The Palestinians Need the Israelis

8/6/2019 The Palestinians Need the Israelis

1/3

Copyright2011byRobertL.Nuckolls,III.Thisdocumentmaybereproducedinanyformorvenuewhenauthorshipisproperlycitedandtheworkisnotexploitedforthepurposeofsecuringaprofitorobscuringcontext.

1

The Simple-Ideas Occasional

A publication dedicated to the study and celebrationof common sense and repeatable experiments

Robert L. Nuckolls, III

Medicine Lodge, KS

Number 118C, 12 June 2011

The Palestinians Need the Israelis

A few days ago I was reading comments to an article

discussing the Middle East peace process. The author of

the article (and the majority of comments) were solidly

engaged in one-upmanship. Those guys killed more folks

than these guys. This side has rights of succession to

certain lands. That side is hell-bent upon sadistic

suppression of the other side. Etc, etc, etc.

While pondering this statistical, political, economic and

philosophical cat fight . . . it occurred to me that any

potential for prosperity outside the borders of Israel is

heavily dependent upon the prosperity of individuals

inside the borders of Israel. I suggest that the recipe for

success has been demonstrated over thousands of years

and is independent of religious, political or cultural

preferences for the individuals involved. Let us consider

readily observable facts:

There is a phenomenon that describes human behaviors

for thousands of years where the "border lands" between

two nations become fuzzy as to nationality, even fuzzier

as to real borders. For example: Present trends plotted intothe future suggest that in the next 50 years or so, control

US territories as far as 200 miles north of the US/Mexico

border will become problematic.

These lands will suffer campaigns of "social unrest" that

run the gamut from simple protest to overt violence.

Sympathetic US citizens and invading Mexicans will both

campaign for a benign acceptance of a new demographic.

Many leaders on both sides of the border will suggest that

the US agree to an appropriate "lands for peace swap" the

US and Mexico. The earliest manifestations of this

phenomenon are already visible.

Signs erected by the US Government just north of the

border read in part: "Danger - Public Warning Travel

not recommended -- Active Drug and Human

Smuggling Area -- Visitors may encounter armed

criminals and smuggling vehicles traveling at high

rates-- Stay away from cash, clothing, backpacks and

abandoned vehicles -- If you see suspicious activity, do

not confront! Move away and call 911"

Say what? Thats like opening the gates to a prison and

then erecting signs in the surrounding countryside warning

citizens of a risk that the government is unable or

unwilling to manage.

A lands for peace deal simply establishes a new border

land between the two countries. At the same time it

encourages a progressive escalation of pressures against

the defensive nation: This is a textbooks tactic of the

despotic progressive - constant, unrelenting pressure.

Israel has successfully defended herself on many

occasions and has prevailed in spite of nearly continuous

harassments and the occasional overt military action. The

much sought after reward for a successful self-defense is

the expansion of Israels defensible borders.

The well of factoids for discussion are endless. They

choose to ignore the fact that Israel expanded her

defensible borders on the several occasions that they were

attacked first. Nonetheless, sympathizers say those borders

should be contracted and disputed lands returned . . . to

somebody.

The laundry list of Israeli transgressions fall in one of

three categories. (1) offensive, (2) defensive or (3) the acts

of sadists who take pleasure in abusing their neighbors.

Offensive behavior as causation doesnt make sense. Israel

has the horsepower to conduct a simple, precise clean

sweep of the disputed lands. So whats keeping them from

simply exterminating the entire populace of their border

lands?.

Okay, what about allegations of theft, detention,

assassination, bulldozing of homes, sundry attacks andpolitical persecutions? Israels detractors would have us

believe the tally of Israeli sins are simply adult

manifestations of behavior by children who grew up

tearing the legs of bugs and turpentining cats. Now fitted

with bigger toys and a national mission, they can turn their

sadistic pleasures upon the next door neighbors and their

children. Its an easy hypothesis to test. Implement a

policy of honorable action by both sides and then see how


2/3


2

many individuals of either population are still victim to

what can only then be sadistic behaviors. If it can be

deduced that Israels behaviors toward its neighbors is not

offensive or sadistic, then whats left?

