Few notes for my Jewish friends, perplexed by Trump

People ask themselves: what has really happened? What will happen to us since Trump elected? I believe nothing REALLY bad hasn’t happened, since the end of the primaries.

Obama’s landmarks. No any doubt both candidates were better than person who was 2nd (after Carter) openly anti-American president. Just to remind, see two following references:Roanoke, VA, 2012 speech: declaration of hate to Business: so, USA could reasonably to look forward to recover a little bit;   Cairo 2009 speech, encouraging “Moslem brothers” to act

The campaign was dirty and extremely unpleasant but it’s over already; end of hostilities after elections depends on Democrats more than on republican Donald Trump already urged his supporters to stop http://www.cbsnews.com/news/60-minutes-donald-trump-family-melania-ivanka-lesley-stahl/ , I hope Democrats will follow his pattern soon to stop left radicals shocking protests against elections outcomes (!).

The winner looks for you unpleasant and he is not man of principles, of values, he is pragmatic (I hate it) but all his bad promises will be hard to keep w/o support of the Congress, there most of republicans not love him, to put it mildly, and not so loyal to him

All good things   he promised (at Convention and in Gettysburg Address, in the Contract with America )   he (because he is ‘pragmatic’), probably, will not execute (While I wish to be wrong about his qualities, of course).  with few probable exemptions – see the “Contract” “Actions to protect American workers” (5) and (6) – there is really strong interests behind these promises so it would be easier for Trump to keep it; US oil extraction and  export will weaken our enemies, will weaken our home special interests dreaming to redistribute gas rent, so it is good for USA and it is good for Israel even more;

Both, USA  and Israel have escaped some very bad things as a result of the elections.

1. Compare the most probable pattern for new SCOTUS judge nominee under Hillary  (sort of candidate for the seat of the Giant – seat of Antonin Scalia!) and here is Trumps’ list:  it make a huge difference

2. For Israel: Can you imagine Trump avoiding to visit potential contributor because of mezuzah at his door?  ; see also on Clintons’ contributors .

3. Further erosion of 1st Amendment Rights; progress in establishment of militant atheism and militant Islam as governmental, officially approved religions and persecution of Christians (as “white privilege”, as discriminating “Historically excluded groups” etc); probably, promotion of restriction on the political campaigns’ financing (Axelrod ideas development of Campaign financing reform ) and discrimination against conservative NGOs (IRS case like ).

4. Further  erosion of 2nd Amendment right (Democrats promised further tighten legislation for gun owners and traders – see “Preventing Gun Violence”  p. 39 of Dems’ Platform 2016 )

5. For Business. Clinton would for sure encourage further escalation jihad on “discrimination”, EEOC power and activities expansion etc  – see  and Trump – simply not (Cruz would destroy EEOC, Trump, unfortunately will not).

The outcomes of the November 8 elections means the US Universities radicalization ugly process suffered heavy blow (at least moral) and opportunity to stop it appears; see following links for example (   http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/12/us/racial-discrimination-protests-ignite-at-colleges-across-the-us.html ; the principal link: database of 1st Amendment rights in the campuses across US: https://www.thefire.org/spotlight/using-the-spotlight-database/  ); November, 8 means half of America told to radicals: “We are hate you too and we have a way to stop you”

On Trump personality again, I’m sure you aren’t take seriously comparisons ‘Trump he is like Hitler’?  The people chanting this nonsense surely aren’t going to emigrate  as they promised before the elections, and they aren’t heroes, believe me. I hope you understand, that the “arguments” like “he can start WWIII” are totally irrelevant.  Trump definitely not mad, he is not man of bad values or man of the good values, he is sly guy, pragmatic, so we should afraid his compromises not his real actions; just to remind – nor Brezhnev, not Mao hadn’t started WWIII and, surely, they hadn’t even idea to do so really.

BTW,  Trump already have got a lot of proposals (from Alan Dershowitz, for example) which means: “Now, be reasonable, betray your voters ASAP!” and I’m afraid Trump will do it in many things; (for comparison – British prime-minister Edward Heath did the same and Margaret Thatcher hadn’t  – see The lady’s not for turning  (and here is the transcript).

Worst things Trump could cause for Israel depends on us more than depends on Trump himself – see the logic (not may be this very specific case) in Moshe Feiglin’s comment: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pn50VjiZCtA&feature=youtu.be

Posted in Foreign Policy & Intl relations, Nanny state, Public choice | Leave a comment

The Torah as the source of economic freedom and its sustainability

At first glance, the Torah does not address the issues of economic and social order (surely, it does not discuss distinctions between free capitalist and socialist approaches). Talmudic sources, occasionally restricting economic freedom, often reflected realities of communities which survived under pressure of hostile environment and were in permanent need of mobilization to meet external challenges. At the same time, the Torah, the Tanakh and the Talmud prescribe limited government and rule of law. But above all, the Torah provides the most powerful protection of private property and personal rights: the protection is sanctified by the Lord and based on moral imperatives, rather than being just for the sake of economic efficiency.

