I’m not touting the stock market, although my portfolio—conservative at this stage in my life—maintains equity (stock) assets. Not denying that great damage was done to the nation, investors who held on eventually rode out the storm. Yet being emotional creatures, people often make sweeping statements. Sometimes we’re right. But not always.

It’s safe to say that our world faces continuing challenges. Unemployment remains high, although the numbers are trending positively. Still, many Americans believe that the nation will never be the same. They’re right to a point, because from decade to decade America has never been the same. Periods of optimism have been countered by periods of pessimism. In 1933, during the Great Depression, unemployment hit 25 percent. Many people lost faith in our democracy and in the ability of capitalism to serve ordinary people. Some threw their support to Soviet communism. We know how the USSR ultimately fared.

Long-term, we may witness a new wave of prosperity. In ten and twenty years much of the Baby Boom generation will have retired and begun dying off. Jobs—even in a changing economy—will open in significant numbers. While individual histories will be filled with difficulties and suffering, as is always the case, the nation will probably experience resurgence despite today’s wide gap in income distribution.

The world beyond our borders also may change for the better, although serious problems will never disappear. I remember when no one believed that the Cold War would end. It did. No one believed that peace would come to Northern Ireland. It did. The same goes for South Africa abandoning apartheid.

Israel and the Palestinians? Egypt? Syria? Iran? Eventually, although probably beyond my lifetime, the Muslim world may sort itself out. Yet an unforeseen breakthrough could arise within the next few years. I’m no Pollyana. The war between Islamism (as opposed to Islam) and modernity could last a century or more. But America’s lifetime will be long, and if I personally don’t see resolution, this nation may witness a Muslim world choosing the twenty-first—or twenty-second—century over the seventh.

As to China, hopefully cool heads will prevail. Each nation has more to gain through cooperation than hostility. A marriage of convenience—filled with tension but governed by recognition of the potential consequences of active hostility—may represent the best we can do. Given the imperfections of the world, that’s not bad.

As a nation and as individuals, we need to keep our feet planted firmly on the ground. But we also must raise our eyes upward rather than bury our heads in the sand. Even a practitioner of realpolitik can maintain a sense of hope that the human condition, like the Dow, can reach new heights. Paraphrasing the Book of Ecclesiastes (1:5), the sun also rises.

I’ll be taking the next two Fridays off and will post again on June 7.

Responding is simple. Click on “comments” above then go to the bottom of the article.

Read the first three chapters of David’s new novel, SAN CAFÉ at davidperlstein.com. SAN CAFÉ is available at iUniverse.com, Amazon.com and bn.com.

The event I referred to was a program at the San Francisco Public Library main branch explaining Filipino suffering defending Bataan in early 1942 and during the “death march” following Bataan’s surrender on April 9. Approximately 12,000 Americans became prisoners of the Japanese—but so did 63,000 Filipinos, died in far greater numbers due to disease, starvation and brutal murder on the 65-mile trek north and during imprisonment at Camp O’Donnell.

Cecilia Gaerlan, the Filipina-American creator of the Bataan Legacy Project, seeks increased recognition for Filipinos who fought alongside American troops. Those vets have had great difficulty getting benefits from Washington. Filipinos they may have been, but the United States ruled the Philippines after wresting the islands from Spain in 1898.

I mention this in light of the April 15 bombing at the Boston Marathon. The Boston bombing was horrific but not the only—or most chilling—act of violence experienced in recent years. Heinous acts beyond our borders often go unnoticed. Americans tend to think that what happens to us is tragic while what happens to others merely represents a footnote to history. Understandably, our deepest emotions respond when disaster strikes at home—Oklahoma City, September 11, Hurricane Katrina, Superstorm Sandy and the recent explosion in West, Texas to name a few.

Yet we must acknowledge others’ suffering. Following catastrophes in Iraq and Afghanistan, nearly 80,000 people have died in the Syrian civil war, many of them civilians. (About 1.4 million Syrians have fled the country, according to The New York Times.) Violence abounds in sub-Saharan Africa, too.