Ill suggest that the road to true peace has nothing to do

with the suggestions or demands by present worldleadership or findings of any form of world court. A

theme oft repeated in these essays offers the following

simple-ideas:

Liberty is the condition which allows the individual to go

through life free of force or fraud against their person

and property, i.e. the right to be left alone. Communal

liberty is the condition that fosters cooperation between

individuals in a free-market exchange of value that

raises the socioeconomic condition of a nation and all

nations with which they trade.

The prime directive of a civilized society is the

preservation of individual liberty. If your neighbor is not

engaged in dishonorable activity, then one has no charter

to bring force of any kind against their person or property.

Let us step around any notions of racism by

hypothesizing a boundary A inhabited by population

A1. Doesnt need to be Israel. It can be anywhere on the

planet. It might be the state of Maryland. Let us further

suppose that boundary A touches boundaries B, C,

D and E inhabited by populations B1, C1, D1,

and E1.

Let us suppose that further examination of those

populations reveals subsets B2, C2, D2, and E2"who are not champions of liberty; they preach a doctrine

of total destruction of population A1" and the taking of

all resources within boundary A. B2" could be a street

gang having designs on expanding their own territory and

using language of despotic progressive bully to garner

neighborhood support for their goals.

Humans tend to be the most content when their

boundaries are populated with honorable individuals

engaged in free-market exchanges of value amongst

themselves and with populations in other boundaries. The

meteoric rise of the US in a mere 200 years is a validation

of that particular recipe for success. When deprived ofliberty and the resources for exploiting individual and

communal liberty, struggles for basic comforts consume

great amounts of time . . . . the idea of building anything

new and better are easily displaced by the destructive

rhetoric of by peoples B2 and friends who sing a

compelling tune in four part harmony: "It's Easier to Take

than to Build." Being thus distracted from any ideas of

opportunity offered by a productive relationship with their

neighbor, they assign blame for their admittedly

uncomfortable condition upon that same neighbor and may

even react on those beliefs with violence.

Consider the following hypothesis: Suppose all the

peoples who occupy Israel said, "Okay, we give up. Dont

shoot any more Were leaving." Suppose further that thepeoples who occupy Israels border lands move in and

take over. With a infusion of land, facilities and

infrastructure to the victors holdings, what is the

likelihood for this new national entity will thrive in a state

of Utopian peace and prosperity?

One learns by following the examples of teachers, people

who have demonstrated recipes for success of their

particular design goals.. Running all the chefs out of a

successful kitchen benefits you not. You are left with a

room full of pots, pans, stoves and perhaps a pantry full of

spoiling foodstuffs that nobody knows how to prepare.

Your customer base will take their business elsewhere

when anticipation of a favorite meal is dashed.

A lust for possession of some resource does not guarantee

a Utopian outcome for taking that resource. Suppose you

or I were handed the keys to a nuclear power plant, "Take

it, it's all yours." Now what? It would be incumbent upon

us to enlist a constellation of others who's collective time,

talent and resources make successful operation of the plant

possible.

What happens to any coveted resource when placed in

control of individuals lacking talent to exploit the potential

for success represented by that resource? If B1 and

friends tossed inhabitants of boundary A out, Ill suggestthey are left with an empty kitchen. I suggest further the

outcome will include some combination of the following:

(1) The ownership of all resources within A are beyond

the time, talent and resources for B1 and friends to

operate and maintain. It will fall in to abject decay.

Utopia is wrecked in a few years.

(2) B1 and friends might enlist the populations of F,

K, J, and M to lend their time talents and resources

to the ownership and operation of their newly confiscated

Utopia. The new socioeconomic melting pot is no longer

the Utopia described in the songs which were sung withso much hope for change. Ownership of Utopia is

transferred to those who know how and what to do with it.

(3) Despotic progressives are talented at championing the

causes of a supposedly persecuted and oppressed

underdog. Many competent observers have suggested that

the Palestinians are simply pawns in the great

socioeconomic game played in that region for thousands


3/3


3

of years. Supposed the keys to the Israeli kingdom where

handed over to the Palestinians tomorrow. What are the

practical expectations for popular underdogs of that

region being able to defend and retain their booty? If the

peoples living outside the borders of Israel cannot simply

take what they desire by force right now, it seems likely

that the Palestinians later possession of that prize will beshort lived.

I suggest that it matters not if inhabitants of boundary

A are members of any particular group. They could be

Arab, Irish, Presbyterian, Brazilian, or members of the

Rotary Club. It matters not whether B1 and friends are

of any particular group. It does matter that B2 and

friends are despotic progressive groups that might range

from simple neighborhood street gangs up to an including

world-wide promoters of dishonor, death and destruction.

Discussion of these conditions in the context of racism,

class, community or national identity is moot. It's a study

of human behaviors that have occurred countless times

over the centuries.

If the Pharaoh of Egypt had facilitated the growth of his

slaves into an industrious, independently self-sufficient

and thriving population he could have then imposed a

10% tax on their goods and services. Egypt could have

been a much different nation. By modern times the nation

might be mostly in the hands of chefs who make the

kitchen produce . . . but does it matter? What matters is

that there is a robust, honorable free-market economy that

offers opportunity for any individual to exploit their

personal potential.

When one turns humans into livestock, you must feed,

clothe, house and then direct their every activity. A

burdensome and expensive task as the Pharaoh of Egypt

discovered. Of course, one can forgo that expense and

simply kill them off. Either action is an overt

demonstration of ignorance of human potential and a

tragic waste . . . and the pyramids don't get built either.

I suggest that individuals who occupy the lands

surrounding Israel are in demonstrably in greater need of

free-market exchange with Israel than the other way

around. Im willing to bet that Israel would be delighted

to participate in the exchange of time, talent and resourcesthat promote peace and prosperity for both sides of all

borders. Both sides need to be free of conditions that

promote reflexive running for cover when the rockets fall,

airplanes fly over or camo-painted trucks come rolling

around the corner. The dishonorable propensity for doing

things to each other has to cease first.

Meetings held and documents signed in Geneva, the

U.N., Paris, or Camp David are but dreams of fools or

smokescreens of despots who hawk the idea that a worldsdiscomforts are assuaged by writing law, hiring

bureaucrats, building armies and throwing money at it. It

didnt work a thousand years ago, didnt work 50 years

ago, wont work tomorrow. But the Nobel Prize

Committee is still heavily invested in this obscene notion.

If you were to conjure up recipes for success for say Cuba,

Haiti, or North Korea. Would they not do better to study

and emulate the successes of their neighbors? Would a

Nobel Peace Prize not be more deserved in the form of

entrepreneurial micro-loans to individuals intent upon

doing things for as opposed to doing things to their

neighbors? I much rather see them do that as opposed to

rewarding fools or financing despots.

Liberty is such a simple thing to establish and practice.

Just quit doing things to each other and set up forums of

honorable exchange. Peace will come to the Middle East

(indeed the entire world) only when B2 and friends are

identified as sociopathic pariahs and are shunned or forced

out of power.

Our founding fathers prescribed one demonstrable

treatment for the discomforts of all honorable citizens.

When the Constitutional Convention closed in 1787, one

Dr. James McHenry heard a lady ask Dr. Franklin. Well

Doctor what have we got? A republic or a monarchy. Dr,

Franklin replied, A republic . . . if you can keep it. So itis with the peoples who live outside the borders of Israel.

Even if the Israelis left tomorrow, the new owners are

unlikely to enjoy Israels successes. Further, somebody

with more firepower might pounce upon the new

inhabitants and take their hard-won possessions.

Honorable individuals are far more valuable as partners

than slaves or targets of destruction. This is especially true

of partners who know how to do really cool stuff!

Palestinians will be much more prosperous and secure in

their persons and property if they snuggle up close to (and

trade with) somebody who has repeatedly demonstrated a

will and ability to defend themselves. The PalestiniansDesPro leadership will be their destruction. Israel is not

their enemy. Israel is their salvation.

Documents

The Palestinians Need the Israelis