When the Jews feel the roots of their survival they can share this with others seeking for roots of survival. So when Gentile suffering will bring Gentiles to connect to Jewish suffering then we will be in the root of survival, because of and above all our suffering——a whole new world.
Being Jewish can at times be lonely, but the generations that preceded us knew it was worth it. This knowledge held up even if it meant being an Ivri, standing alone on one side with the world taunting us from the other. Being Jewish is about standing up for what we believe is right, regardless of popular opinion and practice. We are promised that ultimately the nations of the world will look to us for moral guidance just like they revered our forefather Abraham’s counsel. Until then, we need the strength to live up to our name — even if means being an Ivri when we find ourselves on the other side of public opinion.
FactF: A good man is a good man, and a bad man is a bad man, just as a good Hebrew is a good Hebrew and a bad one is a bad one. This is vice versa as well. You can go anywhere in the world and see people acting horribly to one another. This is not something new. The difference is the Hebrews shun, reject and denounce those among them who act out of line with the morals of their people. This is also true for many other peoples, the difference is that the Hebrew expects a permanent change before the individual can be respected as they once were in the community. Many other nations celebrate the sociopath and tolerate the liar and the psychopath and then wonder why things are going bad. As examples we have leaders of many of the arabic nations. Whos leaders lie, cheat, steal, starve their own people all the while touting their greatness. We see this same thing in North Korea. This is something that most often is abnormal in Jewish society.
I will say this, if, in the case that this great final “anti Christ” comes in my life time, and in the case that he sets himself up as God and tricks the world with promises of peace and takes over the rebuilt Jewish temple, and all the Jews go with him and fall for him. Then my opinion of them would change from one of mutual respect, to one of sorrow and mistrust. As it would for all who would fall for such a liar.
The only solution to this is Individual Liberty and unfettered free markets (Laissez-Faire Capitalism). This creates an interdependent holistic system [without contrivance or force] that is in alignment with basic principles and natural law/nature. In other words a world of, by, and for the Individual. Til then history will continue to repeat itself.
"I am convinced that any one accustomed to abstraction and analysis, who will fairly exert his faculties for the purpose, will, when his imagination has once learnt to entertain the notion, find no difficulty in conceiving that in some one, for instance, of the many firmaments into which sidereal astronomy divides the universe, events may succeed one another at random, without any fixed law; nor can anything in our experience or mental nature constitute a sufficient, or indeed any, reason for believing that this is nowhere the case.
Civil disobedience taken in support of concerns such as theenvironment or animal rights may be seen in part as a response to somebreakdown in the mechanisms for citizen engagement in thedecision-making process. This breakdown might be termed a democraticdeficit (Markovits 2005). Such deficits in that dialogue may be aninevitable part of real democracies, and disobedience undertaken tocorrect those deficits may be said to reflect, to varying degrees,dissenters' sensitivity to democratic ideals. Civil disobedienceremains today very much a vibrant part of liberal democracies and thereare significant issues concerning civil disobedience for philosophersto address, particularly in how this practice may be distinguished frommore radical forms of protest and how this practice should be treatedby the law.
The final possible view is that civil disobedients should be dealtwith more leniently than ordinary offenders are, at least when theirdisobedience is morally justified. These offenders are conscientiouslymotivated and often their protests serve the interests of society byforcing a desirable re-examination of moral boundaries. That said,moral justifications do not usually translate into legal justificationsand disobedients have been notoriously unsuccessful at advancing adefence of necessity (a defence that their action was legally justifiedbeing the lesser of two evils). Whether the law should be moreaccommodating of their conscientious motivation and efforts to engagein moral dialogue with government and society is a topic for furtherdebate.
There are reasons to believe that civil disobedients should be dealtwith more severely than ordinary offenders are. First, there is thefact that disobedients seem to have put themselves above the law inpreferring their own moral judgment about a certain issue to that ofthe democratic decision-making process and the rule of law. (Althoughsome judges have endorsed this caricature, it is worth noting that itclashes with how both dissenters and many theorists characterise theiractivities; cf. Rawls 1971; Greenawalt 1987; Markovits 2006.)Second, the communicative aspect of civil disobedience could be said toaggravate such offences since it usually is attended by much greaterpublicity than most covert violations are. This forces legalauthorities to concern themselves with the possibility that law-abidingcitizens will feel distressed, insecure and perhaps imposed on if noaction is taken. So, notes Greenawalt, while authorities may quietlylet minor breaches pass, failure to respond to violations performed, insome respect, in the presence of authority, may undercut claims thatthe rules and the persons who administered them deserve respect(Greenawalt 1987, 351–2). Third, any use of violence would seem toaggravate civil disobedience particularly when it increases the harm ofthe offence or when it directly incites further and unjustifiedinstances of violence. And although violence may eloquently communicatea dissenter's seriousness and frustration, it changes the natureof the dialogue. It pushes authorities to respond in ways consonantwith their stance on violence – responses which may be harsherthan those they would otherwise wish to make toward acts of civildisobedience that defend values they can appreciate.
The world is in desperate need of change, and like all great movements, it requires a leader – this is the destiny of the Jews! They are “the chosen people,” not because of their greatness, but because it’s necessary to have a starting point for the correction of the world. There is no place for pride, here; there is no advantage to being a Jew.
But much of this turns on the assumption that civilly disobedientbreaches of law are in fact comparable to ordinary offences and deservea comparable response from the law. The discussion in Section 1 of thekey features of civil disobedience showed that it differs greatly fromordinary offences both in motivation and in mode of action, let alonemoral justification. This would suggest that civil disobedience shouldbe regarded in the eyes of the law as a different kind of disobediencefrom common crimes. This leaves two options: civil disobediencedeserves greater censure or it deserves less censure than ordinarycrimes do.