Reflections upon first commandment and Europe

"When a Man stops believing in God he doesn’t then believe in nothing, he believes anything." these words by Gilbert K. Chesterton aren't absolutely true ;) I have met enough wonderful atheists in my life to know it but as a general rule they are true in this respect that people tend to seek greater power they may turn to, trust in, have hopes connected to. If they cease believing in God their faith may easily turn to something else, which may or may not be a problem.

Recently one very interesting and - in my opinion - pretty sad trend in Europe has emerged, showing what this 'anything' may look like. Europe becomes more and more non-religious and post-christian. For many native Europeans it is the matter of tradition (if anything at all), rather than living faith.

Nevertheless, in parallel with becoming less Christian and more (by immigration) Muslim there is yet another process in Europe, that started possibly some 80 years ago, accelerated  after WWII and resembles, in many respects, religious beliefs.
It bears some similarity to a local version of cargo cults, which developed in Polynesia during WWII, where on certain little islands, never before touched by civilization,  people were building models of planes (seen when army was using these islands) and subsequently burning them to bring new transports of  chewing gum, cigarettes and chocolate.

It is the cult of the state as something external, omnipotent and caring for its subjects (or even loving them). As indispensable as it may be state is not an absolute being from other reality (as some  Europeans feel) but something connecting us, for which we are responsible as a society.
It still isn't obvious for many that the only source of its income are taxes (so, basically, our money) and only so much can be spent for education, health, fighting unemployment, paying for agriculture (heavily subsidized), all the bureaucrats and social programs and whatever else the state is funding/ organizing/ taking care of (and, which is pretty worrisome, it is more and more hard to point anything the state isn't considering its duty to take care of, at least in Europe). Of course together with it it takes responsibility and blame for things done and not done.
More and more often one hears that the state has to teach citizens about the merit of something or another or  how they are to bring up children, how to eat, how to (not) smoke or drink, what to believe in, what to consider right or wrong.
Together with these voices I hear how a state cares for us, well, being grown up and with my own views and opinions I'd rather care for myself. However, it is becoming increasingly  hard because of  the taxes, which approach (VAT and compulsory social security included) 80% average income in some countries (not only Sweden). And I must admit that the very idea of state employees in revenue or health control or employment office deeply caring for every person like they were near and dear is preposterous. Nevertheless, we are supposed to believe it.

The state is no different from us, it spends what it takes from us, it is as good/ bad or as fair or honest as the people are. Nonetheless, the idea of "welfare state" was designed so as to convince people the state is their protector and caregiver. This benevolent entity is supposed to secure just life for its people, provide health for them and their children and take care of their retirement. Obviously it won't or if it will than for a very short time and the price will be high.

 Isn't it challenging to look at the state as we should look only at God, looking for an absolute where there is organization made by humans like us? Hoping for protection and caring and loving and understanding where there is only a legal concept and a redistribution system? Did people forfeited God for something like Babel tower where pride was speaking, trying to take place of Him?

I remember conversation God had with Samuel when Israel wanted the king "like all other nations" for the very first time. Was it a warning against what may happen when we will put man-created state at the place of God and sever links between creators (responsible citizens) and creation (state). It will never be an ideal. It can't, as we are not ideal as people and we can't create ideals. If we will take care of it with responsibility it may be good, but out of itself it will never be kind of dreamlike king or ideal community people seem to be seeking. It has no potential for it.

So let's not make God out of a state.

BTW Countries built from the bottom by citizens like Canada, Australia, the USA are more prone to this trend, apparently people still remember it is no absolute but their creation, loved and lovable, maybe,but as far from ideal as people.
And one of the greatest democracies is Israel when people still are very aware of the state's value (not 3 generations after countries they've been living in for centuries deprived them from protection or weren't able to offer it) but at the same time remember THEIR struggle for it and creating it, feel responsible and never (or nearly never) mistake it by something unearthly although it IS the only one promised by God.

