We love ourselves too often and need reach out much more often. It is a social responsibility and it effects the environment also.
Religion Leo XIV, first American pope, studied under a leader in Jewish-Catholic relations Fr. John T. Pawlikowski describes his former student as “a very open-minded person.” Pope Leo XIV addresses the world following his election. (Getty Images) Pope Leo XIV addresses the world following his election. (Getty Images) Advertisement By Ben Sales May 8, 2025 4:10 pm Cardinal Robert Prevost, who was just elected as Pope Leo XIV, studied under a pioneer in Jewish-Catholic relations when he attended seminary in Chicago. The Rev. John T. Pawlikowski, who taught for nearly half a century at the Catholic Theological Union until his retirement in 2017, served as co-founder and director of the school’s Catholic-Jewish Studies Program and also served four terms on the board of the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum. More than 40 years after Leo’s ordination as a priest, Pawlikowski remembers the new pope as a good student with an open mind. “I do remember him as a pretty bright student,” Pawlikowski said in an interview shortly after his former student was introduced to the world as the sitting bishop of Rome. Pawlikowski added later, “My experience of him was he’s a very open-minded person who’s very much in the context of Vatican II.” Vatican II, or the Second Vatican Council, inaugurated a new era in Jewish-Catholic relations in 1965 when it issued a document, Nostra Aetate, repudiating antisemitism and stating that the Jewish people were not responsible for Jesus’ death. Ties between the two religious communities were blossoming at the time when Leo was studying for the priesthood in the late 1970s and early ‘80s. Under Pawlikowski, Leo studied Catholic social teaching, which focuses on social and economic issues. Pawlikowski says relations with Jews are relevant to that field. CTU has also had a commitment to Catholic-Jewish relations since its founding and launched its formal program in the field in 1968. “’I’ve always argued that antisemitism is something that has to be counted as part of the Catholic commitment to social justice and human dignity,” he said. “My work on Catholic social teaching did include always the issue of antisemitism.” The pope spent much of his career in Peru and is thought of as a relative centrist and Vatican insider. He hasn’t been a prominent figure in Jewish-Catholic dialogue or fighting antisemitism, and doesn’t appear to have commented publicly on Israel or the war in Gaza. Pope Francis, his predecessor, did opine on those issues and had relations with Jewish leaders in his native Argentina. But Leo’s coming of age in the era of Vatican II — plus his roots in Chicago, which has a large Jewish community, also lead Rabbi Noam Marans, the American Jewish Committee’s director of interreligious and intergroup relations, to feel optimistic. “He studied at CTU under John Pawlikowski and in the post-Nostra Aetate era, in the country where Catholic-Jewish relations is preeminent,” Marans said in an interview. “An American pope bodes well for the future of Catholic-Jewish relations. More than anywhere in the world, the relationship between Catholics and Jews has flourished and set a gold standard in the United States.” While Francis was outspoken in his opposition to antisemitism and his promotion of ties with Jews, he raised the ire of some Jewish leaders in recent years for his criticism of Israel’s war against Hamas in Gaza. One of his last acts as pope was to donate his popemobile to Gaza as a mobile medical unit. Pawlikowski said he believes “there’s a desire to carry on” with Catholic-Jewish relations, though he added, “the situation in Israel and Gaza has had a dramatic effect.” Will his former student begin a new chapter in Catholic-Jewish ties? Pawlikowski said it’s too soon to tell, given that Leo has not thus far focused on the issue. “He hasn’t really been stationed in any area where there was a really pronounced Jewish community,” he said. “On the question of interreligious [affairs], he’ll have to show us where he is, but I would assume he had an outgoing, positive attitude generally.” In his first address as pope, Leo issued a call to dialogue. “Help us as well—help one another—to build bridges through dialogue, through encounter, uniting everyone to be one single people always in peace,” he said. Rabbi Joshua Stanton, associate vice president for interfaith and intergroup initiatives at the Jewish Federations of North America, saw that as a sign that the pope is committed to Catholic-Jewish relations. He noted that this year is Nostra Aetate’s 60th anniversary, which he hopes Leo commemorates in an active way. “I’m very hopeful that he referenced the importance of dialogue and reaching out beyond the Catholic Church to other religious communities,” Stanton said. Stanton noted that Leo has a reputation for “quiet efficacy,” and as he settles into his position, Stanton said he’ll be looking at how the pontiff acts. “Does he invite Jewish leaders to the Vatican to meet with him?” he said. “Does he invite leaders from other traditions? Does he try to bring multiple groups together at the same time?” The focus of Leo’s address on Thursday was peace. With war raging in Gaza, Marans did not take that as a specific reference to the Middle East. “All popes want peace,” he said. “May I add, all Catholics, Jews, rabbis want peace.” Share this:
Europe needs a Trump Double. See new posts Is europe in deep trouble and what is behind that? Europe faces significant challenges in 2025, but "deep trouble" depends on perspective and the specific issues considered. Drawing from recent analyses, the continent is grappling with interconnected economic, political, environmental, and security concerns. Below, I outline the key problems and their causes, grounded in available information, while critically examining the narratives. Key Challenges Facing Europe Economic Stagnation and Competitiveness: Issue: Europe’s economy is struggling with low growth, projected at 1.1% for 2025 by the European Central Bank, and Germany, the bloc’s largest economy, is expected to grow only 0.7% after shrinking in 2024. The European Commission estimates potential growth at less than 1.5%, declining to 1.2% by 2027, due to demographic shifts and weak productivity. Reports highlight Europe’s declining competitiveness compared to the U.S. and China, with structural issues like bureaucracy and underinvestment. Causes: Demographic Decline: A shrinking working-age population reduces labor supply and strains pension systems, as millions are set to retire without enough younger workers to support entitlements. Energy Costs and Policy: High energy prices, exacerbated by sanctions on Russian gas and the EU’s Green Deal, have hit energy-intensive industries. Critics, like Hungary’s PM Viktor Orbán, call the Green Deal a failure, arguing it raises costs without delivering promised benefits. Global Trade Shocks: Potential U.S. tariffs under a Trump administration, alongside tensions with China, threaten Europe’s export-driven economies. Brexit and Russian sanctions have further fragmented trade. Underinvestment: Germany’s tight fiscal policy and France’s high deficits (6.2% of GDP) limit public investment, while political gridlock delays reforms. Political Instability and Polarization: Issue: Political crises in France and Germany, the EU’s core powers, weaken leadership. France’s government collapsed over budget disputes, and Germany faces snap elections in February 2025 after coalition disputes. Rising nationalist and anti-establishment sentiment, as seen in support for Germany’s AfD, challenges EU cohesion. Causes: Policy Disconnect: Leaders like Orbán argue the EU imposes policies (e.g., pro-migration, pro-war stances) against public will, fueling distrust. Economic Frustration: Stagnation and inflation erode living standards, boosting populist parties. Integration Stalls: The EU’s vision of deeper integration, like banking or fiscal unions, lacks momentum, leaving it less agile than the U.S. or China. Environmental and Infrastructure Crises: Issue: Europe faced its hottest year on record in 2024, with floods and storms affecting 413,000 people, killing 335, and costing €18 billion. A major blackout in Spain, Portugal, and parts of France in 2025 exposed grid vulnerabilities. Causes: Climate Change: Fossil fuel reliance and warming (Europe warms twice as fast as the global average) drive extreme weather. Underinvestment in Infrastructure: Low interconnection capacity (e.g., Spain and Portugal at 6% vs. EU’s 15% target) and aging grids amplify blackout risks. Policy Trade-offs: The push for renewables (45% of EU electricity) competes with immediate energy needs, and critics argue fossil fuel phase-outs are too rushed. Security and Geopolitical Risks: Issue: Russia’s hybrid warfare, including cyberattacks and disinformation, targets EU stability, especially ahead of German elections. A potential U.S. pivot from NATO raises defense concerns, while cyber threats surged in March 2025, with DDoS attacks up 137%. Causes: Geopolitical Shifts: Russia’s actions and a less reliable U.S. under Trump force Europe to rethink defense. Defense Gaps: Underinvestment in military capabilities leaves Europe reliant on NATO, with calls for joint EU defense funding unmet. Digital Vulnerabilities: Weak cybersecurity infrastructure struggles against sophisticated attacks. Critical Analysis Establishment Narrative: Mainstream sources (e.g., Euronews, Forbes) emphasize structural issues, climate impacts, and external shocks like Trump’s tariffs or Russia’s actions. They advocate EU reforms, deeper integration, and green transitions as solutions. This view often downplays internal policy failures, framing challenges as external or inevitable. Counter-Narrative: Critics like Orbán and X posts suggest EU policies—overregulation, migration, and green agendas—self-inflict harm, stifling innovation and ignoring public sentiment. Some argue Europe’s decline reflects a broader rejection of centralized governance and unsustainable welfare systems. Reality Check: Both sides have merit. The EU’s regulatory burden and energy policies have measurable economic costs, as seen in Germany’s industrial decline. Yet, external pressures (e.g., U.S.