The Milken Roar

Comments (12)

All The Milken Roar Picks Reader Picks Sort: Newest

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

  • A

    anonFeb 16, 2012 at 2:09 pm

    daniel i think eytan makes a good point.

    it is good that you can assess israel even criticize some of the things we learn and are taught, but keep in mind that there are sooo many anti israel haters and even when disagreeing with some of israels policies, we should always have an ounce of support to defend our people.
    no country is perfect, especially Israel but if us as jews give up on our country, then why would we ever think other people would stand up for it

    Reply
  • D

    DanielFeb 9, 2012 at 4:42 pm

    My misunderstanding. Thanks, Eytan

    Reply
  • E

    Eytan W.Feb 8, 2012 at 7:34 pm

    Hi Daniel,
    I did not say anything close to saying you were close minded. I said remember that many Palestinians are so close minded, that they want to wipe Israel off of the map. You may criticize Israel, but guess what, so do the Palestinians. The Palestinians will not criticize their terrorist (Hamas) government, unlike you (Jew) who criticizes the Israeli government (democracy). Think about that and let me know. I am not looking for any particular answer, just would like to know is all.

    Best,
    Eytan Wallace

    Reply
  • C

    Cindy GFeb 7, 2012 at 9:27 pm

    I think that all points of view are important to hear and evaluate. Thanks for saying what others at Milken may be thinking but not sure how to say it. Your opinion has validity and may make a difference in the programming and even may prompt a change in the mission statement.

    See you around.

    Reply
  • D

    DanielFeb 7, 2012 at 7:41 pm

    Eytan,
    I do not think that my article presents myself as “closed minded”. If anything, it urges the school to be more open-minded.
    Noah,
    Why should anti-Israeli arguments be regarded as “our” problem? Why isn’t it the problem of those who support Israel? Who put the decision in the hands of the administration to decide what the schools political points of view should be? Israel is a political concept, one that happens to be supported by many Jews. I’d like to raise this example to you:
    Most of California would like to ban gay marriage. Should we thus infer that all Californians are against gay marriage? Absolutely not. Even though many Jews support Israel, we should not be under any expectation that all Jews do.

    Reply
  • N

    Noah WallaceFeb 6, 2012 at 6:02 pm

    Daniel,
    If you intend to censure Milken for its inability to meet its own standards, I think it would be beneficial to do so in a way that can not be perceived as antagonistic. When you opine that the core class on the Tiferet program brainwashes students with bias and propaganda, and later when you note that “avoiding first-person plural possessive pronouns would be more effective in fostering a pluralistic community”, I do not think any of the valid suggestions you are recommending will be seriously considered by the administration. To me, it seems the latter can easily be regarded as obnoxious and rude. I think that expressing how you feel in a manner that does not seem like an attack against the school will lead to the change that you seem to be avidly pursuing.

    Reply
  • E

    Eytan W.Feb 6, 2012 at 5:58 pm

    Hey Daniel,
    I would like to congratulate you on a very nicely written article! I am disappointed though in your beliefs towards Milken and how we advocate for Israel at Milken. I certainly hope that you do not go trash talking Israel next year on college campuses because there are already enough silly lies about Israel on college campuses that even most Jews seem to believe. I hope you continue to look at both sides and same with myself and others as well. The goal to piece in Israel is an important one and I believe that we both agree on that. I would like to remind you on one more thing. In the United States and Israel, opposition is allowed to a far greater extent than in the farcical parliaments and countries such as Iran, Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, and many many more. Another note, those in Gaza, Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and other countries are much more close minded than you are. Therefore you have to realize that criticizing Israel, even out of “love” for it, can hurt it, because those who oppose Israel will not criticize their own governments acts of evil and wrongdoings. There are many things I dislike about Israel’s policies, but it is important that we must support it (not only by giving negative facts about it and criticizing it, but also giving positive facts). I hope you stand by me with this. Overall, great article, and I hope we can continue this conversation on campus.

    Sincerely,
    Eytan Wallace

    Reply
  • B

    BrianFeb 6, 2012 at 10:51 am

    Daniel,

    Thank you for writing this article. Regarding what you said about your 9th grade Jewish Studies classes, I felt the same way since day 1. I felt forced to pray and I didn’t think this was right at all, Jewish School or not. It is one thing to learn about Judaism but another thing to be forced to embrace it. I have constantly brought up this issue throughout high school but no one has seemed to care. That is why I am glad to see finally someone is mentioning it.

    I did not attend the Tiferet trip so I cannot speak from my experiences with that but I can say that I totally agree that it isn’t fair to be taught a class from a biased perspective. I also agree with what Leigh said about the elective classes about Israel which would be taught by a non-Jewish teacher. However, I think Israel seminar fulfills this purpose in many ways and a lot of the teachers who teach that class aren’t Jewish. I do indeed think that more classes like this should be added to the electives list. I honestly think learning about some topics are extremely practical since we will very soon go out into a world where we are not always going to be supported by Jews and most understand other people’s viewpoints and why they have a right to believe what they believe.

