The Unseen Cause of Rampant Violence in America


The university-bred doctrine of moral relativism, which influences all levels of education in America, spawns moral confusion and violence throughout American society.

By denying the existence of objective rational standards by which to distinguish right from wrong or good from bad, the academic doctrine of moral relativism fosters the primacy of force or violence as opposed to the primacy of reason and persuasion, as the only effective  means by which to resolve differences of opinion and interests among men.

Therefore, to diminish the violence now rampant in America, it will be necessary for the religious and political leaders of this country to criticize the academic doctrine of moral relativism by exposing its logical consequences and pernicious influence on the attitudes and public behavior of American citizens.

Prof. Paul Eidelberg

Some Logical but Unmentioned Conclusions


Paul Eidelberg

Seven years ago, Caroline Glick exposed “The high price of coalition stability” (Jerusalem Post, June 22, 2010).  Her article involved some unmentioned but logical conclusions regarding Israel’s system of coalition cabinet government.  The present writer has written of these unmentioned conclusions in policy papers, books, and countless articles during the past two decades. Indeed, I have systematically correlated Israel’s political failings with its flawed institutions – all in vain.

Before continuing, let me assure the reader than I am well aware of the fact that political institutions, however wisely designed, cannot prevent the election of inept and even treacherous office holders, including presidents of the United States such as Barack Obama.  In other words, there is no institutional substitute for virtue and wisdom.  It should be emphasized that properly designed institutions can mitigate men’s follies and vices.  Alas, this is not the case in Israel, whose governmental institutions maximize the disarray of politics in this country.

The disarray began and continues as a result of a simple political decision: when Israel’s government was established in 1948, its founders, headed by David Ben-Gurion decided to make the entire country a single electoral district.  This political arrangement necessitates a parliamentary system in which parties win Knesset seats on the basis Proportional Representation (PR). Given a low electoral threshold (it has risen from 1% to 3.25%), PR spawns a multiplicity of parties such that no party has ever come close to winning a majority of the 120 seats in the Knesset.  This fact necessitates coalition cabinet government, which results in a cabinet consisting of several rival political parties.

Let’s examine the grounds on which virtually every commentator fears to tread.

1) The multiplicity of parties produced by PR prompts major parties – recall Labor in 1992 and the Likud since then – to deceive the public by campaigning on a more or less centrist or more vote-getting agenda, only to shift in the opposite direction once the leaders of these parties become prime ministers.  Thus, Labor leader Yitzhak Rabin, who scorned the PLO in the 1992 election campaign, signed – after a “decent interval” – the Israel-PLO agreement of 1993. Likewise, Ariel Sharon, who campaigned against Labor’s policy of disengagement in 2003, adopted – after another “decent interval” – that very policy!

2) Likud Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was also devious.  He said nothing of the “two state solution” preceding the February 2009 election. But after a mind-numbing interval of four months, he endorsed a Palestinian state!

3) Some sixty years ago, David Ben-Gurion denounced Proportional Representation and revealed the pernicious nature of multiparty cabinet government, which remains solidly entrenched to this day.  The reasons are not pretty.  PR not only yields a multiplicity of parties in the Knesset.  It also compels citizens to vote for fixed party lists.  One result is this: the members of the Knesset are not individually accountable to the voters in constituency or regional elections.

4) Moreover, members of the Knesset know that this system of voting for fixed party slates – a system found only in four out of more than 80 countries classified as democracies – enables an incumbent MK to be re-elected without having to compete with a rival candidate (who would surely reveal the incumbent’s political failings).  For this reason alone, virtually all members of the Knesset oppose direct, personal, and democratic election of Israel’s parliament.

5) Furthermore, multiparty cabinet government enables any MK, regardless of his record, to become a cabinet minister – the road to power and political longevity.  This explains Glick’s characterization of Ehud Barak is a “serial bungler.”  One may add Shimon Peres, the father of Oslo, who became a permanent fixture in the Knesset until that conglomeration of self-serving politicians elected him Israel’s president!