The paper (in Hebrew) is uploaded at SSRN.

Posted in Just published, Private property and private owners' rights | Leave a comment

Will the West Survive Until 2084? Israel perspective – updated version

Updated (edited) versions of previously published book are just uploaded

The book approaches and ideas is developed and promoted in the Israel by the brochure “Will the West Survive until 2084? On the problems and Perspectives of the Family, Private Property and the State”.

Here is pdf version of the brochure in English and here is the  Hebrew versions .

The readers’ reaction and criticism is welcomed!

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Crime and Punishment: Jeff Jacoby comment

Here is highly recommended article written by Jeff Jacoby on punishment deterrence capacity and his  link onexcellent collection of scientific articles on the issue.

Classical paper by Isaak Ehrlich  (1975) must be added to the above mentioned list of papers.

BTW, both, dead felons  and dead terrorists can’t kill.

Posted in Crime and Punishment, Security and Terrorism | Tagged | Leave a comment

Revisiting US military Aid for Israel: new voices of concern

More and more people publicly share their concern about incentives caused by US military aid for Israel. The problem we had discussed since 2011 (Yanovskiy Moshe, US Aid for Israel – A Historical Overview (version on March 3, 2014).

Ex-ambassador Yoram Ettinger presented his reasons why  Israel shouldn’t accept U.S. aid? Previously he insisted. Ettinger had explained previously, that ‘Israel Must Be Defiant; ‘US Doesn’t Want a Wimp Ally‘ so US Aid harms both sides.

Former Israeli general (Maj. Gen. (Res) Gershon Hacohen, former commander of the IDF’s Northern Command and head of the army’s war colleges): US military aid harms Israel. General is focused on conditionalities of the programs mainly.

Unfortunately, government of Israel being fully aware  of the problem follows the course predicted by Mancur Olson theory of special interests groups – asking for more and more ‘generous’ US Aid programs.

General references on Rashi:

“According to Rashi, who was one of the most important pillars of Jewish thought, this story teaches us that liberty has a price; that it’s better to have a bitter leaf taken directly from the hand of God than to be given something sweet as honey by mortal men, …  The lesson here is that the bitter taste of things we accomplish on our own is preferable to the sweet privileges than can imprison us.”

Posted in Economic Aid, Foreign Policy & Intl relations, Public choice, Security and Terrorism | Tagged | Leave a comment

One Year of Government 34 of Israel: Leading Parties’ Positions on Key Issues

Fourteen months has passed since the day of elections and more than one year since Government 34 of Israel has been sworn in 14 May, 2015 – long enough for the various political parties to demonstrate their readiness to live up to pre-election promises. Comparing practical action taken in this time with pre-elections platforms provides a fair notion of the dynamics and choices made by party leaders: whether scrupulously to follow the line as previously defined and refined, or to try new approaches.

The paper, just presented (uploaded at SSRN) explores the leading Israeli parties’ positions (the right-wing mainly) on the key issues. The set of “key issues” is our choice and contains Judicial (legal system) reform, Judea and Samaria status, 2nd amendment right and self-defense, other security issues, economic policies. The paper is focused primarily on the most important issues like Kfar Duma arson case (investigation was accompanied by grave violation of suspected persons’ rights), terror wave, Gas deal, new legislation weakening real estate owner’s rights for the developers’ benefit and more.
The principal issue of the paper is the parties’ commitments to their pre-election promises and informal mandates.

Posted in Elections and Politics in Israel, Public choice | Tagged | Leave a comment

Prague Conference on Political Economy: explaining Nanny State rise

Sergei Zhavoronkov and Kirill Rodionov have presented the report  ”Nanny State: few notes on origin and political machine” at Prague Conference on Political Economy.  The paper develops and upgrades  previous researches:  Universal Suffrage: Undeclared Conflict of Interest and   The Puzzle of Selectivity in Fighting Discrimination: A Public Choice Approach.

The main concern of discussant turned to be the issue authors had addressed to the final section of the report: political feasibility of the Taxpayers’  Democracy restoration.

Besides the report, we have addressed the same question previously at the chapter “Rebuilding the Democracy of Taxpayer” of our book  How the Import of Modern Western Institutions Suppresses Economic Growth: 1990-ties East-West and West-East Transition.

Posted in Nanny state, Public choice, Pure & Mixed Public goods, Scope of Government, Universal Suffrage | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

To Kill Hope? In Search of a Reliable Strategy to Fight Terrorism

New paper’s ‘To Kill Hope?   In Search of a Reliable Strategy to Fight Terrorism’ draft  is uploaded for critics in free access at ssrn: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2745935
Nor does history of Israel suggest any reasonable expectation that terrorists will be appeased by concessions of any kind, whether transfer of funds or relinquishing territory to terrorist control. Neither statistical analysis nor the study of particular cases support such a hypothesis.

