Politics are seldom discussed in classrooms. They have the tendency to stir emotions and trigger heated debates. Respectful dialogue is difficult to come by these days, as takes on issues are more polar than ever. I don’t know about you all, but this is not how I think things should be. Only seeing one side of an argument leads to a limited view on a complicated, and ever changing world. It is of utmost importance that we learn how to disagree better. 

 

In order to illustrate that this seemingly fantastical idea can come to fruition, I had a conversation with my grandfather about some controversial topics in foreign and domestic policy. We have a close relationship, and I felt comfortable asking him very direct questions. Our approaches to these topics at first seemed to significantly diverge. When put in context with our very different upbringings, however, I gained a deeper understanding of how our overall goals and motivations were in fact, similar. My grandfather was born in Baghdad, Iraq. As a Jew, he faced much discrimination, and was the victim of antisemitic-fueled violence in elementary school. He was exiled at the age of eight, and spent the rest of his childhood in Israel. After serving in the Golani, an elite infantry division of the Israeli army, he emigrated to the United States. He graduated from Princeton University with a degree in engineering, started a family, and ultimately settled in Richmond, Virginia, where he realized his dream of owning his own business.

 

I began the interview by asking my grandfather about the news outlets he watches. I felt this question might add context to how or why he holds certain ideas. 

​

Question: Which news outlets do you watch and why?

Answer: I normally watch Fox News, One America news, and every now and then, I watch CNN… but most of the time it’s Fox News. I feel that Fox News has a better approach to news than CNN.

​

Follow-up Question: Do you watch/read any non-partisan sources?

Answer: Yes - I watch a lot of Israeli sources. I think the news there is leading towards uniting the nation rather than dividing the nation (much like Trump did).

​

Question: Do you think Fox News is divisive?

Answer: Not really, no.

[I interjected] Fox News is not an accredited source… it’s an entertainment outlet

His response: That’s fine.

 

Question: Was Trump a good president? 

Answer: I believe so… yes. I don’t like his personality, his explanations, and so on and so forth. I didn’t like him personally, but he had good policies. 

​

Question: Which policies are you referring to?

Answer: For the Middle East, it was a miracle he accomplished in bringing Arab countries to sign peace treaties with Israel... never ever happened before. With the economy, he reduced the number of limitations on companies, brought companies back to the US, and increased employment. There was a reduction, overall, in taxes (for corporations and personal taxes). All very good things. 

 

My response: I would argue that although Trump’s “peace deals” were a step in the right direction, peace is far from achieved. I know you were specifically referring to peace with Israel, but it is important to acknowledge that the region is still riven with conflict. Civilian casualties in the Middle East skyrocketed, and went up by over 200% under Trump. He may have bombed Yemen more than all previous presidents combined. Not to mention that because of his administration’s actions, Israel is practically farther than ever from making peace with the Palestinians.

 

Question: Did your upbringing affect your view on Trump?

Answer: The only part was that I never thought peace would be achieved between the Israelis and Arabs. Also, because I was an independent business man, I always faced the possibility of having roughly 40% of my income paid into taxes. In the past it was like that with both Democrat and Republican leaders… only during Reagan and Trump was there an attempt to reduce those taxes. I’ll also say that the tax reduction benefitted both me and my employees under Trump.

 

My response: I find that latter take of yours interesting. There have been several studies done that disprove the concept of Reaganomics/the trickle down effect. The income tax for the wealthy was 91% in 1963, and has seen a gradual, general decrease since then. What we know is that cutting those taxes for the wealthy often does not translate to increased rates of employment, wage growth, income growth, or economic growth. I tend to look on a larger scale, and how the policy affects the majority of Americans, so I just want to clarify that I’m not trying to dismiss your experience. 

 

Question: What political ideology would you identify with?

Answer: I am generally conservative, slightly liberal… but whenever someone says he’s conservative these days, it’s almost like they’re saying they’re an extremist. In my view, there is a good aspect on both ends, and I like the good parts on both ends. I, for example, believe the American constitution is the best constitution of any country on Earth. If we follow it, I think we can reach a better life in general.

 

Question: What would you say are your “liberal” views?

Answer: I believe there should be some equality, in general, between classes. I believe the green effort to save the Earth, in my opinion, should happen… whether it [fossil fuels] is causing global warming, I don’t have any opinion about that. In general, Earth went through many cycles like that. But humans shouldn’t depend on fossil fuels; we should adopt clean energy. New green energy would have some impact before we get rid of the other energies that are affecting the environment, and I think they should be phased in and out as it happens, but we can’t cut fossil fuels out completely.