Surely a well-informed and perceptive political analyst like Caroline Glick could add many other instances of the disastrous consequences of multiparty cabinet government.

Science: The Handmaid of the Torah


Prof. Paul Eidelberg, (Ten years ago)

Astronomers and astrophysicists are revealing with increasing frequency the compatibility of the Torah with the most recent discoveries in science.  A recent article in one of the foremost international journals of physics bears the title, “Creation of the Universe from Nothing”:

At the 1990 meeting of the American Astronomical Society, Professor John Mather of Columbia University, an astrophysicist … presented “the most dramatic support ever” for an open universe [i.e., one which supports a cosmological proof of God’s existence].… Mather’s keynote address was greeted with thunderous applause, which led the meeting’s chairman, Dr. Geoffrey Burbidge [an atheist astronomer], to comment:  “It seems clear that the audience is in favor of the book of Genesis – at least the first verse or so, which seems to have been confirmed.”

The renowned mathematical physicist and agnostic Stephen Hawking concedes:  “It would be very difficult to explain why the universe should have begun in just this way, except as the act of a God who intended to create beings like us.”

Unfortunately, scientific research has had no influence on the attitudes and policies of Israel’s ruling elites.  Not even the religious parties comment on the relevance of contemporary science to the cynicism of Israeli politicians!  This means that Truth is irrelevant in the domain of politics – a deadly phenomenon.

Israel is engaged in a life-and-death struggle with Islam, a religious creed whose propagandists disparage the “Old Testament” along with Jews.  Of course, Israel’s Government ignores these ignorant and vicious Muslims. At the same time, however, no religious party in Israel ever challenges Jewish scorners of the Torah by means of established scientific research.

Hence let me say a few words in honor of the Torah by quoting the French intellectual giant Henri Baruk, a pharmacologist, biologist, psychologist, sociologist, and member of the Medical Academy of Paris.  Baruk encapsulates the Torah as “the most complete science of man,” and writes:

Though this extensive science has been vulgarized by the religions which have sprung from it, it still remains little known and even misunderstood.  The [gentile] religions … took mainly from [the Torah] its moral principles with … various modifications which left out Hebraic Law, Hebraic biology, Hebraic sociology, etc. — in a word, the concrete and material parts of the Torah.  Complete and scrupulously exact study of the Torah is indispensable if one is to capture its spirit.  Then again the Torah forms an indivisible whole, and one cannot study it in borrowed versions or excerpts without completely falsifying its meaning and spirit.” (Tsedek, 1972.)

Baruk’s discoveries in medicine are not exactly new.  In The Secret Life of the Jew (1930), Rabbi David Miller writes:  “In the Pharmacological Laboratory of Johns Hopkins University … it has been recently established, apparently as a new discovery, that menstruous women generate and carry menotoxin throughout their systems.  At the onset of their period, they contaminate by contact and even retard the development of plants,” (Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics, January 1924.)

Other quotes from Rabbi Miller’s book follow:

Dr. Peter Frank, known as “the founder of the modern science of public health,” writes:  “Very often do I read the rules of the Mosaic medical policy and their valuable sanitary laws which by far surpass many of our contemporary public health institutions  …”

Charles W. Elliot:  “Modern sciences are only corroborating the ancient Hebrew precepts.”  Sir James Cantlie agrees:  “We have never upset one of  Moses’ laws in regard to hygiene, sanitation, or medical teaching.  All that the scientists of today, with their microscopes and text books, did was to prove that the ancient lawgiver was right…. We had been trying hitherto to cure disease instead of preventing it, as Moses did.”

Rabbi Miller extols the Jewish laws of family purity as “a great boon to woman according to medical standards.”  It is a preventative of many diseases of the female organs, including cancer. “It conserves her natural faculties and prolongs her youth and attractiveness,” more so in view of the limits and obligations which the Torah imposes on a Jewish husband in regard to conjugal relations with his wife. These limits contribute to a woman’s dignity, privacy, and independence.

