I'll be decent and respond here, though you publicly and rudely made a backhand comment towards me.
Do you really think you'd talk like that in real life to a 19 year old?
"I owe Chris an apology for treating his FB page like a listserv. To people who think public education is worse off now than in the 1930s, who use the words "liberal" and "leftist" as equivalent epithets in the manner of the Reagan school, who think the health care system isn't broken, and who regard people praying when they want to as a "huge problem," not so much."
I know it's probably been a while since you were in a public school; I, however, spent my days in public school enraged at being forced to participate in a wasteful system--wasteful with time, and wasteful with money. I wrote personal little articles for myself on what would improve the system. I researched education systems in other countries. And because of the personal affront the system afforded me, I came to the position I now have on it.
I'm not talking about something I heard someone else talking about. I sincerely can't stand it.
When I spoke of 'leftists' and 'liberal', I didn't intend it in a derogatory manner. I'm being honest here. I can see, now, how it could be read either way, but I am not polemic against other points of view--that would violate the statement itself. I have lots of friends (maybe the majority) who are of different political persuasion. But when I find people writing and talking like every other point of political view is an idiot, I want to pull my hair out. How can anyone think that way? How can they be so arrogant? So disrespectful? So blind?
Notice this time I phrase it neutrally. That's because now I'm talking about a more general sentiment that I feel just as strongly when I see people on the far right who are simply dogmatic and don't think for themselves... just like those same polemics on the left. The way you were treating Linda, whoever that other person was, and myself. That being said, I personally get to experience the wrath of the liberals and leftists; enough of my positions are compatible with those on the right for them to, generally, be ok with me.
As far as your statement regarding prayer, that's distortion and ridicule. A minaret is not necessary for praying. My comment about France even already demonstrated this; as far as I can recall, open prayer falls into that category of forbidden religious demonstration. That's ridiculous. I'm all about personal religious freedom. However, constructing a minaret is imposing your beliefs on others. What's more, and what often isn't discussed, is the fact that a minaret is viewed as a symbol of conquering within the Muslim world... In today's world, there's no need for a large tower to blast out prayers to Allah for people to know it's time. We have watches. We have mp3 players. Alarm clocks. They aren't building minarets so they can pray, they're building it because they believe they are engaged in spiritual warfare, and they want to impose on those around them. A mosque existing is fine, they are entitled to a place of prayer... but not to putting it on loudspeakers for me to be forced hear.
Is health care broken? I can't know, I guess. My point of view is too small to really say that. I know I hear people on both sides say opposite things, which means I probably shouldn't trust either of them. I'd imagine, though, that if it really were broken, I'd have known someone who had experienced its letdown, or have experienced it myself. I've been to the hospital a few times for broken bones, a blood clot, etc. As far as I know, it went smoothly.
Is it like that for everyone? Well I'm sure it's bad for someone, because there's a movement of people trying to fix it. Whether that's because it's on their party's agenda and they therefore become dogmatic, or the majority of them are personally acquainted with its shortcomings, I have no way of knowing.
What I do know is my opinion on systems being put into the hands of the government from personal experience... So if it is broken, I don't think this is the solution.
Furthermore, I don't want a high-tax government that provides lots of services. I'm glad that it works in some other countries; I believe in America we should be entitled to spend our money as we please, and the government should do as little as necessary. The private sector exists to provide goods and services, and with the right blending I think that's the best option.
Can you still treat me like you did? I'm trying to demonstrate to you that I'm not an idiot, and you're being unfair. I'm not trying to convince you. I'm just trying to show you I'm a real person with legitimate beliefs worthy of your respect.
