One of the main reasons we
give toys to children, is to have them simulate the real situations they'll
encounter when they grow up. For example––right or wrong––in most cultures,
boys are given a car to simulate driving, a firetruck to simulate firefighting
or an erector set to simulate constructing or building something. As to the
girls, they are given a doll to simulate comforting, dressing or feeding a
baby.
The question is whether or not
it is necessary to impose this artificial method of learning on human children
since they are naturally equipped to learn by watching their parents and the
other adults around them. The answer is a qualified yes, because what
differentiates our species from the other species, including the higher
primates such as the apes and the monkeys, is that we are equipped with a brain
that allows us to live an artificial life. We therefore need an artificial
education to sustain it. But we must be careful what we teach our human
children since anything in our hand can be turned into a double-edged sword.
In some cases, such as the
newly hatched chicks, they know what to eat and how to search for food the
moment they hatch. In other cases, kittens are taught how to hunt for food by
their mothers. In both cases, that's all the little ones need to know because
it is the kind of life they'll live. When it comes to human beings, however,
we'd have a hard time living without electricity, mechanized modes of
transportation, and increasingly a twitter in the hand. Because none of these
can be made without attaining a certain level of mathematics and communication
skills, we built schools to teach these subjects to our human children.
But what happens when the
proverbial “a little bit of education” becomes an important factor in what we
think and do? By the way, in other languages, a little bit of education is
referred to as “half education” or “semi education.” Well, if and when that is
the case, and the one that's bedeviled with a little bit of knowledge is in a
position to harm others, bad things can result, and they often do.
That's because a little bit of
knowledge is manifested in one of two ways. It is either a harmless, “monkey
see, monkey do” kind of situation that may even appear comical, or it is the
case of an ignoramus who believes he knows something because he saw someone
else do it, when in reality he only saw a small part of what's there. He
remains ignorant of the part he did not see, which is usually the one that can
harm others when imposed on them by the half educated.
This brings us to the article
that came under the title: “United Nations not thrilled about Middle Eastern
nations uniting,” written by David May and published on August 24, 2020 in the
Washington Examiner.
The point that David May is
making goes something like this: The UAE and Israel have agreed to normalize
their relations. This is a happy occasion, and the UN that is supposed to bring
about such outcomes, is not celebrating. This proves there is something wrong
with the UN, a reality that we, the Jews have been pointing out for a long
time.
Well then, what's wrong with
that? What's wrong is that it is the product of a partial education. David May
seems to know the half of the story that suits his narrative but ignores the
other half because those who raised him never told him about it. He knows about
the land that was given to the Jews out of pity, as a result of them making a
mess of their lives throughout space and time. But what he was taught to
deliberately ignore, is the plight of the Palestinians who were dispossessed to
make the Jews comfortable.
Instead of tolerating the
natural resentment that was expressed by the Palestinians whose homes were,
after all, invaded by the Jews, the latter added insult to injury by pouncing
on the Palestinians and starting a program of ethnic cleansing Palestine of its
Palestinian population. This is why the world keeps reminding the Jews that
they are doing the wrong thing. It is why the UN is not celebrating the little
events that happen at the periphery, such as a potential rapprochement between
the UAE and Israel, while the core of the issue, which is the right of the
Palestinians, remains unresolved.
But is this case unique in the
sense that the perpetrators of the injustice, care only about the benefits that
accrue to them while ignoring the damage they inflict on their victims because
they choose not to see the reality of what they are causing? The answer is yes,
this is a unique case. It often happens that the perpetrators of an injustice
come to see the damage they cause to others, and do what they can to rectify
the situation and compensate their victims … but not this time; not with the
Jews being the perpetrators.