The Torah thus embraces cosmology and cleanliness – heaven and earth.  With the world now steeped in violence as well as in mental and political disorder, the time may not be distant when a science more fundamental and more comprehensive than quantum mechanics and relativity theory will be revealed in Israel and thus be acknowledged as the handmaid of the Torah.☼

Economic Diplomacy Continues – President Trump Softens Tone Toward China Currency Manipulation…


President Trump gave an interview to the Wall Street Journal where he changed a prior position on declaring China a “currency manipulator”:

(Via ABC) According to the Wall Street Journal, the president said the decision came in consideration of talks with China over its role in countering North Korean weapons testing. Trump said that any move to attach the designation could hamper China-U.S. relations. He claimed that, in recent months, China’s currency manipulation has halted. (link)

Is this a change in position? Yes.

It is an arbitrary change, or even an unexpected shift? Hell no.

As we have pointed out since the February 2016 GOP debate, the Trump approach toward North Korean hostilities is to leverage China to get control over N-Korea. –Expanded Backstory

President Trump is realigning U.S. geopolitical relationships based on America-First interests.   President Trump is using economic leverage to provide security and global stability. President Trump knows how to stroke the panda fur.

Last night President Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping held another consultation call. 

Earlier today China abstained from vetoing a U.N. security council resolution against the use of chemical weapons in Syria.  Russia was forced to stand alone in alliance with Bashir Assad.  Russia is now isolated.  To emphasize that point, President Trump publicly states his support for NATO.

Earlier this week, following the April 6th, 7th Florida meeting between President Xi and President Trump, China refused to allow North Korean coal cargo ships to unload.  Today, China signaled they may temporarily ban the export of oil into North Korea.  Through these actions North Korea is becoming isolated.

China holds leverage over North Korea as the U.S. holds leverage over Puerto Rico.

As we stated in 2016, and again in January 2017, President Trump is positioning economic leverage with China to promote U.S. security interests.

The non-designation of China as a “currency manipulator” may be a billion benefit to China today, but if China can leverage productive action by North Korea, that same transactional exchange may save the U.S. billions in the use of military and peacekeeping assets, and provide enhanced security to South Korea – another strategic economic interest of the U.S.

This should come as no surprise to those who carefully followed Donald Trump’s public positions on the issues.   Bold predictive statements made earlier provide the leverage today for President Trump to find a larger economic and national security win.

In the last 24 hours:

♦ Russia said President Putin would not meet with U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson.  Hours later Vladimir Putin hosted T-Rex for more than two hours.

♦ Russia vetos a U.N. Security Council resolution against Syria, and China refused to stand with them – that’s a historic shift of alliance.

♦ President Trump modifies his position on Chinese currency, and China announces the possibility of an oil embargo against North Korea.

[…]  A new nuclear test or an intercontinental ballistic missile test, if conducted by Pyongyang at this time, will be a slap in the face of the US government and will intensify the confrontation between North Korea and the US.

Presumably Beijing will react strongly to Pyongyang’s new nuclear actions. China will not remain indifferent to Pyongyang’s aggravating violation of the UN Security Council (UNSC) resolution.

More and more Chinese support the view that the government should enhance sanctions over Pyongyang’s nuclear activities. If the North makes another provocative move this month, the Chinese society will be willing to see the UNSC adopt severe restrictive measures that have never been seen before, such as restricting oil imports to the North.

Pyongyang’s nuclear weapons program is intended for securing the regime, however, it is reaching a tipping point. Pyongyang hopes its gamble will work, but all signs point to the opposite direction. (link)

President Trump is leveraging China toward successful objectives in both Syria and North Korea.  In both instances Russia and North Korea are more isolated.  Additionally, in both of the key security interests of the United States, the use of this economic leverage means we do not have to involve our military.

The media are gleefully pointing out reversals or modifications of prior positions announced by candidate, now President, Donald Trump.   However, within each of these modified positions there are enormous benefits to the America-First platform.

America-First is not about isolationism; it is about the smart use of America’s aggregate scale and influence to shape outcomes that benefit America First.

….”Complicated business folks, … complicated business.”

Juvenile Delinquency versus the Victory of Donald Trump


Prof. Paul Eidelberg

The phenomenon of college professors inciting students to vehemently and violently protest against Mr. Donald Trump’s election as President of the United States should be understood as a manifestation of juvenile delinquency!

Truth be told, these professors are half-educated academics. They have been stupefied by the university-bred doctrine of multicultural moral relativism. This doctrine purveys nihilism, a denial of the existence of Truth. Nihilism denies the power of human reason, hence of man’s God-given capacity, to distinguish between good and evil.

This Nihilism has corrupted the minds of one generation after another of American college students since the end of the First World War. Although America won this European-inspired war on the battlefield, European philosophy defeated America on the campus. The skepticism of England’s philosopher David Hume, and the historical relativism of Germany’s philosophers Hegel and Marx, took American colleges and universities by storm.

European philosophy blitzed America by obliterating America’s primary intellectual and moral foundations, whose American bedrock was the Declaration of Independence. This foundational document embodied, and preserved for the American people, a concept known as “the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God,” a concept rooted in the Creation Narrative of the Book of Genesis, which was undermined by Darwin’s doctrine of biological Evolution.

Darwin’s doctrine of evolution reinforced the academic doctrine of historical relativism. Historical relativism includes moral relativism, which is magnified by present-day Liberalism. This degraded form of Liberalism has utterly corrupted college youth. For this corruption we may thank half-educated American professors. These academics have taken civilization for granted. They are oblivious of how many centuries were required for thoughtful and virtuous men to overcome centuries of pagan polytheism.

Countless Liberals of the academic elite have taken civilization for granted, which means they have taken decency for granted.

While the elites of Liberal Democracy exalt freedom and equality, they are oblivious of the demonstrable truth that freedom and equality without rational and moral constraints cannot but lead to barbarism or neo-paganism. These constraints (as was known by America’s Founding Fathers) are nothing other than the Noahide Laws of morality embodied in the Book of Genesis.

Neo-paganism is manifested today not only by Muslim terrorists who behead “infidels” or burn them alive. Neo-paganism lurks in the hostile passions and prejudices of half-educated college youth who believe that by protesting against the presidential election of Donald Trump, they are upholding Democracy, when in fact they are displaying contempt for the rule of law without which Democracy degenerates into anarchy.

Unfortunately, not a single 2016 presidential candidate, not even the erudite professor Newt Gingrich, possessed the wherewithal to denounce the corrosive impact of moral relativism, a doctrine that has been propagated by America’s academic elite for several decades. Sadly, notwithstanding his merits, President-elect Donald Trump is not intellectually well-fitted to combat that sinister doctrine without arousing fools and scoundrels in the academic and electronic media to denounce him as a proponent of “absolutism” and “McCarthyism.”

It should also be noted that relativism has flourished in America despite the influence of Christianity. Indeed, the hundred denominations of Protestant Christianity encourage relativism. So, too, does the Catholic Church, which, apart from its logically untenable and sinister doctrine of “Replacement Theology,” has sullied itself by supporting independent statehood for the pagan Palestinian Authority, a device used to undermine Israel and Jewish possession of Jerusalem. Even the Vatican fosters atheism via the moral equivalency implied in its politically neutral attitude toward the Israel-Palestinian conflict!

Small wonder the evangelical atheism current in America and promoted via moral relativism will not be overcome by the established churches of Protestant and Catholic Christianity. They are more concerned about the rebirth of Israel, that is, about the intellectual threat Judaism poses to Christian theology, for example, by the compatibility of Judaism with scientific cosmology.

This compatibility, to begin with, was confirmed recently by a team of scientists headed by astronomer John M. Kovac of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics. Dr. Kovac announced on March 17, 2014 that his team of astrophysicists had found the evidence it was seeking to support the theory that the universe did indeed have a beginning. Of course, this finding, as mentioned, is only a beginning; but it’s the beginning of a worldwide intellectual revolution anticipated by the Sages of Israel.

That said, can it be that the presidential victory of Mr. Donald Trump, whose election has disconcerted America’s unknown but silently subversive academic establishment, has so rattled the eggheads of this intellectual clique as to prompt them and their students to behave as juvenile delinquents – can it be, I ask, that this election of an uncouth and
unlearned “outsider” heralds a step toward America’s redemption?☼

Why Democratic America Can’t Win the War against Islam


Eidelberg Report – Tamar Yonah Show, INR – December 11, 2006 Updated

Democracies cannot win a protracted war in an era in which their opinion makers have been indoctrinated and emasculated by the university-bred doctrine of multicultural moral relativism.

This relativism, which inclines liberal democracies to pacifism, corrupts 75-80 percent of American social scientists. These academics provide the experts of our policy makers and decision makers, as well as the mandarins of the mass media. Whether studying journalism, political science, sociology, psychology, etc., they have been taught there are no objective standards by which to determine whether the way of life of one individual, group, or nation is intrinsically superior to that of another. All lifestyles are morally equal. Hence there are no moral grounds for preferring the American way of life to the Islamic way of life.

This is a denial of evil. By denying the enormity of evil, relativism fosters sentimental humanism. This humanism underlies the strategy of “post-heroic” warfare, which would not only avoid casualties to your own troops, but also to avoid killing enemy civilians.

One would have to impose censorship on the universities and the media to conduct a war-winning strategy against Islamism and its global jihad.

Let me quote Nonie Darwish, that gallant Egyptian writer who immigrated to America in 1978 and has lectured around the world since 9/11. In her book, Now They Call Me Infidel, she refers to an authoritative Muslim leader who brazenly said this to Christians: “Thanks to your democratic laws we will invade you; thanks to our religious laws we will dominate you” (p. 144).

Darwish discerns how Muslims exploit the freedom of speech of liberal democracies to spread Islamism on university campuses where Muslim student organizations freely preach Islam, obscuring its history of despotism. She notes, moreover, that liberal professors are equally if not more radical than any imam in a radical mosque. And most mosques, she warns, preach anti-Americanism, anti-Semitism, and jihad.

Darwish, the daughter of a famous shahid, but educated by Christians as well as by Muslims, writes that “In the Muslim world there are no real distinctions between moderate or radical Muslims; all are Muslims” (p. 135). Moreover, “there is nothing America or the non-Muslim West can do that will meet with gratitude and appreciation…. To the contrary, good deeds of non-Muslims toward Muslims only deepen their sense of dependency and inferiority … [and resentment]”

Darwish deplores the media, especially CNN, which has contributed, she says, to Arab hatred by regularly criticizing America. The media, she argues, have failed to inform the public that the 9/11 attack was an attack not only on America. It was an attack by the haters of civilization. Yet the public, and even college students, are largely misinformed about this culture of hatred. A huge PR campaign, supported primarily by Saudi money, has spread across U.S. campuses selling Islam as a religion of peace. But that’s exactly what
President Bush told the nation the day after 9/11!

As I wrote in New York nine days after 9/11, democratic America lacks the concepts and perseverance to win the war against Islamic Jihad. I’ve mentioned the dispiriting influence of relativism. Add the fact there are some 150 billion Muslims on this planet. Daniel Pipes estimates that 10 -15 percent (or 150-225 million) support jihad. Robert Spencer reports estimates of more than 50 percent.

To win any war, one must be ruthless. The compassionate Abraham Lincoln understood this, which is why he was so frustrated with timid generals until Ulysses S. Grant and William Tecumseh Sherman came on the scene and ravaged the South to win the Civil War. Franklin D. Roosevelt understood this, which is why Dresden was napalmed. Harry S. Truman understood this, which is why Hiroshima and Nagasaki were vaporized. Today, when Israeli generals go abroad, they face the threat of being indicted as “war criminals” for having defended their country against Arab terrorists! They are shouted down as “war criminals” at American universities.