A man who wasn't accused in Nuremberg trial (and should have been)

I would like to write something about a - a bit forgotten - man whose impact on history of few countries (and very destructive one) should be remembered, and whose trial in Nuremberg would not only have served justice but maybe (just maybe) could help to avoid or minimize (more probably) some  wars.

The man is Mohamed Said Haj Amin al-Hussaini, Great Mufti of Jerusalem., at the beginning British friend, later British and Jewish mortal enemy, rabidly antisemitic, great friend of Hitler, ambitious and power-thirsty, not a stranger to killing his own brethren if it could give him gain.

Cruel, intelligent, brilliant manipulator, he started career as a Turkish soldier after quitting Muslim University in Cairo. He was also British spy during the I WW believing in British promise to create "huge independent Arab kingdom" given a little bit later than Balfour declaration. He probably believed Jerusalem would count in but possibly could pass it if not for the fact that in 1917 UK has ceased Syrian and Lebanese territory to French rule (and that was supposed to be territory for Arab kingdom). The pact was secret, signed in Moscow, but after taking power over by Bolsheviks it was made public and caused Haj Amin to turn against Great Britain. He returned to Jerusalem and started working on increasing anti-British and anti-Jewish feelings among Arabs. The first riots that were his doings started in 1920 and for his role in starting them he was sentenced for 10 years by British. He escaped to newly created Transjordan (being 80% of British mandate and - as an Arab wish granted by British - being out of Jewish limits, therefore being effectively this vast Arab kingdom).
In 1922 when former mufti of Jerusalem passed away British authorities had to nominate a new one. Haj Amin, young and not scholarly, was NOT on a short list of candidates, but aiming at turning their enemy into friend again British authorities nominated him after pardoning his sentence. The aim wasn't met.
For 6 years Haj Amin was gaining support. He didn't trust educated Arabs of higher class, instead he turned towards bazaars and villages to organize and turn fanatic masses. He was the spiritus movens of riots and pogroms in 1928 in Jrusalem and 1929 in Hebron and in 1936 he started Arab strikes and later anti-British riots that turned into domestic Arab war. Over 2,000 people among Arabs were killed by Haj Amin's orders. Mostly well educated, moderate Arabs (the main crime was to good knowledge of English) therefore taking such needed middle class for the stormy period of late 1940s.
Banned from British territory he found refuge in French Lebanon and - as from 1936 he had excellent relationships with German Nazis - after supporting Iraqi antibritish movement - he foundhome in Berlin.
He was great friend of Hitler, was sending Arabs as spies behind British lines in North Africa, was the one who helped to create 2 SS divisions among Balkan Muslims, was very well aware of ongoing Holocaust and in few instances helped to prevent the victims from escaping (e.g. 4,000 Jewish children from Bulgaria who could have reached Palestine if not for his intervention).
After war he was to take place among accused in Nuremberg but French, disappointed by their loosing Syria and Lebanon helped him to stay in France. When in 1946 American seconded British demands to hand him over he was discreetly  helped to go to Cairo.
During Independence war in Israel he made sure as many Arab parties as possible are involved (for the sake of not only winning but also gaining power due to interarab disputes). In September 1948 he proclaimed Palestinian government which threatened Jordan's interest causing king Abdullah to order ceasing support for Arab Legion. As a revenge Haj Amin took part in 1951 assassination of king Abdullah.
After 1948 war he lived in Lebanon until his death in 1974. He was Yasir Arafat's uncle  and declared patriotic symbol which says volumes (when you think about his Nazi past) about Palestinian authority origins.

Manipulation

Some sources published today that professor Stephan Hawking, British physicist, joined boycott of Israel and thus removed himself from attending conference in Israel in June this year. Later it was reported that his cancellation was purely for health reasons. Now it is claimed it was the boycott after all. The match is ongoing.
I just would like to remain that leading research center for inventing ALS (the disease Hawking is suffering from) cure is Hadassah Medical Center in Jerusalem. And that as Hadassah medical director an Arab professor was just appointed last month.
Should Hawking go on with boycotting Israel (if this is really the cause of his cancellation) and give up on Israeli cures and medicines? I think in this situation he should!!!!