Have a nice day,
[K]
-------------
Dear K,
Thank you for taking the time to respond, and I'll try keep it short. You get no extra points for being 19; if you're tall enough to get on the ride--the "ride" being FB comments--you're treated like anyone else. Your remark about minarets was this: "I live in Jerusalem, lots of minarets here, and it's constantly a huge problem for a number of people to have prayers going of at 4:15 in the morning, every morning." I guess you're not in a neighborhood where the bells thunder Lauds every morning, but if you carefully read what you wrote--the problem is people who have prayers then. That has nothing to do with the shape of a minaret on the skyline, which is what the Swiss are having problems with. If you meant something else, fine, but that's what you wrote. And I don't know how long you've lived in Eretz, but those of us who are not Christian in the U.S., but "spiritual warfare" is a very common term used by many Christian groups here to describe what they feel needs to be done. (K Street types, etc.)
Insurance: it is against the law here, at least in most states, to drive without auto insurance. The reason is that if an uninsured person gets in an accident and is at fault, but that person cannot pay, we ALL pay through a variety of means, because costs are spread out via increased premiums, medical costs, etc. I am in favor of the same for medical insurance, because the risks are just as great or greater, and "Linda," whoever that is, is being disingenuous if she thinks she can really opt out. That was my point: if she gets cancer or a brain tumor, she'll be in the emergency room instantly, and we'll all be paying for her, despite her fine words about independence and big government. And the emergency room is far costlier than preventative care, so the people so interested in hanging on to their own money are happily wasting . . . mine. No, I don't feel I was overreacting; I think she deserves what she got. You have government care in Israel, if I'm not mistaken; minimal care for citizens' well-being, ESPECIALLY prenatal and preventative care is a moral responsibility. Here, people are without that care, and their numbers are growing exponentially because private insurance companies find paying for them to be unprofitable. That is immoral.
I'm a product of public schools, except for my doctorate, and I teach at one. I don't know where you went to school, but will simply say that there is at least as much waste in private schools as in public. . . plus, they are answerable to narrower constituencies. I'll take public every time.
FINALLY: "leftist" and "liberal" are not at all the same thing. Leftists were hard-left radicals, violent-overthrow types. Liberals? Please--moral responsibility of government to care for its citizens, full equality and inclusion for people of all colors, religions, genders, preferences, etc., and ABOVE ALL *strong* schools. (Not at all warlike, but not pacifists either.) Those are liberal values, which are in many ways antithetical to "leftist" values. Conflating the two is a common technique of the shrieking pop-culture Right here in the U.S., and it is dishonest. (I'm not accusing you of dishonesty; I suspect that you never learned the difference, which goes back to the 1960s.)
I didn't keep it short. Thank you for thinking, but if you step in the ring, young'un, you've got to expect punches to be thrown. And note the importance of *clear* writing, making sure that you have said or written exactly what you mean, and making sure that you know the meanings of words you use . . . and (in the case of Linda) making sure there aren't a hundred holes in your argument. Self-confidence is a good thing. Self-righteousness . . . nope.
Sleep tight, and enjoy Israel. I've never been, but hope to go one day--I've several relatives there.
--------------------
I don't want points for being 19, I want points for being human. Nineteen or otherwise, one shouldn't be treated like that for disagreeing. I appreciate being treated like everyone else--as long as you're treating everyone else as an equal. Previously, it didn't feel that way. This time around, the tone is much more reassuring.
"I live in Jerusalem, lots of minarets here, and it's constantly a huge problem for a number of people to have prayers going of at 4:15 in the morning, every morning."
I suppose I could have worded this a little more clearly... Perhaps I was being presumptuous before, but are you aware that minarets have loudspeakers from which they call out prayers a handful (I think it's 5) times a day? I don't know what common knowledge about minarets actually is. Regardless, assuming you knew that bit of information, what I was trying to indicate was the problem of prayers at 4:15am... As in loud calls to Allah waking everyone in the vicinity up, constantly. Disrupting their day. There's a great cafe in the old city I love to bring friends who are visiting to--I just have to make sure to avoid the call to prayer hours, because it's so loud there that sitting outside is unbearable. It's a very disruptive event. People praying at 4:15am, or any other hour, is fine with me. People doing it over a loudspeaker? Not so much. Especially not a tiny minority.