This past week’s news offered more tragedy. The death toll from a fire at a garment factory in Dhaka, Bangladesh—allegedly caused by a lack of safety precautions—soared to 1,000. (One woman was just found alive.) Another factory fire in Bangladesh killed eight. In Pakistan, a suicide bomber killed 25 and wounded 65 at a rally organized by a religious political party. A gas tanker outside Mexico City exploded killing 20. Suicide bombers killed three people in Kirkuk, Iraq. Gunmen in Nigeria ambushed and killed as many as 46 police officers (death tolls vary).

My morning contemplation includes, “May this day bring us all a step closer to healing and peace, understanding that we’re all children of the same Creator and all deserving of the same respect.” I don’t kid myself. This thought won’t eliminate the hatred, greed and will to power too often attached to the human heart. This post won’t put an end to bad news.

Still, any and every step towards making the world better demands that we recognize the plight of others. We can’t dwell on these horrors all the time; we’d go mad. But we can transform footnotes to history into real people.

Responding is simple. Click on “comments” above then go to the bottom of the article.

Read the first three chapters of David’s new novel, SAN CAFÉ at davidperlstein.com. SAN CAFÉ is available at iUniverse.com, Amazon.com and bn.com.

Two weeks ago, Brittney Griner, the 6-8 basketball All-American from Baylor, announced that she was a lesbian. “Ho hum,” the sports world responded. Lesbians in sports don’t rouse much attention—and that’s good.

Last Monday witnessed some history. Collins, a 6-11 center for the NBA’s Washington Wizards last season, wrote in Sports Illustrated that he’s gay. A veteran of 12 NBA seasons, he became the first active player in America’s four major pro leagues (NBA, NFL, MLB, NHL) to come out of the closet. The reaction was close to “ho hum.” That’s good, too.

I have a personal stake in this. I have three sons. The eldest, like me, is straight. The middle was born female and is transgender—a term that in many ways defies description. He refers to himself as male and legally changed his first and middle names. My youngest is gay and happily married—to my son-in-law.

I’m delighted that Collins received much support—from President Obama, NBA commissioner David Stern and Lakers star Kobe Bryant among others. But not everyone was thrilled. Chris Broussard, who covers the NBA for CNN, said on the air that homosexuals violate the laws of Jesus Christ. He took flack. On Tuesday, Broussard wrote online, “As has been the case in the past, my beliefs have not and will not impact my ability to report on the NBA. I believe Jason Collins displayed bravery with his announcement … and I have no objection to him or anyone else playing in the NBA.”

While most sports fans and much of America is cutting Jason Collins slack, lets cut Chris Broussard some, too. Look, I totally disagree with his opinion. But he’s entitled to his religious beliefs so long as he doesn’t interfere with others who believe or live differently. And he says he won’t. So let him demonstrate that without being demonized.

Many Christians, Jews, Muslims and others think that homosexuality is wrong—and sinful. I disagree. But people who hold those positions must be free to do so as long as they don’t act to restrict others’ lives. We cannot uphold freedom of religion and speech if we refuse to allow those with different opinions to speak out.

According to millions of Christians, I’m going to hell. I couldn’t care less because I don’t believe that there’s a “right” religion or form of religious expression let alone a hell. But I care deeply about their right to express themselves so long as they don’t assault my privacy or preach—let alone act on—restricting my rights and freedoms.

So here’s to gay and lesbian athletes who now can see more of themselves in the mirror and, hopefully, compete openly. And here’s to the First Amendment with which no one should compete.

Responding is simple. Click on “comments” above then go to the bottom of the article.

Read the first three chapters of David’s new novel, SAN CAFÉ at davidperlstein.com. SAN CAFÉ is available at iUniverse.com, Amazon.com and bn.com.

According to Vedantam, a Yale professor suffered a serious hand injury. In the emergency room, she announced that she was a quilter—important to her—but received ordinary treatment. When she revealed she taught at Yale, in came a team of specialists. (The cost is another story). Vedantam cited an act of prejudice involving the initial treatment—one involving sins of omission rather than commission.

I’m not so sure. The professor’s routine care was probably outstanding. This was Yale! President Obama and the Giants’ catcher Buster Posey get more comprehensive, timely medical care than I do. Yet I get very good medical care and wish that everyone received at least the same. I don’t think I’m not being treated well because I’m not famous.

Along with prestige and wealth, familiarity and comfort create weighty factors regarding how people relate to each other. Human beings, like it or not, maintain an innate suspicion of “others,” even if differences are superficial. Such fear may be irrational on the conscious level, but it exists. Group loyalty tends to be deeply ingrained—taught certainly but also seemingly part of our DNA.

What to do? The Torah tells us that every human being is created in God’s image. Moreover, we should love our fellows as ourselves. Easier said than done. Some among us may exhibit universal affections, but I suspect genuine saints are few and far between.

The Mishnah states, “Kal Yisrael arevim zeh l’zeh.” All of Israel is responsible each for the other. Jews have a special responsibility to see to the wellbeing of other Jews. This attitude is hardly unique. African Americans, the Irish, 49ers fans, Latinos, Chinese, sorority sisters, Muslims, Native Americans and Elk Lodge members all understand.

Two Army experiences come to mind. At Officer Candidate School, the Jewish chaplain at Fort Benning had each Jewish senior candidate speak man-to-man with one Jewish junior candidate. That helpful chain linked men in class after class. In Columbus (Georgia) to purchase uniforms, I went to Sugarman’s and was delighted when the storeowner warmly greeted me as a landsman—a fellow Jew. (I can’t remember if I got a price break.)

Granted, our capacity to go the extra mile for everyone every day involves limitations, because our emotional energies aren’t boundless. We don’t feel the same attachment to everyone.

Still, legitimate affinities do not permit us to ignore the needs of others. A 9/11 or a Superstorm Sandy extends our sense of connection to everyone within sight or hearing. The nation grieves. The nation helps. But even on ordinary days, we must offer every person a minimum standard of decency, integrity, attentiveness and competence.

So here’s to the minimum standard. May we apply it to the max.

Responding is simple. Click on “comments” above then go to the bottom of the article.

Read the first three chapters of David’s new novel, SAN CAFÉ at davidperlstein.com. SAN CAFÉ is available at iUniverse.com, Amazon.com and bn.com.

I had written: “You can imagine a number of likely suspects, foreign and domestic, in general terms, but the investigation demands time to examine all the details. While CNN and other TV networks sprint towards breaking news, the FBI and other involved agencies must run a marathon of their own.”

Well, the FBI seems to have run a marathon in 9.58 seconds—the world record for 100 meters set by Jamaica’s Usain Bolt in 2009. They found and identified the remains of the bombs. They identified suspects from security videos then came up with faces and finally, names. As you doubtless know, The two suspects—brothers and ethnic Chechens—are believed to have held up a 7-Eleven store in Cambridge, murdered a school policeman at MIT and hijacked a Mercedes.

The elder, Tamerlan Tsarnaev, 26, was shot by police in Watertown and died at Beth Israel Hospital. Law enforcement personnel are looking for the younger, Dzhokhar Tarnaev, 19, who survived the shootout. He may be captured or killed by the time you read this.

Yet the marathon metaphor remains apt. If law enforcement authorities will have one run sprint, they’ll have to run another to answer important questions. Why did the brothers engage in this act of terrorism? Should anyone have picked up signals? Did they act alone? And can we expect copycat attempts from sick individuals seeking public exposure through such acts?

Okay, the Feds run a second sprint. But then the finish line moves again. How do we tighten security to make terrorist activities harder to plot and carry out? Do cities widen the use of video cameras? Do we form a National Video Association, inspired by the National Rifle Association, to encourage citizens to video every aspect of their lives should something go wrong?

Still, the tape keeps moving no matter how fast we run. Technology gives incredible power to police and security agencies. It enabled the FBI to make connections at seeming light speed. As KCBS Radio’s political analyst Marc Sandalow mentioned this morning, does this make us feel comfortable—or threatened? Where is the balance point between security and privacy? Does one exist at all?

Finally, how do we create a world in which we prevent the causes of terrorism? How do we reconcile Western ideas of peace and freedom with countless nations and peoples who don’t share our worldview and engage in violence that kills more people daily than died in Boston?

I conclude that life is one sprint after another—a marathon. The Talmud instructs that we must try to improve the world even if we can’t achieve that goal. Events of this week remind us that the finish line is a long way off. Yet decency demands that we put one foot in front of the other, mile after mile after mile.

Responding is simple. Click on “comments” above then go to the bottom of the article.

Read the first three chapters of David’s new novel, SAN CAFÉ at davidperlstein.com. SAN CAFÉ is available at iUniverse.com, Amazon.com and bn.com.