The same feeling had expressed B.Netanyahu: ‘Terror comes from hope, not frustration’
The immediate and most obvious criterion of success for belligerent is the control of new territory and its population, which allows terrorists freedom of movement and opportunities to try new terrorist technologies and take the initiative in dynamic situations. Loss of land and population, humiliating defeat, or ostentatious display of triumph by the enemy, in contrast, discourage both terrorist leaders and perpetrators, who would lose the posthumous reward typically promised them in the guise of prestige and income for their families.
Factual instances and statistical data provide evidence to support the hypothesis that terrorism is best put down by force. When opting for such a strategy, it is of critical importance that military personnel be provided with appropriate legal protection.
Few additional stories available in Supplemental materials.
The paper contains three stories. The 1st – Israel legal system take its position at war. Since Israel court system choose to become politicized and sided Left parties in their political struggle. Judges’ decisions regarding security problems experienced pretty specific shift to the position, presented below. The 2nd covers issue of competing claims for murder, proving rational approach of terrorists gangs leaders in their fundraising. The 3rd story brings rational interpretation for Israel mainstream (leftist) mass Medias’ coverage of terrorism in support of “peace process” solution.

Posted in Elections and Politics in Israel, Pure vs. Mixed Public Goods, Security and Terrorism | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Where are their children?

Euro-bureaucrats had invited  millions savages from Middle East and North Africa. It turned to be new “Europeans”  destined by Brussels to vote for Big Unlimited Government, say,  not obsessed by their children fate. Now it turned to be 10000 children missed and they even not care… They hate us more than love their children, as Golda Meir once has said.

Pay attention, no “official” feminists cry for the missed children, no one child-caring bureaucrat has been detected working hard to prevent massive disappearance.  The Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) of September 2, 1990 prepared and adopted mainly as an judicial instrument to take a child from the family “in the best interests of the child” (see article 9) – it is not about missing 10000 children. Leftist Guardian already preparing to blame “white christian European men” for sex exploitation of poor cute creatures in the Hungary and in Germany.

So, unfortunately, our worst expectations on real intentions of governmental intervention in intra-family relations of law-abiding people of the West and, specifically regarding government which belongs in nursery come true.

Posted in Family, Family protection, Institutions preventing economic growth | Leave a comment

Do I need ID to vote? Carpetbaggers and electoral fraud come back

Washington Post have published just before November 2014 Elections short Manual on “where to commit electoral fraud”. The fraud masters from Democratic party supporting Unions got the signal and interpreted it quite clearly and rationally (the fact they failed generally that time doesn’t means fraud is tolerable). Situation have being improved a little bit since November, 2014 (see current photo-ID legislation state-by-state).

The most disturbing news is the fact the courts having struck down the laws in some states adopting legislation requirement to bring photo ID for to vote (!).

I’m afraid, in Long Run Republican will need badly to adopt old southern democrat’s experience (see citation below, how Universal Suffrage caused disenfranchising, corruption and Welfare state). In 1870-ties electoral fraud was broadly used by republicans (radical, “progressive”) to retain control in southern (Dixie) states. During 1870-ties southern democrats fired back with their own fraud experience: they paid the black for to vote Democratic party and recovered (restored their power) in the South till 1964.

I’m sure, this sort of counter fraud will be morally legitimate at list in the states, infected by liberal court’s activism.

The root of the problem is Universal Suffrage. The only reliable cure for this disease is taxpayers’ democracy restoration (census suffrage).

1866 pre-history: “Again coercion and force became the order of the day. Declaring the state governments created under Johnson nonexistent, the Radicals divided ten Southern states into five military districts and put them under the rule of major generals and an army of occupation. Frankly revolutionary in mood, Thaddeus Stevens and his followers overrode constitutional restraints right and left. They created a new electorate of more than 700,000 Negroes and pared down the white voters by disfranchisement to a total of some 627,000. The Radicals displaced six governors and supplanted thousands of lesser officials with their own men; they purged three legislatures of conservative members, threw out laws that displeased them, suppressed or ignored civil courts, denied the right to trial by jury, and violated freedom of press and speech. All this was done, of course, in the name of democracy. And in truth history does not record a more drastic application of the democratic dogma. In addition to the sudden creation of the new Negro electorate, the Radicals set up new state constitutions that were several leaps ahead of the old ones in a progressive direction. They reformed judicial procedure, court organization, and county organization, and established, on paper at least, a broad conception of the government’s responsibility for the people’s welfare that was new to the South. Woodward, C. Vann (1991-03-28). Reunion and Reaction: The Compromise of 1877 and the End of Reconstruction (pp. 14-15). Oxford University Press. Kindle Edition.

1877 history: Treasury, testified before a House committee that Governor J. Madison Wells had commissioned him to come to Washington and put the votes of Louisiana up for sale. “He said he wanted at least 200,000 apiece for himself and Anderson and a smaller amount for the niggers,” testified Maddox.13 Even Republican papers admitted that these developments threw “a terrible suspicion over the action of the Louisiana Returning Board, and seriously involved a number of men whom the country has tried hard to think well of.”14 Woodward, C. Vann (1991-03-28). Reunion and Reaction: The Compromise of 1877 and the End of Reconstruction (p. 155). Oxford University Press. Kindle Edition.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment