collection of over 500 Jugendstil objects, which he collected over the years, to the Museum of Wiesbaden. The value of the donation is estimated to be higher than €40 million.

A certain James Simon (1851-1932) is being remembered and celebrated by Berlin, by naming the newly created visitors’ centre and central entrance building to the city’s museum cluster at the Museums Insel after him. James Simon, a German Jew – who was fortunate enough to die before the Nazis came to power – stems from a family of wealthy cotton merchants. For years, he donated a third of his income for social and cultural projects. Over the years, Simon – who is considered to be the most prominent patron of the arts at his time, donated most of his important art collection to Berlin’s museums (including the well-known bust of Nefertiti).

A certain Georg Friedrich, Prinz von Preussen, the great grandson of Germany’s last Kaiser, claims the “return” of several castles, which were nationalised, as well as thousands of art objects from the German state. A return of the objects the family now demands would empty some of Berlin’s museums. This is quite amazing, considering that everything monarchs own, is accumulated through taxation of the general population. Instead of asking the question, how the monarchs were able to amass such fortunes, the state is negotiating with the family.

It appears that the only (yet unlikely) hope under German legislation is proving that the family supported Hitler. A historically sounder case would be to show the Kaiser’s responsibility for the catastrophe that befell Germany and Europe, in World War I. Why should his heirs retain their assets, whilst millions have lost all they had during and because of that war?  

Don’t let us forget who fills our museums and who is trying to empty them.

BDS and two (Muslim) US Congresswomen

I.

Two Congresswomen, who are accused by Israel as supporters of BDS, have been barred from entering Israel. An Israeli law enables it to bar supporters of the boycott movement from entering the country. It is stupid but I see no real issue with a country deciding who it will not allow to enter. Israel, however, also controls the borders of both Gaza strip and the West Bank. Thus, it decides who Palestinians are allowed to meet. That, of course, is scandalous: Millions of Palestinians in a sort of open-air prison.

II.

Representatives Rashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar were not joining one of the hundreds of trips, which US politicians have been taken on for years, organised by AIPAC, the pro-Israel lobby, and the Israeli government. They were planning to visit the West Bank. They wanted to visit this open-air prison. Had they been allowed to enter, they would have learned about the reality of life in the territories under Israeli control. They would have seen how deceitful the propaganda network is (they always are).

III.

For Netanyahu, this whole affair was bad news. And yet barring US Congresswomen was problematic. He therefore decided to permit entry to the two Congresswomen. And then Trump called, and… Netanyahu dutifully changed his mind.

IV.

The question Americans must ask themselves and their representatives is, why do no other US Representatives and Senators make the effort to truly inform themselves. Are the American legislators neglecting their duty? After all, $3.8 BILLION of American taxpayers’ money is given unconditionally to Israel per annum. Is seeing only one side of the picture, their notion of democracy?

V.

And talking of democracy: Israel’s Minister of Interior Aryeh Deri, was approached by Representative Rashida Tlaib, for permission to visit her 90-something year-old grandmother, who lives in the occupied West Bank. Deri approved the request, on condition of good behaviour, and then Tlaib decided not to travel. Deri’s reaction to Tlaib’s decision not to accept his offer, was: "Apparently her hate for Israel overcomes her love for her grandmother."

Tlaib explained “Silencing me & treating me like a criminal is not what she wants for me. It would kill a piece of me. I have decided that visiting my grandmother under these oppressive conditions stands against everything I believe in—”

To understand where Minister Deri comes from, one needs to know that he is a convicted criminal. An Israeli court had found him guilty of corruption and bribery and had sentenced him for three years in prison. He must be dumbfounded by politicians, who put their political work and values before their own and their family’s business interests. Not something that he would do.

So why is corrupt Deri a senior member of Netanyahu’s cabinet? Simple: He came out of jail and the electorate of the Sephardi religious party, a senior partner in Netanyahu’s cabinet, promptly re-elected him. Corruption wins.

Der Spiegel – Antisemitic?

The German news magazine Der Spiegel publishes a history series (Der Spiegel Geschichte), with each number dedicated to a single topic. The subject of its latest issue was “Jewish life in Germany: The unknown world next door”. They produced a well-researched magazine, covering a variety of angles and view-points.

Der Spiegel has recently angered the Jewish community with an investigation into activities and attempts of two Jewish lobby organisations to influence German politicians. It is considered by some German Jews to be not only anti-Israel but also antisemitic. A view that I do not share. 

Now Spiegel is being attacked for its choice of cover for the special issue journal. The President of the Central Council of Jews in Germany: “By choosing the cover for the current issue of Spiegel History, those who made the decision have decided to spread an anti-Semitic stereotype.“  “Neither my ancestors nor my family and I look that way”,  was one of the complaints, I saw on Facebook. 

I have no issue with this photo. On the contrary, I find it quite heart-warming. No, my ancestors, at least those, I have photos of, did not look like that. But, let’s face it, this Jewish world of the shtetl, is part of the history of European Jewish history, including Jews who at some point modernised their external appearance or even started leading a secular life.

So, here’s the corpus delicti: 

Klezmer music was not part of my grandparents’ world, they listened to Mozart, Bach and Wagner. And yet, virtually every Jewish culture festival, that Jewish communities in Germany organise, includes Klezmer music. Some Jews, who can afford it, buy “Judaica” art and artefacts at special Sotheby’s or Christies auctions and hang painting by Chagall, depicting Jewish life – art they, evidently feel is part of them, a world they identify with.

Yet, curiously, Jewish communities that are willing to embrace the klezmer stereotype as a poster for their Jewish culture-festivals, take issue with Spiegel’s cover photo. The music, which enjoys general acceptance is fine, but the shtetl image…

I wonder whether any Spiegel photo would have gotten the thumbs up? Perhaps a photo of Jewish intellectuals, or strong and healthy Israeli soldiers?   

Mounting the Temple

In 1947, the United Nations voted for the partition of British Mandate Palestine into three separate entities: a Jewish state, an Arab state and Jerusalem as a separate legal entity, a corpus separatum. That was the plan.

Tish’a Beav, is a day of mourning, on which religious Jews fast and remember the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem. Eid El-Ad’ha is the Feast of Sacrifice, the Muslim feast ending the annual pilgrimage to Mecca.  Such days are always an opportunity for extremists on both sides to stir trouble. This year is no exception. Moreover, this year, both holidays fall during the same period. And so the Muslim religious authority has closed all other mosques in Jerusalem to force those Muslims who wish to pray to come in droves to the El-Aksah mosque, and right-wing Israeli politicians and activists are pushing and cajoling the government and the police to open the area for Jews to celebrate. The Chief Rabbi meanwhile opined that according to Jewish law it is forbidden for Jews to enter the area.

What a miserable lot they are – whatever god they maintain they believe in. And all those that follow, hollow and shallow, “believers” that care more for real estate than for human values of peace, love and mercy. Worst of all, are those cold-blooded politicians, secular and religious, who manipulate those primitive feelings of “their people”.

And how right the UN was in 1947, to suggest a corpus separatum. Instead – borrowing from Shakespeare – we have