STORY

Jaleho, more politics

You should have written your article

in Feb. then, hehe!

Good article, and reflects the frustration of ordinary people. But, through which one can also understand that the US government above all is the government of those corporations (named in the article) who are getting free money at the expense of devastated taxpayers! 

Today's release of detail of massive bailout is another indication. In the name of not wanting to "nationalize" banks, a handful of hedge funds are given the chance to buy assests with taxpayers money. If they profit, it is all theirs, if they lose, the government takes their loss!

Jaleho, Feb 10 Yale law school article

The AIG story came out just in time

for your story ;-)

And, I am not dissociating Jews with financial misconduct in general. In fact, I have said that Jews because throughout centuries were FORCED to keep their assests liquid and movable, naturally have concentrated in financial and money lending business much more than their % population. And, finance and in particualr money lending do come with misconduct at times. But, you do not defend Shylock to defend Jews. There is really no Jew who would ask your flesh for his money, that's an anti-Semitic charge!!

The AIG case does not have any known Jewish officer earning greedy bonuses, (not any that I know of) and like I said, one of the leaders going after the ill-earned money of these AIG thieves, is Barney Franks, our Jewish judge.

The point of AIG comparison is the counter-example of "law over grace," that you pursued. Accepting that Shylock has anything to do with real Jews is in fact anti-Semitic, and is best a representation of Shakespeare's time. 

Jaleho

Ah Ari!!

I thought I provided a perfect example in the understandable case of AIG in that link, so you could see the flaw in your argument about "law over human grace."

It is clearly indicated that AIG officers had a "legal contract" for those bonuses, worst  case of greed here was the best case that you think might have happened to Shylock when you defended him, that is, they wanted their bonuses immediately or else they would have gotten three times the money by contract. This IS what's causing some American taxpayers to go as far as asking these people to kill themselves, otherwise the culprit did everything legally, and didn't even ask for an ounce of flesh!!

I wanted you and those who show sympathy to Shylock, just because he's a jew, to notice that everything that Shylock did, even if legal and bound by a contrac is below the morality of a savage animal, not buts and ifs about it. It is as if you would try to justify a blood libel charge against a Jew! That is, find an excuse or sorrow for the Jew who would kill Christian children to drink their blood!

Don't you see, the point is the identification of the Jew with that kind of animal  immorality which is the problem? Identification of the the Jew with the character of Shylock is the problem, not what the fair judge of Shakespeare, or Charmahaal, or the US government does today. In each case, the judge finds a way to cheat the inhuman thief out of its profit by imposing a new law to modify the contract. Shakepeare's judge tells Shylock that he can have the flesh if he can get it without any blood. In this format he plays the most directly the Christian anti-Semitic themes of "flesh-blood/bread-wine" and "revenge." The Charmahaal judge does it by telling the guy that he can have the flesh, but if he cuts an epsilon more, his own flesh would be in danger. The US government is telling the AIG thieves that they can have their bonuses if they don't want to return it, but then we'll get all of it and more in the form of peculiar taxes made just for you!!

You don't fight anti-Semitism by trying to find an excuse for a dirty imaginary character like Shylock who has been precisely created in prominent anti-Semitism of his time, you try to dissociate Jews from the non-existent character of Shylock who asks for human flesh.

Solo

Jaleho

Sidestepping the AIG debacle is a matter of my inability to do literary justice to the theme. So, for the moment I will attempt to satisfy the debate with references to two great writers. The first has at least been able to express his despair of the task. The second seems to have taken a clear position. The first is of course Victor Hugo in Les Miserable. As you recall Inspector Javert cannot resolve the conflict between his duty to the law and his conscience.  His target of pursuit, Jean Valjean, is a man of great benevolence who will nevertheless face cruel punishment of law if caught. Javert is torn apart by the dilemma and commits suicide. So much for a happy resolution to the problem Hugo chooses to tackle.

Closer to my thinking is Robert Bolt’s A Man For All Seasons. In this play the character of Sir Thomas Moore is asked by his king, Henry VIII, to break Church law, thus endorsing the king’s unlawful divorce. Here’s a famous line from the play when Moore is asked by his daughter’s fiancée (Roper) if we should give the protection of law to even the Devil. By the way, this passage reveals my own position on the AIG issue:

 Moore: “And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned round on you - where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country is planted thick with laws from coast to coast, Man's laws, not God's, and if you cut them down -- and you're just the man to do it -- do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake!" 

Please note that in the Jay Leno clip you kindly provided, what is being discussed is not about the US government breaking the law. The corrupt deregulation of the financial industry made it legal for AIG to do what it did. The US government in turn is using the law to keep AIG executives from their unethical yet legally obtained profits. Leno then poses a meta-legal question as to whether or not a government should have the power to make ad-hoc punitive laws targeting a specific group’s specific actions. Leno’s question is not about whether or not to live inside the law, but about the proper architecture of law.

I am sure we will have occasion to dig further into this issue in future articles and commentaries.

 Happy Norooz.

Impeccable

Ari,

An excellent read.  I enjoyed it and learnt a thing or two.

 Saale No Mobarak.