I went and read the article you linked previously, by the way, and the problem the Swiss were presenting was not the dislike of the way it looks on the skyline--that wouldn't have garnered a whopping 60% majority in favor of the anti-minaret bill--but instead the recognition that a minaret is a status symbol of Islam and the Islamization of the country, and of values that are incompatible with the swiss mindset. The Swiss who are in favor of the bill recognize the minaret not as an expression of the freedom of religion of a few people, but of crossing the line to infringing on the religious freedoms of others.
As far as using a similar term to 'K Street' American Christians, that's exactly the type of connotation I was aiming for... political-religious intermingling, intentional, organized, and perhaps slightly sinister in the implication of unstated manipulation.
I'm aware that auto insurance works that way, but notice: it's privately handled. The government doesn't give auto insurance. So in the end, people pay for their own mistakes, and get rewarded for safe driving. Quality of auto insurance is relatively good, it's fairly cheap. There's thriving competition. Why can't there be a solution in that direction for health care? Why do we have to enlarge an already bloated government? As far as profitability, calling something immoral here is sticky. Where does responsibility lay? Can't we just as easily say doctors capable of performing John's surgery (I believe John was the name of the guy in Chris' article?) are immoral for not just taking on one pro-bono case? I mean, really, what does it cost the doctor? The equipment for the surgery, which is half the cost, is already there and paid for. Simply using it won't be that expensive. The other part of the cost is his salary. So he's giving up a few hours of his life, at most... and not a doctor there will do it just because saving someone's life is payment enough? When the care of individuals has become simply about profit, and being a doctor is so lucrative that only those concerned with their profits above the well being of others make it to the field, that's a problem. Why should we expect insurance companies to take on that burden? An insurance company is a corporation. It's raison d'être is to make a profit. If you have a problem with that, then we're talking about the much bigger (and certainly legitimate) issue of corporations in the US... but as it is, I see the human moral failure of the doctors as a much bigger dilemma.
The case of the man in Chris' article was also, I think, a special case. I have no problem with our government helping out the people that have no responsibility for their medical problems. I also think doctors should be willing to give some community service hours towards that respect, rather than lining their pockets with everyone else's money, if it comes to that. But the majority of people who can't get insurance are very likely those who are making poor lifestyle choices health-wise (as is the majority of America, as far as I can tell). Obesity and Smoking are the two top killers in America.
Both of those are preventable simply by abstaining from poor diet choices. Those are our number 1 killers. Why should everyone be forced to pool money to pay for their choices? If there's some form of accountability for those who receive care, to show they are proactive in their health, then maybe we can talk... But I'm not interested in a system that just lets people keep making their mistakes on our dime. I think you'll notice at this point that we're pointing at the same problem: our dime paying for someone else's poor choices.
Maybe there is a problem with health care, I really don't doubt it--I've yet to find a perfect societal institution. But I highly doubt that this system of nationalized health care is the solution.
There is nationalized health care in Israel; there's also a 50% import tax, among others. Living in Israel is really hard under the huge taxation burden, among other things--the cost of living is about the same as in America, the average income and minimum wage are about half of that in America. Even if we call that a well functioning system, it's not the kind I want to have in America. I don't want a baby-sitter government that handles everything; the centralization of power in government is a recipe for disaster. The decentralization of power is one of the greatest achievements in our government's history--the federal states of America, the original primacy of the state, and so on. I believe in the ideas and principles behind those decisions, and am quite sorry to see that being erased.