 

My response: I could go on for a while about this subject, but I’m just going to day that it irks me that climate change, a crisis that poses a threat to mankind as a whole, is a partisan issue. 

 

Question: Are you for or against capital punishment?

Answer: I don’t favor the death penalty, in general, no. Death penalty, I think, appeared, was created to save money so we wouldn’t have to keep people in jail for life, which is a bigger punishment anyways. Capital punishment makes no sense to me.

 

My response: I’m in complete agreement! For this sake of this article, however, I’d like to elaborate. The death penalty inherently violates the constitutional ban against cruel and unusual punishment and the guarantees of due process of law and of equal protection under the law. It’s representative of an intolerable denial of civil liberties, and is contradictory to the fundamentals of our democratic system. Execution is the ultimate, irrevocable punishment: the risk of executing an innocent person can never be eliminated. Since 1973, for example, more than 160 prisoners sent to death row in the USA have later been exonerated or released from death row on grounds of innocence. I would also like to add that depending on one’s perspective, it is not justice, it is revenge... having our nation carry out the violence that we proudly condemn is deplorable. Not to mention, it is a huge drain on our resources. 

Average death penalty costs are estimated at $1.26 million. Between 2008 and 2017, Louisiana spent $15.6 million each year to maintain its capital punishment system. This does not include prosecution, court costs for cases that never went to trial, or the cost of the state’s supreme court review. During that time, the state executed one person.

In 2018, the state had 69 death row inmates. The average length of time on death row was 16.3 years. More than one-third had served more than 20 years. It costs the state $56,000 a year per inmate just to pay for staffing, seven times more than the cost to staff a trustee camp for minimum security inmates.

The average length of time waiting on death row is 15 years. In California, it can be 20 years. As a result, death row inmates are older on average than the general prison population. That leads to higher health care costs that come from age-related illnesses.    

As a group, death row inmates are more likely to suffer from serious mental health disorders. One study found that more than half suffered from psychosis. Another claimed that almost 90% had post-traumatic stress disorder from family violence and abuse. Management of inmates with these issues increases the cost for states as well!

 

Question: Would you identify as pro life?

Answer: I think abortion can be a choice by a woman. All abortions should not be illegal… but there should be some regulations.

 

My response: I agree with you - a fetus cannot live without being inside a woman’s uterus up until 21 weeks, even with a respirator and months on end in an incubator. Scientific consensus is that a fetus cannot feel pain up until 24 weeks, as it lacks the brain connection to do so. I don’t like when people hide behind the label of “pro life,” because it requires them to be willing to spend the money to make birth control more accessible and cheaper, and sexual education in schools more comprehensive. Oftentimes, they do not. It would also mean they care about the physical, mental, and financial well being of the impregnated woman, which, in some cases, they do not. Regardless, making abortions safe and legal only decreases the number performed, which has been demonstrated time and time again in several studies. 

 

Question: Has Judaism had an impact on ANY of your political views?

Answer: Absolutely, yes… on all of them. I’m against atomic weapons, anything that causes fights between people, between nations. I believe in discussion between parties, between people, and reaching a midpoint between two sides. Every person has opinions, and they are worth something. That, in essence, is Judaism - thinking outside the box, for the betterment of the world, for whatever life should be the best.

 

My response: Yes! For me, Judaism has somewhat reaffirmed some of my political beliefs… although I don’t think religion has any place in government, on an individual basis it can sometimes provide clarity. 

 

Question: Did your view on the world change from your move from Iraq to Israel, and then from Israel to the US?

Answer: I guess, when I grew up, I was thinking that in general, total equality between humanity was possible… Now I think classes will always be forever. At that time [I’m coming to Israel, we’re going to be all equals, everything will be almost free… that was my original thoughts, up until 9/10 years old - I then saw how it was running, like any other nation, no difference.] I believed in equality, and I still wanted freedom of thought… not that the government runs your life. As I grew up, in my opinion, there will always be murders and bad human beings, but the majority, the 99% of humanity, should operate in a very good atmosphere. There will always be rich countries and poor countries and so on and so forth… I became less idealistic.

 

My response: I don’t think it’s idealistic to believe that development and innovation can create a better world! It already has!! We’ve made so much progress, globally. We still have a long way to go, don’t get me wrong, but we won’t continue to grow if we adopt cynical outlooks.