Thanks Ari, didn't mean to

be a pest, but curious about your take on the issue. I'll be busy the entire weekend myself. Take care.

Jaleho

Ari, I am curious about your silence

about the AIG case that I brought up!

Given your interest in finding modern versions of well established stories and annecdotes, "Bijan and Manijeh" and the present article of yours included, I find it really strange to see no comment from you reagrding the AIG case I mentioned. Not only it is completely related to the present case, but it is a very hot issue of today! I understand that it can run against your defending the case for "contract" over "human grace," but frankly, I would have expected you to give a t least a comment on that given your quickness to give comments on the other side of the story. You might be just busy and found the case closed here, I don't know. Happy Norooz.

 Here's Obama talking about the case in Tonight's show, and it is as if one is revisiting modern day case of the story told here:

//beta.video.msn.com/play/?g=e98631ff-aa10-4430-b5e7-e596b57c72fc&GT1=42003

US government: Can you get the flesh without the blood?

Update on the AIG case I was talking about: 

US acting like the "fair judge," is arguing now that if the AIG thieves are not willing to cough up the "ill earned money" voluntarily and insist on the "flesh," then they would find other means to nullify their contract! Like getting 90%+ of your money by introducing specific taxes for them. That is, if you insist on the "flesh," you can have it, but you can not have ANY blood with it!! These guys, including our great Jewish "fair judge" of the case, Barney Franks, are now acting a little more forceful than the fair judge of Charmahhal, as I heard Barney Frank yesterday telling the AIG fellow that unless he reveals the name of every officer who has gotten the bonus, they'll call them to court openly. He said that it is sad that some angry taxpayer Americans  have threatened the lives of the AIG officers and their children, but the government would still make them cough up the "ill gained bonus, although contractual."  Here's the news:

"The House is scheduled to vote today on a bill that would levy a 90 percent tax on bonuses paid to employees with family incomes above $250,000 at companies that have received at least $5 billion in government bailout money.

"We figured that the local and state governments would take care of the other 10 percent," said Rep. Charles Rangel of New York, chairman of the tax-writing House Ways and Means Committee.

Rangel said the bill would apply to mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, among others, while excluding community banks and other smaller companies that have received less bailout money.

House Democratic leaders unveiled the bill as the head of embattled American International Group Inc., which has received $182 billion in bailout money, testified about $165 million in bonuses paid out in the past week to about 400 employees in its Financial Products unit.

Edward Liddy, who was brought in last year by the government to run AIG, told a House subcommittee Wednesday that the company was contractually obligated to pay the bonuses but that some of the recipients have begun returning all or part of them.

Liddy said that on Tuesday, he had "asked those who have received retention payments in excess of $100,000 or more to return at least half of those payments." Some have "already stepped forward and returned 100 percent," he added.

Re: AN

she's no more hateful of iranians in general that you are of jews in particular. remember that well from now on.

Excellent observation. I think that statement applies almost to all of the mullah-supporters crowd on this site.

Ari jan,

I am doing my share in that. One must know what the problem is, which is in my opinion the State of Israel's racist and apartheid policies. Most unfortunately, many Jews in Europe and America have gathered around "Israel" as a substitution for what they are unable to do against a rise in anti-Semitism. This is a vicious cycle that can be corrected only by revealing Israeli crimes, and the powerful Zionist supporters of it. More and more Jews are joing this camp to oppose Israeli uncontrolled leash. But, there are many other Jews and FAR MORE Christian Zionists who are more Zionist than the Jews themselves in supporting Israel.

Those who now support Israeli atrocities on the underdog, would be oppressing the future underdog also! That's why I believe that Jews must be careful NOT choosing friends in fanatical Christian Zionists whose eventual goal is a rush for the Armageddon, and final conversion of the Jews to Christianity. I mean the happy 1/3 that they predict will come out of the massacre. They wouldn't care about the massacre of the remaining 2/3 of the Jews. from their point of view, they are helping the Jews to see the beauty of Christ arguing that death is better than eternal fire of hell!

Jaleho

Ari, thank you for this wonderful piece

more please!

This is the kind of thing I read Iranian.com for!

Fatollah

ali

interesting that you say that.  i was looking for a particular word with regard to another post and saw this item.  i remembered reading something about it a long long time ago and whether or not you subscribe to the theory is immaterial.  it bears to what you're saying about folk tales... albeit a nursey rhyme in this case.  it goes (and i'm paraphrasing alot... that the old nursey rhyme "ring around the rosie" was about the black plague. 

"ring around the rosie (the round red circles of rash typically see)"

"pocket full of posies (habit of putting flowers around the infected)"

"ashes, ashes (the practice of burning the bodies)"

"we all fall down (the likelihood of dying if you contract the disease)"

I like your ending Ari

Especially that Shylockpour and Hassani go into business together.  I hope they are both very careful this time, the judge and the thieves are still on the loose.

Mehrban

Human behavior

Even in this simple story it can be seen that the cast of characters are all human, with different levels of goodness, badness, and intelligence.  Though the storyteller specifies attributes of religion and locality to them, at the end of the day they are a bunch of people who might lie to borrow money, ask for flesh in return for the money, jump out of a window without looking, and calculate risks to make the best decision. I think the story is strong enough to withstand the experiment.