As far as schools: you 'took public every time'--except when it came to your highest degree. But that's a moot point; the real issue is that I'm talking about public *mandatory* education, where competition is minimal. I know it's not the same at university level--and I would imagine in large part that that is because of the competition of private universities. Our mandatory public education kills competition, and so sinks to low quality because of the lack of accountability. You say that a private school has a lower constituency holding it accountability, but who is holding the school accountable? "The people"? Alas, we're not a true democracy, and our representatives upholding our 'democracy' aren't holding them accountable (I'm really touching on a more severe problem in our country). In reality, whatever system we have watching over the public schools isn't working. Small groups are generally more efficient anyways. And certainly when you bring a factor of profit into the picture, efficiency necessarily increases.
Indeed I didn't learn the difference between leftist and liberal; when I saw left, I mean the opposite of right (which is a bit more clearly defined through being in common use, I guess). As far as liberals, I agree with all of those values--I usually disagree with how they intend to go about it. You make a valid point about use of clear writing here; I learn something every day, I guess. I'll amend my future use of "left" as an American political term in the future.
You should visit while there's relative peace--you never know how long that will last here, and it's thus well cherished. I've been here for almost 1.5 years... I'm at Hebrew University right now, but I just stated this year. Last year I volunteered teaching English in the West Bank and in East (read:Arab) Jerusalem.
You mentioned in yours that you'd try to keep it short; I didn't, and hope it isn't a problem, though I understand if you don't have an hour for composing a response like I just gave. Either way, it has thus far been an enjoyable exchange. The main point of this discussion, as I see it--reconciliation and respect--has been found. The rest is for fun.
May your visit be soon and long.
K
--------------
It's a shame that I never got a response to this. I really enjoyed it.
---------------
No offense was meant, K. It was just apparent that we have differing views on key issues, and both of us (obviously) have a great deal going on, which is a good thing. You know from Chris, and probably on your own, What Academics Do: a constant barrage of due dates for reviews, articles, papers to be given places, etc. And that's if business is *good*! I'm a Chopin guy, and this year is the two hundredth anniversary of his birth, and so things have been wall-to-wall for me. Given all that plus the odd major performance and my job and time with family, you can see where lengthy FB colloquies fall.
Stay thoughtful, and continue to walk your talk.
Best--JB
Do you really think you'd talk like that in real life to a 19 year old?
"I owe Chris an apology for treating his FB page like a listserv. To people who think public education is worse off now than in the 1930s, who use the words "liberal" and "leftist" as equivalent epithets in the manner of the Reagan school, who think the health care system isn't broken, and who regard people praying when they want to as a "huge problem," not so much."
I know it's probably been a while since you were in a public school; I, however, spent my days in public school enraged at being forced to participate in a wasteful system--wasteful with time, and wasteful with money. I wrote personal little articles for myself on what would improve the system. I researched education systems in other countries. And because of the personal affront the system afforded me, I came to the position I now have on it.
I'm not talking about something I heard someone else talking about. I sincerely can't stand it.
When I spoke of 'leftists' and 'liberal', I didn't intend it in a derogatory manner. I'm being honest here. I can see, now, how it could be read either way, but I am not polemic against other points of view--that would violate the statement itself. I have lots of friends (maybe the majority) who are of different political persuasion. But when I find people writing and talking like every other point of political view is an idiot, I want to pull my hair out. How can anyone think that way? How can they be so arrogant? So disrespectful? So blind?
Notice this time I phrase it neutrally. That's because now I'm talking about a more general sentiment that I feel just as strongly when I see people on the far right who are simply dogmatic and don't think for themselves... just like those same polemics on the left. The way you were treating Linda, whoever that other person was, and myself. That being said, I personally get to experience the wrath of the liberals and leftists; enough of my positions are compatible with those on the right for them to, generally, be ok with me.