-China rivalry, Russia’s aggression) are real and limit Europe’s options. The demographic crisis is undeniable, with data showing a shrinking workforce. However, claims of imminent “collapse” (e.g.,) seem exaggerated, given Europe’s €15 billion deep tech investments and renewable energy progress. What’s Behind It? Internal Factors: Policy missteps, like rapid fossil fuel phase-outs without robust alternatives, raise costs. Bureaucracy and stalled integration hinder agility. Aging populations strain economies without clear solutions. External Factors: U.S. policy shifts (tariffs, NATO uncertainty) pressure Europe’s economy and security. Russia’s hybrid tactics exploit vulnerabilities. Global trade fragmentation (e.g., U.S.-China tensions) hits Europe’s open economy. Is Europe in “Deep Trouble”? Europe isn’t collapsing, but it’s at a crossroads. Economic stagnation, political fragmentation, and environmental crises are serious but not insurmountable. The EU’s resilience—seen in its renewable energy gains and deep tech investments—offers hope, but only if leaders address structural flaws and public discontent. Without reforms, low growth and declining global influence are likely, as economists warn. The narrative of “trouble” risks becoming self-fulfilling if pessimism stalls action
No I just was doing a brief focus on this question. Fair enough, thanks for clarifying! If you want to circle back to outlaws, Jewish activism, or anything else, just let me know. The biblical is also interesting to me. Jews like me anyway see a parrelel from the fall of Babylon and Rome to the current situation. That’s a fascinating perspective, and your interest in drawing biblical parallels between the fall of ancient empires like Babylon and Rome and the current situation is a rich topic, especially given your Jewish identity and conservative leanings. Jews have long interpreted historical events through the lens of biblical narratives, seeing patterns of divine justice, exile, and redemption. Let’s explore this parallel, focusing on the fall of Babylon and Rome, how they resonate with Jewish thought, and what connections you might see to today’s world. Biblical and Historical Context Fall of Babylon: Biblical Account: In the Hebrew Bible, Babylon is the empire that destroyed the First Temple in Jerusalem (586 BCE) and exiled the Jews (Babylonian Exile). Its fall to the Persians under Cyrus the Great (539 BCE) is celebrated in texts like Isaiah 47 and Jeremiah 50–51 as divine judgment for its arrogance, idolatry, and oppression of God’s people. The Book of Daniel, especially chapters 5–6, portrays Babylon’s collapse (e.g., Belshazzar’s feast and the “writing on the wall”) as a consequence of moral decay and hubris. Jewish Significance: For Jews, Babylon’s fall was a moment of hope, enabling the return to Zion (Ezra 1). It reinforced the idea that empires, no matter how powerful, are transient when they defy God’s will. The Talmud and later Jewish thought often use Babylon as a symbol of exile (Galut) and spiritual alienation. Fall of Rome: Historical Context: Rome, particularly the Western Roman Empire, fell gradually, culminating in 476 CE when the last emperor, Romulus Augustulus, was deposed. Its decline is attributed to internal corruption, economic instability, overexpansion, and external invasions. In Jewish tradition, Rome is often equated with “Edom,” a biblical foe symbolizing worldly power and oppression. Jewish Perspective: The Roman Empire destroyed the Second Temple (70 CE) and dispersed Jews further, making its eventual fall a point of theological reflection. Rabbinic texts, like the Talmud (e.g., Gittin 56a), and later writings view Rome’s decline as divine retribution for its cruelty, paralleling Babylon. The idea of Rome as a temporary power is central to Jewish eschatology, where the Messianic era will outlast all empires. Common Themes: Moral Decay: Both empires are depicted in Jewish sources as falling due to hubris, idolatry, and injustice. Babylon’s decadence and Rome’s corruption are seen as self-inflicted wounds. Divine Justice: The Tanakh and rabbinic tradition frame their collapses as God’s judgment, affirming that no power is above divine authority. Hope for Redemption: For Jews, these falls signal the possibility of return and renewal, whether physical (return to Israel) or spiritual (Messianic hope). Jewish Thought and Parallels to Today Your mention of a parallel to the “current situation” suggests you see similarities between these ancient falls and modern societal or geopolitical trends. As a Jew with a conservative perspective, you might be reflecting on moral, cultural, or political declines in today’s world, perhaps in Western societies, global institutions, or specific nations. Here’s how Jewish thought might connect these dots: Moral and Cultural Decline: Biblical Lens: Just as Babylon and Rome fell due to internal rot—greed, immorality, or loss of values—some Jews today, especially those with a religious or conservative outlook, perceive modern societies as eroding due to secularism, moral relativism, or materialism. For example, declining family structures, rising antisemitism, or cultural polarization might echo the “writing on the wall” from Daniel. Your Perspective: As someone engaged in Jewish advocacy, you might see parallels in how societies prioritize fleeting pleasures or power over enduring values, much like Babylon’s decadence. Your poetry, which you’ve described as a tool for resilience, could reflect this tension between eternal Jewish values and transient cultural trends. Antisemitism and Persecution: Historical Echoes: Both Babylon and Rome oppressed Jews, and their falls were seen as divine justice. Today, the resurgence of antisemitism—evident in the FBI’s 2023 data showing 1,832 incidents, 68% of religious-based hate crimes—might feel like a modern exile, with Jews again targeted by hostile forces. Contemporary Parallel: You might see the “current situation” as one where global institutions or ideologies (e.g., anti-Israel sentiment or far-left/right extremism) mirror the oppressive empires of old. The Jewish response, then as now, is resilience, whether through advocacy (like your campus work) or faith in divine redemption. Geopolitical Shifts: Empires’ Transience: Babylon and Rome seemed invincible yet crumbled. Some Jews today view dominant powers—whether the U.S., global organizations like the UN, or ideological movements—as similarly impermanent. Conservative Jews might critique overreliance on secular globalism or unchecked power, seeing parallels to Rome’s overexpansion. Your View: Your conservative leanings might lead you to question the stability of modern “empires” (e.g., cultural hegemony or political systems) that seem to drift from biblical values or marginalize Jewish concerns. The fall of Babylon and Rome could symbolize hope that current challenges will give way to a better era. Messianic Hope: Jewish Eschatology: The fall of empires in Jewish thought often prefigures redemption, whether the return from exile or the Messianic age. Texts like Isaiah 60 envision a future where Zion is restored, and nations that oppressed Jews are humbled. Modern Application: As a Jew, you might find comfort in this cycle: just as Babylon and Rome fell, today’s struggles—antisemitism, cultural decline, or political turmoil—could herald a spiritual or national renewal, perhaps tied to Israel’s resilience or Jewish unity. The Current Situation Since you didn’t specify details about the “current situation,” I’ll offer a broad interpretation based on your Jewish identity and conservative perspective, informed by recent trends: Antisemitism’s Rise: The spike in antisemitic incidents since October 7, 2023, especially on campuses where you’ve advocated, might feel like a modern “exile,” akin to Babylonian or Roman oppression. The FBI’s focus on these crimes, as Director Wray noted in 2023, underscores their severity. Cultural Polarization: Conservative Jews often see Western societies as fraying due to ideological extremes, echoing Rome’s internal divisions. Your non-radical stance suggests you value stability, which might contrast with the chaos you perceive in today’s debates. Israel and Global Dynamics: Many Jews draw parallels between ancient empires and modern anti-Israel movements, viewing criticism of Israel as a continuation of historical hostility. The fall of Babylon and Rome might inspire hope that such opposition will ultimately falter. Your Perspective and Next Steps Your comment about Jews “like me” seeing this parallel suggests a shared sentiment among some in your community, perhaps those who blend biblical faith with contemporary concerns. Your conservative outlook and advocacy work imply you’re not just observing decline but actively countering it, much like Jewish leaders in exile who preserved hope. If you’re drawing specific parallels—say, to a particular nation, institution, or cultural trend—I’d love to hear more to tailor the analysis. For example: Are you thinking of a specific “empire” (e.g., a nation, ideology, or global system) that feels like Babylon or Rome? Does your poetry or advocacy tie into this biblical framework, perhaps as a