19 Apr
The Disparity between Image and Reality
The well-known phrase, “Let them eat cake . . .” has often but incorrectly attributed to Queen Marie Antoinette. According to French philosopher, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, these words were supposedly said by a great princess who wondered why the French peasants couldn’t eat cake, instead of bread. The quote suggests that the princess was oblivious to the people’s state of poverty. This expression has become the perfect metaphor for leaders who are out of touch with the working class. (I should add that almost in Congress can really and truly honestly identify with the “Average Joe,” since everyone in Congress is a millionaire! Ergo, whenever politicians talk about “power to the people!” always ask yourself, “Which people are they referring to? The Communists have killed scores of millions to bring “power to the people”).
Among the Chinese, there is a similar quote. When a Chinese Emperor was informed that his subjects didn’t have enough rice to eat, the Emperor replied, “So, why don’t they eat meat instead?” In both the French and the Chinese tradition, the point is exactly the same: leaders can ill-afford to act as though everyone else in their country is privy to excellent food. In rabbinic tradition, R. Eleazar ben Azariah said , “If there is no bread, there can be no Torah” (Avoth 3:17). In other words, when people are hungry, they cannot occupy themselves with the higher pursuit of knowledge.
Hungry stomachs yearn for a more basic gastronomical truth.
In my last article, I pointed out the types of excesses we have come to expect from the White House and Congress. Mind you, I really don’t view this as a Democratic issue per se. There has been lots of waste in Congress and the Republicans must take their share of the responsibility in allowing Social Security to become insolvent and potentially bankrupt.
That being said, I expect—no I demand—that Michelle Obama cease going on these lavish vacations at our expense. She is no Marie Antoinette, but she sure acts as though she were the French queen. Ten million dollar vacations are an embarrassment.
If you have trouble accepting that fact, then remember: Denial ain’t just a river in Egypt!
Several months ago, I wrote about the President’s attempt to emulate the Republicans by going on his personal bus tour around the country. Evidently, the President wants everyone to think that he is “one of the people,” and that because of his economic background, “he really ‘understands’ their problems.” Does he really? Had the President decided to go in a Greyhound bus (with the appropriate security), he would at least make his point a little bit more persuasively. However, President Obama decided to go on one very expensive bus—along with many of his staff—on two buses that cost over 2.2 million dollars!
Welcome to President Obama’s new age of austerity.
I forgot to mention that the bus was made in Canada and not in the United States. Well, look at the bright side: At least it wasn’t made in China! How can the President drive around in a bus that was made in Canada and talk about creating more jobs for American? My liberal Jewish friends, I ask you one simple question: Where is the cognitive dissonance here? Is the hypocrisy too painful to admit—much less acknowledge? If I was the Republican candidate, I would tell the government, “Keep your bus, Greyhound is good enough for me . . .”
Now, Talmudically speaking, if President Obama decided to go on an electric bus that used no gas, one that was completely fuel efficient—the President could have made an important point about energy conservation. No, not Mr. Obama! The buses he decided to ride on, only gets 2 miles to the gallon.
Way to go Mr. Obama! You, the French queen and the Chinese Emperor have a lot in common!
I am mentioning this incident to show that regardless who happens to be in the White House, I expect that leader to epitomize austerity and prudence. If after he is elected, Romney decides to act this way—I will be on his case too like white on rice.
The President cannot act like he is a “champion of the people,” while living the lifestyle of the rich and opulent.
I will conclude with a piece of timeless wisdom I wish to draw from the great Hellenistic Age, when Jewish thinkers first began articulating the symbiosis of Greek and Judaic thought. In a famous work known as, “The Letter of Aristeas,” this fictional account portrays an imaginary dialogue between King Ptolemy II Philadelphus (285–246 B.C.E.) and the Sages of Alexandria. In one memorable passage, we find:
- The King asked another Sage, “Who is the most suitable person to be made king—a private citizen, or a member of the royal family? The Sage replied, “He who has the most superior moral nature, for kings who come of royal lineage often act harshly and treat their subjects with cruelty. However, private citizens too are not immune to the abuse of power. Despite having experienced evil and borne their share of poverty, these private citizens often rule over the masses with even greater meanness than the godless tyrants. But, as I have said, a good nature which has been properly trained is capable of ruling, and you are a great king, not so much because you excel in the glory of your rule and your wealth but rather because you have surpassed all men in clemency and philanthropy, thanks to God who has endowed you with these qualities.”[1] Continue Reading