As far as your statement regarding prayer, that's distortion and ridicule. A minaret is not necessary for praying. My comment about France even already demonstrated this; as far as I can recall, open prayer falls into that category of forbidden religious demonstration. That's ridiculous. I'm all about personal religious freedom. However, constructing a minaret is imposing your beliefs on others. What's more, and what often isn't discussed, is the fact that a minaret is viewed as a symbol of conquering within the Muslim world... In today's world, there's no need for a large tower to blast out prayers to Allah for people to know it's time. We have watches. We have mp3 players. Alarm clocks. They aren't building minarets so they can pray, they're building it because they believe they are engaged in spiritual warfare, and they want to impose on those around them. A mosque existing is fine, they are entitled to a place of prayer... but not to putting it on loudspeakers for me to be forced hear.
Is health care broken? I can't know, I guess. My point of view is too small to really say that. I know I hear people on both sides say opposite things, which means I probably shouldn't trust either of them. I'd imagine, though, that if it really were broken, I'd have known someone who had experienced its letdown, or have experienced it myself. I've been to the hospital a few times for broken bones, a blood clot, etc. As far as I know, it went smoothly.
Is it like that for everyone? Well I'm sure it's bad for someone, because there's a movement of people trying to fix it. Whether that's because it's on their party's agenda and they therefore become dogmatic, or the majority of them are personally acquainted with its shortcomings, I have no way of knowing.
What I do know is my opinion on systems being put into the hands of the government from personal experience... So if it is broken, I don't think this is the solution.
Furthermore, I don't want a high-tax government that provides lots of services. I'm glad that it works in some other countries; I believe in America we should be entitled to spend our money as we please, and the government should do as little as necessary. The private sector exists to provide goods and services, and with the right blending I think that's the best option.
Can you still treat me like you did? I'm trying to demonstrate to you that I'm not an idiot, and you're being unfair. I'm not trying to convince you. I'm just trying to show you I'm a real person with legitimate beliefs worthy of your respect.
Have a nice day,
[K]
-------------
Dear K,
Thank you for taking the time to respond, and I'll try keep it short. You get no extra points for being 19; if you're tall enough to get on the ride--the "ride" being FB comments--you're treated like anyone else. Your remark about minarets was this: "I live in Jerusalem, lots of minarets here, and it's constantly a huge problem for a number of people to have prayers going of at 4:15 in the morning, every morning." I guess you're not in a neighborhood where the bells thunder Lauds every morning, but if you carefully read what you wrote--the problem is people who have prayers then. That has nothing to do with the shape of a minaret on the skyline, which is what the Swiss are having problems with. If you meant something else, fine, but that's what you wrote. And I don't know how long you've lived in Eretz, but those of us who are not Christian in the U.S., but "spiritual warfare" is a very common term used by many Christian groups here to describe what they feel needs to be done. (K Street types, etc.)
Insurance: it is against the law here, at least in most states, to drive without auto insurance. The reason is that if an uninsured person gets in an accident and is at fault, but that person cannot pay, we ALL pay through a variety of means, because costs are spread out via increased premiums, medical costs, etc. I am in favor of the same for medical insurance, because the risks are just as great or greater, and "Linda," whoever that is, is being disingenuous if she thinks she can really opt out. That was my point: if she gets cancer or a brain tumor, she'll be in the emergency room instantly, and we'll all be paying for her, despite her fine words about independence and big government. And the emergency room is far costlier than preventative care, so the people so interested in hanging on to their own money are happily wasting . . . mine. No, I don't feel I was overreacting; I think she deserves what she got. You have government care in Israel, if I'm not mistaken; minimal care for citizens' well-being, ESPECIALLY prenatal and preventative care is a moral responsibility. Here, people are without that care, and their numbers are growing exponentially because private insurance companies find paying for them to be unprofitable. That is immoral.
I'm a product of public schools, except for my doctorate, and I teach at one. I don't know where you went to school, but will simply say that there is at least as much waste in private schools as in public. . . plus, they are answerable to narrower constituencies. I'll take public every time.
