Judaism, Politics and Fear

Wednesday morning for community time, we had a speaker come in to talk, in theory, about Iran and nuclear weapons or nuclear power. And he was a very effective speaker- even though he didn't talk about Iran's nuclear capabilities much at all. He mostly talked about our two favorite subjects: terrorism (and how it's all coming from Iran) and anti-semitism (and how it is everywhere and only growing). There were even the standard comparisons between the world now and the world shortly before World War 2. In other words, it was all the same old stuff in the same old ways. And yet, even while I saw all these holes, it was very persuasive. Especially since he littered it with these comments about how it was the moderate and liberal Muslims who were the first victims of Islamic fundamentalism, and supported that claim very well, talking about their reduction in respect, job possibilities, perceived legitimacy, etc. And he talked about wanting sanctions against Iran, not war, but how taking war off the table as an option would only make us seem toothless.

The whole thing made sense, in its way, even though I disagreed with some of his claims. But it was very persuasive, and I don't know if it was because it really seemed true or because he was a good speaker and we're so used to seeing ourselves as oppressed and in danger. It's a confusing thing. I just don't know how to decide what I really believe in this field- sure he's persuasive, but so are the people who would disagree with all of it. I know I ought to be able to formulate independant opinions on these things by now- but I still feel like every time I hear an argument, I'm swayed one way or the other, back and forth.

Judaism, Politics and Fear

Wednesday morning for community time, we had a speaker come in to talk, in theory, about Iran and nuclear weapons or nuclear power. And he was a very effective speaker- even though he didn't talk about Iran's nuclear capabilities much at all. He mostly talked about our two favorite subjects: terrorism (and how it's all coming from Iran) and anti-semitism (and how it is everywhere and only growing). There were even the standard comparisons between the world now and the world shortly before World War 2. In other words, it was all the same old stuff in the same old ways. And yet, even while I saw all these holes, it was very persuasive. Especially since he littered it with these comments about how it was the moderate and liberal Muslims who were the first victims of Islamic fundamentalism, and supported that claim very well, talking about their reduction in respect, job possibilities, perceived legitimacy, etc. And he talked about wanting sanctions against Iran, not war, but how taking war off the table as an option would only make us seem toothless.

The whole thing made sense, in its way, even though I disagreed with some of his claims. But it was very persuasive, and I don't know if it was because it really seemed true or because he was a good speaker and we're so used to seeing ourselves as oppressed and in danger. It's a confusing thing. I just don't know how to decide what I really believe in this field- sure he's persuasive, but so are the people who would disagree with all of it. I know I ought to be able to formulate independant opinions on these things by now- but I still feel like every time I hear an argument, I'm swayed one way or the other, back and forth.