Mr. Siletz, I do appreciate that providing a reference to a certain character's locality might provide the writer with a 'pre-fab' set of assumptions on the reader's part upon which the story can be built, but I do believe that any story can be made a lot richer by talking about the characters and their thought process and courses of action as opposed to their ethnic and geographic origins.

Have you ever considered what folk tales would look and read like a hundred and two years from now?  I hope a serious attempt by writers to bring out the human qualities without need for ethnic addressing will pay off then.  After all, if we know a dumb Esfahani and a generous and carefree Jew and a very successful Lor businessman right now, it shouldn't be very difficult for a writer to write about them, should it?  Today's stories could become tomorrow's folk tales.

Dear Ari

Dear Ari, Thanks very much for the tale and your writings always. Absolutely enjoyed it. Not sure, whether I realized all the essence packed in one simple story, especially, the part concerning the morality in the story.

But, how you help decode such complex issues wrapped in one simple story by: "The Law, though sometimes difficult to uphold, is the foundation of any civilization. The stronger the foundation, the higher the civilization can rise." is appreciated and how very true!

Respectfully Fatollah

Hassani is not exactly Lily white either

Entering into a contract which he knows he has no intention (or possibility) of honoring.   Money lender lends against his own better judgement his reluctance at the beginnig is key.  For all we know the pound of flesh as payment may have been suggested initially by Hassani as to assure the lender (Hassani is very persistant).  We could argue that the lender lends to Hassani out of the goodness of his heaart as he sees the old man has no other chance to better his lot and having been there himself, he aquiessess. if money and greed were his objects he could have asked for a valuable collateral (to the lender) he could have made Hassani's childrens Guarator's of the loan but he does not. He asks for something that is only of value to Hassani to ensure his honesty.  He agrees to set the bar so high so that Hassani will take every precaution not to lose his merchandize.  But Hassani betting on a corrupt system knowing that he may not be accountable is relaxed and without due diligence chooses the route full of theives.

Down the line also when Hassani discovers the judge's corruption he does not expose him but goes along as long as it gets him off the hook.  

 Also think about it, this money is not loaned to Hassani because his children are sick and need medical attention but it is for him to go into business (buying low in one place and selling high in another) which could be interpreted as being motivated by greed in the first place.

And Ari, you said,

" historically unprecedented openness of American society to Jews," I don't think is correct. Only well after WWII, and mostly after 1967 you can say that about US-Jewish relations. The anti-Semitism in the US has been vivid, Jews here have been one of the most liberal and progressive minorities in the US, and have worked hard to tilt the hidden anti-semitism of the Americans gradually. Unfortunately, the Israeli Lobby and the Israeli-firsts in the American political institution, and the sad identification of Jews with Israel, has started to backfire greatly, and is reviving American anti-Semitism.

Once the power of Israeli Lobby is diminished, which it is bound to diminish if US is to survive, then you'll see the ugly head of Anti-Semitism in the US to be one of the biggest ones!

Most Iranian Jews are Iranian first,

Just like Iranian Muslims who are Iranian first. They have been given many opportunities to go to Israel including financial bribes in the form of advantages for living in Israel. Time and again they have chosen to remian in Iran, their own country. Even many Jews who like Muslims and Christians left Iran after the revolution, are still looking at Iran as their motherland. Don't look at Fred, he is the poster child of counter example for "mosht nomooneh kharvar ast!," he is NOT!!

All roads lead to rome (the jews)

I do not think that Iranian Jews are responsible for what Israel does. I'm just saying that Shylock is not different than the Palestinians today who have their rights and land stripped of them. I think Shylock is tolerated because of the historical persecution of the Jews whereas Arabs were previously persecutors and had been punished for a German crime. It's quite mixed up. 

I think that what Iranian Jews are responsible for is up to them. If they support Israel actions, then yes. But I can't talk about them as a group. That is ridiculous. They are all scattered and some take dispute with Israel while others whole heartedly support Izzy. 

Crush

Crush, today he reminds me of AIG thieves

who claim they have A "contract" and got their $million dollars bonus checks sent to them out of bankrupt taxpayers $BILLIONS donations!

These are the financial branch of the AIG who took the entire economy to ruin, and now are using the fact that they had a "contract" to steal millions more in the form of bonus and benefits from the taxpayers.

Good that the new government seems to act like the "fair judge" and is going to "invent laws" to rip these thieves from their inhuman claim!!

Bush would have been the perfect "corrupt Judge" in their pocket.

I wonder how those who are for "respecting a contract at any cost" feel about their beloved American government acting like the corrupt judge of Chaarmahal? I know I am all for the government acting like the Banana Republic and nullify the inhumane contract, even if it has to cheat!!

Hello Ari I have a theory about Shylock

he was one of the first major terrorists in western literature. why? the way he is treated (not recognized by law, abused, tossed, exploited) is not different than what is happening in israel today. It's strange huh? I haven't read Merchant for a while, but what I remember is that he terrorizes the people who persecute him. It's quite fascinating.