    Once again, thank you Daniel for writing such a fantastic article. It speaks the truth.

    Reply
    • A

      Anonymous 3Feb 7, 2012 at 1:44 pm

      If you feel forced to pray at Milken, you have a lot of other communities to look at.

      Best, Anononmys

      Reply
  • A

    AmiFeb 5, 2012 at 11:19 pm

    Daniel, you’re absolutely right. This is an issue beyond the petty silliness of the Tiferet/Non-Tiferet question, which is really just a silly quarrel – nothing more than rhetoric. This is a fundamental issue that makes us consider the nature of how we seek to better our community. Do we believe in the notion that critique yields improvement? Or do we stay within the comfortable confines of flag-waving community, allowing ourselves to become one with the culture, effectively avoiding “eye-contact” with that which might prove threatening?

    I disagree with your assertion that the push for constant and excessive Israel advocacy “highly detracts from Jewish innovation as conformity to a political concept in a religious frame of mind.” I think that in this era of such drastic and precarious uncertainty for the Jewish State, strong and informed Israel advocates need to exist. However, there are two subsets of that issue that need to be outlines. 1) What is an advocate who doesn’t acknowledge or attempt to learn about its causes’ flaws? In other words, how can we defend what we do not fully understand? And 2) Without criticism, how can Israel improve? Leaky faucets only work once we’ve identified the source of the leak and fixed it. Parenting only works with loving rebuke. To love Israel – and, more importantly, to defend Israel – we must learn how to correct Israel. The push for Israel – meaning the SOLE push for Israel, regardless of circumstance, which I think is the primary issue here – is problematic. The push for Israel, mixed with cautious optimism and real, constructive scrutiny, will strengthen our advocacy far beyond any session with a “how to defend Israel verbally” presenter.

    At the end of the day, Milken IS a haven for pluralistic life. But even within our own haven, we can improve the extent to which that pluralism is functional and able to be cultivated. No one is left out of “pluralism” because he is an Atheist or because he is not a Zionist – that’s not pluralism. Rather, it’s important for us to implement programs that TRULY show all sides of the equation, or at least beyond the bounds of “verbally defending” a State, blindly, by default, and without precedent. Thanks so much for writing this article. It’s an important one, and I hope we discuss these issues on campus – not just on the internet.

    Reply
  • D

    DanielFeb 5, 2012 at 10:56 pm

    Leigh,
    Thank you for your comment. A great deal of what I hear regarding my comments about TIF strongly matches up with what you’ve said about the Arab-Israeli. I was thrilled to hear that man’s perspective, but as soon as we left the room, my Core teacher made a point to indicate the flaws in the speaker’s statements. New programming sounds like a great plan for the future of Milken’s relationship with Israel. Senior Seminar seems to be taking that role for now, an experience that I greatly appreciate.
    Maybe some guest-speakers from the other side of the Israel spectrum can offer us their perspectives. This doesn’t need to mandate acceptance from our student body, but it could surely promote an interesting conversation.

    Reply
  • L

    Leigh JacobsonFeb 5, 2012 at 10:47 pm

    Dear Daniel-

    You certainly raise an interesting point in your article, one that I think will strike a nerve with the vast majority of this community. For your bravery in writing such an incendiary piece, I commend you.

    I certainly do not agree with a lot of what you’re saying (for example, the Core program on the Tiferet Israel Fellowship, in which we actually had an Israeli Arab come before us and quite passionately tell us all the ways he felt he was being mistreated by the Israeli government, offered us a selection of views regarding Israeli policy. My own Core teacher constantly made us question the decisions made by Israel and its government in varying situations– even in biblical times.) However, I do think you raise a valid point in that perhaps Israel advocacy at our pluralistic institution should not be so strict in its forms. As someone who is an Israeli citizen and a major proponent of Israel advocacy myself, it is definitely not my view that Milken should end its Israel advocacy programming. But perhaps it can allow more “breathing space” for those who are not the most passionate on the topic by creating opportunities for people who oppose Israeli policy to voice their concerns to the community, maybe in a public forum like a debate?

    In addition, I think another viable solution would be to add more elective classes for students who are interested in learning Israeli history– especially those who did not have the opportunity to go on Tiferet. These classes should be removed entirely from a Jewish Thought/Jewish Law viewpoint, and be taught, perhaps, by a teacher that is not Jewish, so as to attempt to provide an unbiased learning experience. They should be viewed as History Electives, and focused on stringently historical topics.

    Again, although I have not had a similar experience to you with regards to Israel programming at Milken, I admire your efforts to make your voice heard in the Milken community via the Roar.

    Sincerely,
    Leigh Jacobson
    Editor-in-Chief

    Reply