Compromise gets some people riled up. The word suggests a lack of integrity and morality. These folks believe they’re always right and opposing views are by definition flat-out wrong. No quarter ever can be given. A small step towards an opposing view only launches the righteous down a slippery slope.

The refusal to find a middle ground is nothing new. In the novel As a Driven Leaf by Milton Steinberg, published in 1939, the Sanhedrin in Judea debates allowing the study of Greek culture. For some Jews, only Torah is legitimate. Others have drifted towards Greek philosophy, art and science leaving Torah behind. Still others strive for balance. Their faith need not crumble before Greek reason; other cultures offer something of value. When the zealots, who wish to obliterate Greek culture in Israel’s midst, rebel against Roman occupation, disaster follows. Unfortunately this is history not just literature.

Yes, the Sages teach that compromise is not always allowed. One may not commit murder or incest or bow down to idols even on pain of death. Beyond that, the real world requires acceptance of the “C” word. Those who bear direct responsibility for a nation’s wellbeing—presidents, prime ministers and even kings—often understand this. Those who sit on the sidelines—another “C” word, Congress, comes to mind—can promote ideological or selfish positions. The buck does not stop with them.

Jordan’s King Abdullah offers an insight worthy of attention. In an article by Jeffrey Goldberg in this April’s Atlantic, Abdullah notes that his efforts to establish a modern democracy face opposition from the royal family. “The further away you’re removed from this chair [the throne—DP], the more of a prince or a princess you are.”

Fortunately, several new attempts at compromise may pay great dividends.

In Jerusalem, women and men may finally get to pray together at the Kotel—the Western Wall. Natan Sharansky, Israel’s head of the Jewish Agency, presented a plan that may not give liberal Jews everything they seek in an Orthodox-controlled religious environment but nonetheless allows for major progress. The plaza in front of the Kotel would be divided into Orthodox and non-Orthodox areas. To each his—and her—own.

In Washington, Senators Joe Manchin III (D-West Virginia) and Patrick Toomey (R- Pennsylvania) have fashioned a compromise on gun control to include background checks at gun shows. The National Rifle Association, which adheres to the slippery slope theory, will try to kill the legislation in the Senate. But the spirit of compromise just might be too great. In the same vein, reasonable immigration legislation may well be fashioned in the coming weeks. It won’t be perfect, but it will help our immigration policy make more sense.

So let’s get a grip on all our “C” words. Because some should be part of any polite company’s conversation. Oops, here we go again.

Responding is simple. Click on “comments” above then go to the bottom of the article.

Read the first three chapters of David’s new novel, SAN CAFÉ at davidperlstein.com. SAN CAFÉ is available at iUniverse.com, Amazon.com and bn.com.

Well, maybe that’s a stretch. “The Daily Currant” is a satirical news blog. And what could be sillier than Cairo seeking to arrest Jon Stewart just because he prompts some major laughs at the expense of hypocrites? Unless it’s Cairo arresting the Egyptian satirist Bassem Youssef for poking fun at Egypt’s president Mohamed Morsi. And that’s no joke.

Youssef believes that Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood are not all they would like Egyptians—and the world—to believe. So the government—Morsi disclaimed responsibility—arrested Youssef a week ago then released him as the world media shone a bright light into a dark hole. Nonetheless, Cairo threatens to withdraw the license of his TV channel. Its response resembles that of Seinfeld’s fabled Soup Nazi: “No freedom for you!”

I could be next. My novel Slick! points a big finger at the hypocrisy of Arab politicians who rule—or seek to rule—in the name of God. (For grins I skewer Washington, too.) Maybe the Muslim Brotherhood wants to go after Jon Stewart and me in tandem—two Jews daring to say that something’s not kosher in the Arab world. And that goes beyond Egypt.

A week ago, a Palestinian Authority court upheld a one-year prison sentence handed down to the journalist Mamdouh Hamamreh for posting a photo on Facebook likening P.A. president Mahmoud Abbas to a villain on a popular Syrian TV show. The P.A. then thought better of its stupidity and released Hamamreh.

Laughter indeed is serious business. Poke fun at a powerful figure in the Middle East—or at someone like Russian president Vladimir Putin (which I’ve done)—and you take your life in your hands. Morally corrupt leaders fear one thing above all: being turned into a punch line. Incredibly, they make it so easy.

