The Politics of Altruism: What Obama can Learn From Judaism


obama-jewishBy Dovid Efune

As widespread unrest throughout the Muslim world continues, A Case for Democracy by former Soviet dissident and Israeli politician Natan Sharansky is a must-read. Almost prophetic in nature, he outlines and expertly presents multiple arguments and counterarguments relating to the building and maintaining of a free society. He authoritatively concludes that the power of freedom can overcome tyranny and terror.

In the introduction to the book, Sharansky arguesthat the Nixon/Kissinger Realpolitik approach to handling the Soviets was in fact fundamentally flawed:

“The term détente, a French word meaning “relaxation” was used during the cold war to describe a policy approach that was supposed to ‘ease tensions’ between the superpowers. Its detractors saw it as a euphemism for appeasement. ”

It was Reagan, he says, who got it right, in understanding the fundamental weakness of a society whose population lives in fear. He pursued “an activist policy that linked the Soviet Union’s international standing to the regime’s treatment of its own people.”

Upon reflection, it seems that political policy is very much a manifestation of the specific worldview of those individuals who are responsible for its implementation.

Nixon and Kissinger practiced the politics of realism, seeing the world for what it was; their primary concern was how to maintain the status quo and preserve their interests, hence the implementation of policies such as ‘containment’ and ‘détente.’ These policies were largely reactionary and pacifist and ultimately self-defeating as Sharansky continues to explain in his book.

Reagan, on the other hand, was a forward-thinking visionary, who practiced the politics of altruism, seeing the world for what it could be. He demanded more from friend and foe alike. Decisions were implemented based on what was right and moral, not on what was safe and predictable. It was Reagan’s policies that facilitated the unleashing of the power of freedom on the Soviet regime and hastened its demise.

Today as history repeats itself once again, this conceptual view has renewed significance. But as many turn towards the leader of the free world to take a stand for morality and justice, they will be disappointed to find that President Obama seems to be more concerned with the politics of realism.

Obama has displayed repeatedly that what is right is not the determining factor; what is moral and just is not the priority. Failing to utter a word of support in favor of anti Islamist movements in Iran and Libya and rallying against a staunch ally in Mubarak, he has hedged his bets, and congratulated the winner.

As Jeffrey T. Kuhner points out in the Washington Times:

“Even today, as brave Iranian democrats battle the forces of tyrant Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the president cannot muster the indignation he demonstrated toward former Egyptian autocrat Hosni Mubarak. Mr. Obama refuses to demand that the Persian strongman step aside – as he did with the Egyptian pharaoh.”

This week saw one of the administration’s more morally perverse moments. Ambassador Susan Rice sided in principle with a UN resolution that condemned Israeli settlement building as she sat alongside a Libyan representative, whose government was indiscriminately massacring unarmed dissenters in Tripoli.

Under president Obama the United States has lost its moral standing, trust, and status as a voice of freedom in a world of tyranny and terror. For now, the politics of altruism is all but lost.

Perhaps this also explains why the relationship between the Obama administration and Israel has been under constant strain. Belief in a better future and in the altruistic nature of human beings is fundamental to the Jewish worldview. The concepts of striving towards a perfect world and the belief in the innate goodness of man are ingrained in Jewish tradition and thought. Judaism demands altruistic politics and America was founded on Jewish values.

It may be up to America’s Jews to lead this country back to its roots.

The Author is the director of the Algemeiner Journal and the GJCF and can be e-mailed at . Please visit

{ Newscenter}


  1. Mixing up apples & oranges gobbledygook.
    In the Muslim countries democracy & free elections leads to Gaza style repression, theocracies & islamofascism.
    Mubarak’s ouster is a catastrophe for the Egyptian people, let alone for Israel & the world.

  2. Rod Serling, the writer, director and producer of the popular weekly show called “The Twilight Zone” would appear on camera as the narrator and would say that we all live in a world of imagination and can easily take a wrong turn and step off into the “Twilight Zone.” Little did we know then that Mr. Serling was describing the future post 9/11 world of political correctness. Thus, if he were alive today his narrative would read something like this:
    Your are in the Twilight Zone. This is the world of fantasy where terrorists are called “militants” and the war against terror is not a war against the fundamentals of Islam, but a war against a small minority of one hundred million fanatics who “hijacked a peaceful religion”. This is the world of bizarre twists and convoluted turns where murderers and thieves are rewarded with the property of their intended victims and the “road map to peace” requires total surrender to homicidal lunatics.
    This is the world beyond reality where atheists pray to themselves in the “Church of Non Belief”. This is the world of imagination in which the officiators of marriages declare, “I now pronounce you husband and husband.” This is the world of denial where threats of genocide are met with open borders and entitlements for all who chose to enter that “unseen” place in the realm of human reflection where right is wrong and left is right. More at


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here