FINALLY: "leftist" and "liberal" are not at all the same thing. Leftists were hard-left radicals, violent-overthrow types. Liberals? Please--moral responsibility of government to care for its citizens, full equality and inclusion for people of all colors, religions, genders, preferences, etc., and ABOVE ALL *strong* schools. (Not at all warlike, but not pacifists either.) Those are liberal values, which are in many ways antithetical to "leftist" values. Conflating the two is a common technique of the shrieking pop-culture Right here in the U.S., and it is dishonest. (I'm not accusing you of dishonesty; I suspect that you never learned the difference, which goes back to the 1960s.)
I didn't keep it short. Thank you for thinking, but if you step in the ring, young'un, you've got to expect punches to be thrown. And note the importance of *clear* writing, making sure that you have said or written exactly what you mean, and making sure that you know the meanings of words you use . . . and (in the case of Linda) making sure there aren't a hundred holes in your argument. Self-confidence is a good thing. Self-righteousness . . . nope.
Sleep tight, and enjoy Israel. I've never been, but hope to go one day--I've several relatives there.
--------------------
I don't want points for being 19, I want points for being human. Nineteen or otherwise, one shouldn't be treated like that for disagreeing. I appreciate being treated like everyone else--as long as you're treating everyone else as an equal. Previously, it didn't feel that way. This time around, the tone is much more reassuring.
"I live in Jerusalem, lots of minarets here, and it's constantly a huge problem for a number of people to have prayers going of at 4:15 in the morning, every morning."
I suppose I could have worded this a little more clearly... Perhaps I was being presumptuous before, but are you aware that minarets have loudspeakers from which they call out prayers a handful (I think it's 5) times a day? I don't know what common knowledge about minarets actually is. Regardless, assuming you knew that bit of information, what I was trying to indicate was the problem of prayers at 4:15am... As in loud calls to Allah waking everyone in the vicinity up, constantly. Disrupting their day. There's a great cafe in the old city I love to bring friends who are visiting to--I just have to make sure to avoid the call to prayer hours, because it's so loud there that sitting outside is unbearable. It's a very disruptive event. People praying at 4:15am, or any other hour, is fine with me. People doing it over a loudspeaker? Not so much. Especially not a tiny minority.
I went and read the article you linked previously, by the way, and the problem the Swiss were presenting was not the dislike of the way it looks on the skyline--that wouldn't have garnered a whopping 60% majority in favor of the anti-minaret bill--but instead the recognition that a minaret is a status symbol of Islam and the Islamization of the country, and of values that are incompatible with the swiss mindset. The Swiss who are in favor of the bill recognize the minaret not as an expression of the freedom of religion of a few people, but of crossing the line to infringing on the religious freedoms of others.
As far as using a similar term to 'K Street' American Christians, that's exactly the type of connotation I was aiming for... political-religious intermingling, intentional, organized, and perhaps slightly sinister in the implication of unstated manipulation.
I'm aware that auto insurance works that way, but notice: it's privately handled. The government doesn't give auto insurance. So in the end, people pay for their own mistakes, and get rewarded for safe driving. Quality of auto insurance is relatively good, it's fairly cheap. There's thriving competition. Why can't there be a solution in that direction for health care? Why do we have to enlarge an already bloated government? As far as profitability, calling something immoral here is sticky. Where does responsibility lay? Can't we just as easily say doctors capable of performing John's surgery (I believe John was the name of the guy in Chris' article?) are immoral for not just taking on one pro-bono case? I mean, really, what does it cost the doctor? The equipment for the surgery, which is half the cost, is already there and paid for. Simply using it won't be that expensive. The other part of the cost is his salary. So he's giving up a few hours of his life, at most... and not a doctor there will do it just because saving someone's life is payment enough? When the care of individuals has become simply about profit, and being a doctor is so lucrative that only those concerned with their profits above the well being of others make it to the field, that's a problem. Why should we expect insurance companies to take on that burden? An insurance company is a corporation. It's raison d'être is to make a profit. If you have a problem with that, then we're talking about the much bigger (and certainly legitimate) issue of corporations in the US... but as it is, I see the human moral failure of the doctors as a much bigger dilemma.