People repeatedly ask me, “How do you come up with so many ideas for novels?” My answer is simple. “Every morning, I wake up.” Each day, a malevolent despot, despot wannabe, religious leader or corporate tycoon models the foolish emperor in Hans Christian Andersen’s “The Emperor’s New Clothes.” He’s the character whose vanity blinds him to the fact that he’s parading stark naked in front of his subjects—themselves willing believers. It takes an innocent young boy to reveal the truth.

Of course, satire isn’t the only weapon against hypocrisy. Drama does a fine job. Netflix’ original series “House of Cards” with Kevin Spacey offers a nasty condemnation of Washington politicians. Yet no one (publicly at least) has suggested banning the show or arresting its creators. We have the First Amendment. Also, a hint of legal action would spur more people to sign up for Netflix and watch the show.

Still, satire remains my weapon of choice. Because the smallest barb of humor often cuts more deeply than the sword.

Responding is simple. Click on “comments” above then go to the bottom of the article.

Read the first three chapters of David’s new novel, SAN CAFÉ at davidperlstein.com. SAN CAFÉ is available at iUniverse.com, Amazon.com and bn.com.

First, a disclosure. We have a gay son. A married gay son. Last August, he and our son-in-law exchanged vows in Vermont—one of nine states along with the District of Columbia that permits same-sex marriage. Now, according to conservative thinkers, same-sex marriage poses a grave threat to American families and thus the nation. Sadly, they’ve missed the point. The real villains are straight married couples, who underhandedly subvert family values.

Ask Charles J. Cooper, representing the opponents of same-sex marriage at the court. The purpose of marriage, he said, is procreation. Same-sex marriage, Mr. Cooper declared, “will refocus the purpose of marriage and the definition of marriage away from the raising of children and to the emotional needs and desires of adults, of adult couples.” Evidently, Mr. Cooper has not heard of birth control and its widespread employment. Or that same-sex couples raise well-adjusted children.

Most important, he hasn’t factored in the “straight-couple factor.” Based on Mr. Cooper’s views about marriage and procreation, it’s only logical—not to mention moral—that my wife and I divorce. Our 43-year-old marriage is a sham. We’re in our sixties now. Our three kids range from almost 37 to almost 30. We’re empty nesters and not about to have another child. So these days, our marriage consists of nothing more than a very satisfying focus on what Mr. Cooper dismisses as our “emotional needs and desires.”

Should California tolerate our flaunting the purpose of marriage? And what about young straight married couples concerned only with their own “emotional needs and desires?” Should Sacramento demand that straights declare their intention to have at least one child within five years of their wedding to obtain a marriage license? Should the state abrogate their marriages if they fail to become parents? Likewise, should the state terminate marriages that produced children when said offspring reach the age of independence?

This is all new stuff to be sure. Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, who may cast the deciding vote, noted that, “We have five years of information to weigh against 2,000 years of history or more.” Yet studies of children raised by gay and lesbian unions indicate positive outcomes. And let’s be honest. Cases of children abused and neglected by straight parents fill our courts. Many, many more never see a courtroom.

So Justice Kennedy’s observation doesn’t ring true to me. It almost suggests that Abraham Lincoln should have accommodated the United States’ 300-year tradition of slavery and never pushed the Thirteenth Amendment.

Be that as it may, my wife and I will hold our breath until June. Because, giving full credit to the late Walt Kelly’s Pogo, we have met the enemy of family stability and America’s enduring foundations—and they are us.

Again, Happy Passover and Happy Easter. May freedom and love guide us.

Responding is simple. Click on “comments” above then go to the bottom of the article.

Read the first three chapters of David’s new novel, SAN CAFÉ at davidperlstein.com. SAN CAFÉ is available at iUniverse.com, Amazon.com and bn.com.

Why indeed. And so I share with you a poem that comprises the first page of the Haggadah I put together some years ago and just revised—Haggadah Shel She’elot, Haggadah of Questions. The Haggadah is the “telling” of the Passover story. But in Jewish tradition, asking is just as important. So whether or not you observe Passover, you may find this of interest. Because when a small minority hangs on to its identity and observances for 3,200 years (dating back to the first Pesach) and more, questions must be asked.

WHY THIS NIGHT?