Higher education has eroded American resolve. Contrast the following. A CNN poll just days after 9/11 showed that 76 percent of Americans said they would support military action against al-Qaeda even if it meant 5,000 troops would be killed. Today, 56 percent are resigned to the prospect of a nuclear-armed Iran, and less than 10 percent supports military action to prevent that deadly outcome.

Why don’t college students know that a nuclear Iran could dominate the Middle East and the oil resources of the Persian Gulf? Why don’t they know that a pacifist Europe, already Islamized, would succumb to nuclear blackmail? Why don’t these student know that the loss of Europe would wreck the American economy and radically curtail the scholarships and funding on which the education and careers of these students ultimately depend? Why this ignorance or indifference?

Multicultural moral relativism erodes the American people’s confidence in the justice of their own cause vis-a-vis Islamic terrorism. Like the mandarins of BBC, those of CNN, ABC, NBC, USA Today, the New York Times, and the Washington Post, choke on the word “terrorism.” The same may be said of Barack Obama. This is not all.

Moral relativism has degenerated into “moral reversal.” The clearest example of this metamorphosis is the media’s coverage of the war between Israel and the PLO-Palestinian Authority. Whereas the victim, Israel, is portrayed as the villain, the villains, the Palestinian terrorists are portrayed as the victims. This moral inversion is conspicuous on university campuses, where Israel has been demonized.

But what is singularly significant, without denying the pivotal role of the race card, multicultural moral relativism prompted the large percentage of academics that voted for and facilitated the dovish Obama presidency. It should also be emphasized, however, that by curtailing American military power, Obama has promoted international anarchy.

Meanwhile, Obama has fostered a “culture of American self-hatred,” the inverse, ironically, of Islam’s culturally-induced hatred of all infidels!

Self-hatred, which is typical of the American Left, has influenced Hillary Clinton, whose mentor was the anti-American radical Saul Alinsky. Clinton’s goal in the 2016 election was to further the program – really the treachery of Barack Obama. Recall that his slogan in the 2004 presidential campaign was CHANGE, which signified nothing less than his sinister ambition to de-Americanize America. This corresponds to the “G’D damn America” malediction of his guru pastor Jeremiah Wright, a patron of the Left.

Hence we may thank the unrefined and very American Donald Trump, a political outsider, for bringing America back to its senses by relegating Hillary to the political wilderness, which the forthright Mr. Trump might inelegantly refer to as a political outhouse.☼

A Unity of Opposites: A Jewish Teaching that Private Vice Can Serve Public Virtue


Prof. Paul Eidelberg

Consider Donald Trump vis-à-vis these extracts from my book American Exceptionalism:

  • The Father of America, George Washington, envisioned in this nation the growth of a great commercial Republic. He understood that a commercial Republic will inevitably foster, along with competition and self-interest, the passions of ambition and avarice, which would augment dissension and litigation. However, he agreed with his great Secretary of the Treasury, Alexander Hamilton, that under the rule of law and well-designed institutions, “ambition will check ambition,” and that avarice, rightly directed, “may serve the public as well as the private good.”
  • Hamilton also discerned that commercial republicanism can foster rationality, creativity, co-operation, as well as thrift, frugality, and even civic virtue.
  • The philosopher-scientist Alfred North Whitehead observed that “Commerce is the great example of intercourse by way of persuasion.” It transforms self-interest into “enlightened self-interest.” Thus modified, self-interest will produce public benefits, while public benefits will enable a larger number of citizens to prosper and contribute to the common good.

********

Strange as it may seem, Donald Trump has been more or less influenced by the teaching of the above paragraphs. His pompous boast “to make America great again,” his enormous avarice primed by vulgar egoism, should be viewed with the above paragraphs in mind, to justly evaluate the man who may become the next President of the United States.

Trump make americ great