The case of the man in Chris' article was also, I think, a special case. I have no problem with our government helping out the people that have no responsibility for their medical problems. I also think doctors should be willing to give some community service hours towards that respect, rather than lining their pockets with everyone else's money, if it comes to that. But the majority of people who can't get insurance are very likely those who are making poor lifestyle choices health-wise (as is the majority of America, as far as I can tell). Obesity and Smoking are the two top killers in America.
Both of those are preventable simply by abstaining from poor diet choices. Those are our number 1 killers. Why should everyone be forced to pool money to pay for their choices? If there's some form of accountability for those who receive care, to show they are proactive in their health, then maybe we can talk... But I'm not interested in a system that just lets people keep making their mistakes on our dime. I think you'll notice at this point that we're pointing at the same problem: our dime paying for someone else's poor choices.
Maybe there is a problem with health care, I really don't doubt it--I've yet to find a perfect societal institution. But I highly doubt that this system of nationalized health care is the solution.
There is nationalized health care in Israel; there's also a 50% import tax, among others. Living in Israel is really hard under the huge taxation burden, among other things--the cost of living is about the same as in America, the average income and minimum wage are about half of that in America. Even if we call that a well functioning system, it's not the kind I want to have in America. I don't want a baby-sitter government that handles everything; the centralization of power in government is a recipe for disaster. The decentralization of power is one of the greatest achievements in our government's history--the federal states of America, the original primacy of the state, and so on. I believe in the ideas and principles behind those decisions, and am quite sorry to see that being erased.
As far as schools: you 'took public every time'--except when it came to your highest degree. But that's a moot point; the real issue is that I'm talking about public *mandatory* education, where competition is minimal. I know it's not the same at university level--and I would imagine in large part that that is because of the competition of private universities. Our mandatory public education kills competition, and so sinks to low quality because of the lack of accountability. You say that a private school has a lower constituency holding it accountability, but who is holding the school accountable? "The people"? Alas, we're not a true democracy, and our representatives upholding our 'democracy' aren't holding them accountable (I'm really touching on a more severe problem in our country). In reality, whatever system we have watching over the public schools isn't working. Small groups are generally more efficient anyways. And certainly when you bring a factor of profit into the picture, efficiency necessarily increases.
Indeed I didn't learn the difference between leftist and liberal; when I saw left, I mean the opposite of right (which is a bit more clearly defined through being in common use, I guess). As far as liberals, I agree with all of those values--I usually disagree with how they intend to go about it. You make a valid point about use of clear writing here; I learn something every day, I guess. I'll amend my future use of "left" as an American political term in the future.
You should visit while there's relative peace--you never know how long that will last here, and it's thus well cherished. I've been here for almost 1.5 years... I'm at Hebrew University right now, but I just stated this year. Last year I volunteered teaching English in the West Bank and in East (read:Arab) Jerusalem.
You mentioned in yours that you'd try to keep it short; I didn't, and hope it isn't a problem, though I understand if you don't have an hour for composing a response like I just gave. Either way, it has thus far been an enjoyable exchange. The main point of this discussion, as I see it--reconciliation and respect--has been found. The rest is for fun.
May your visit be soon and long.
K
--------------
It's a shame that I never got a response to this. I really enjoyed it.
---------------
No offense was meant, K. It was just apparent that we have differing views on key issues, and both of us (obviously) have a great deal going on, which is a good thing. You know from Chris, and probably on your own, What Academics Do: a constant barrage of due dates for reviews, articles, papers to be given places, etc. And that's if business is *good*! I'm a Chopin guy, and this year is the two hundredth anniversary of his birth, and so things have been wall-to-wall for me. Given all that plus the odd major performance and my job and time with family, you can see where lengthy FB colloquies fall.
Stay thoughtful, and continue to walk your talk.
Best--JB
0 comments:
Post a Comment