Why this night? And why this year

Just like last year?

All that tsuris with Pharaoh.

The plagues. The deaths of the firstborn yet.

That was thirty-two hundred years ago.

Why this table? This Seder plate?

The shank bone and the greens and the egg and the maror

And the charoset.

All this matzah, too. A whole week of matzah.

Seven or eight days—whichever you observe.

Not to mention the wine. Five cups yet,

Including one for Elijah.

 
And just who is Elijah anyway?

Do we really expect him to walk through the door?

He’s got a lot of doors to walk through

On this night.

Face it. Millions of Jews are doing the same thing

All around the world.

And why are there Jews anyway?

Isn’t it just an accident of birth?

Some say, “Hey, I’m a Jew, sure,

But I’m not Jewish.”

What’s the difference?

And what do they gain by

Turning their backs on the past?

And what do they lose?

And what’s to lose if we make this night

Like all other nights?

On all other nights, we’re just like

Everyone else.

Isn’t that what we want?

Although when you think of it, everyone else

Is never just like us.

For all of you sitting down at a Seder tonight and tomorrow night, Chag Sameach—Happy Holiday (literally “Festival”). For all of you celebrating Easter this Sunday, Happy Easter. And for all of you who have or create other traditions—Shavuah tov—have a good week.

Responding is simple. Click on “comments” above then go to the bottom of the article.

Read the first three chapters of David’s new novel, SAN CAFÉ at davidperlstein.com. SAN CAFÉ is available at iUniverse.com, Amazon.com and bn.com.

Yes, technology races forward. Solomon could not have dreamed of the printing press and steam engine let alone the high-energy particle telescope, smart phone, Internet and Higgs boson—or “God”—particle that may finally have been detected. Politics and economics also evolve. But human nature remains unchanged. We exhibit concerns and passions no different from our ancestors’ thousands of years ago.

Thus the more things change the more they remain the same. Start with the new pope, Francis I. Once, all popes were Italian. Francis, 76, formerly Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio of Argentina, is the third consecutive non-Italian pope (although the son of Italian immigrants). He’s also the first from Latin America. But what’s really changed for the Church?

Sexual predators and dubious financial dealings have cast a pall over the Vatican. Nothing new there. Francis declared his intention to transform the Church while maintaining its traditions. He faces a major challenge. Many in the Church hierarchy prefer the status quo. They have their own interests. There’s nothing new about that, either.

Of course, an Argentine pope doesn’t represent the first big change witnessed by many millions of people living today. In August 1945, nuclear energy leaped from the blackboard to Air Force bombers and brought Japan to its knees. In 1960, a Catholic, John F. Kennedy, was elected president of the United States. In July 1969, we literally saw the first moonwalk—on TV.

As the years rolled on, computers came home. The stock market soared and crashed and soared and crashed. Yesterday’s close set a record for the Dow—14,539. A woman, Madeleine Albright, became secretary of state in 1997. And in 2008, a black man—with an Arabic name yet—was elected president.

Progress? Yes and no. Our A-bombs hastened the end of the war but killed over 100,000 Japanese. They also created a frightening arms race, because weapons change but not the traits of fear and aggression. The race continues. Witness North Korea and Iran.

And while nuclear energy created cheaper electricity, it also engendered disasters at Chernobyl, Three-Mile Island and Fukushima. History repeated itself when America’s Catholic president was assassinated. Lincoln, Garfield and McKinley had preceded him. Manned flights to the moon were abandoned. But other nations and groups developed rocketry to assault neighbors or deliver nuclear weapons across the globe.

We know as well that the Internet brings porn into millions of homes and offices along with cyber bullying and ignorant rants inciting hatred. The human mind, capable of nobility and compassion, still works in perverse ways.

So it comes as no surprise that we’re on the cusp of time travel. Banana Republic has introduced its Mad Men collection so we can retreat to the good old days of 1963. Which the show clearly demonstrates were not terribly good at all.

And which offers the validity of another pearl of wisdom: everything old is new again.

Please note that my next post will appear on Monday, March 25.

Responding is simple. Click on “comments” above then go to the bottom of the article.

Read the first three chapters of David’s new novel, SAN CAFÉ at davidperlstein.com. SAN CAFÉ is available at iUniverse.com, Amazon.com and bn.com.