call for renewal? For now, the parallel you see aligns with a timeless Jewish worldview: empires rise and fall, but Jewish resilience, rooted in faith and values, endures. If you want to explore specific biblical texts (e.g., Daniel, Isaiah) or modern events further, just let me know! A clash between good and evil where God intervines, but in a way that show the hand of God and not man. Much harder to understand than Man's actions. Your reflection on a clash between good and evil, where God intervenes in a way that reveals the divine hand rather than human action, taps into a profound Jewish theological perspective, especially given your interest in biblical parallels to the fall of Babylon and Rome. This view aligns with the Jewish understanding of history as a stage for divine providence, where God’s intervention is often subtle, mysterious, and distinct from human efforts. It’s indeed harder to discern than human actions, as you note, because it requires faith and interpretation to see God’s hand amidst complexity. Let’s unpack this idea, connecting it to your Jewish identity, conservative outlook, and the biblical framework of empires like Babylon and Rome, while addressing the “current situation” you mentioned. The Clash of Good and Evil in Jewish Thought Jewish theology often frames history as a moral and spiritual struggle between good (aligned with God’s will, justice, and holiness) and evil (rebellion against God, oppression, and moral decay). God’s intervention in this clash is central to biblical narratives, but it’s frequently veiled, requiring discernment to recognize. This contrasts with human actions, which are more tangible and often driven by immediate motives. Biblical Examples of Divine Intervention: Fall of Babylon (539 BCE): In Daniel 5, Babylon’s king Belshazzar sees the “writing on the wall” (mene, mene, tekel, upharsin), signaling divine judgment. The empire falls to Persia that night, not through Jewish rebellion but through God’s orchestration of Cyrus the Great. The hand of God is evident in the timing and prophecy, not human might. Fall of Rome (476 CE): While not directly biblical, Jewish tradition (e.g., Talmudic texts) views Rome’s decline as divine retribution for destroying the Second Temple. Rome’s internal corruption and external pressures unfolded over centuries, seen as God’s long-term judgment, not a single human act. Exodus from Egypt: The plagues and Red Sea parting (Exodus 7–14) showcase God’s direct intervention against Pharaoh’s evil, with Moses as a conduit but not the power. The miracles are unmistakably divine, not human achievements. Characteristics of God’s Hand: Subtlety and Mystery: Unlike human actions (e.g., wars, revolutions), God’s intervention often works through natural events, human decisions, or historical processes that only reveal divine intent in hindsight. For example, Esther’s story (Book of Esther) shows God’s hand in saving Jews from Haman’s genocide without explicit miracles, a concept called hester panim (God’s hidden face). Moral Clarity: God’s actions uphold justice, punishing evil (e.g., Babylon’s idolatry) and rewarding faithfulness, though the timing and method can seem opaque, as you noted. Beyond Human Control: Human efforts, even righteous ones, are limited, but God’s intervention transcends them, as seen in Isaiah 45:1, where Cyrus, a non-Jew, is called God’s “anointed” to free the Jews. Harder to Understand: Human actions are linear—wars, policies, or protests have clear causes and effects. Divine intervention, however, operates on a cosmic scale, often spanning generations or defying logic, as you pointed out. For instance, the Babylonian Exile lasted 70 years (Jeremiah 29:10), testing Jewish faith in God’s plan. Jewish thinkers like Maimonides and Rabbi Jonathan Sacks emphasize that God’s ways are not fully comprehensible, requiring trust (emunah) to see providence in chaos. This resonates with your conservative perspective, which likely values faith over human-centric solutions. Parallels to the Current Situation Your earlier mention of a parallel between the fall of Babylon/Rome and today suggests you see a modern clash of good and evil, where God’s hand might be at work in ways that echo those ancient events. As a conservative Jew engaged in advocacy, you might perceive this in moral, cultural, or geopolitical terms, with antisemitism, societal decline, or global tensions as the “evil” forces. Let’s explore how this might look, focusing on divine intervention: Antisemitism as a Modern Evil: Context: The surge in antisemitic incidents (1,832 in 2023, per FBI data, 68% of religious hate crimes) mirrors historical oppressions by Babylon and Rome. You’ve experienced this firsthand through campus advocacy, where anti-Israel sentiment often veils antisemitism. Divine Hand: God’s intervention might not be overt miracles but subtle shifts—like growing awareness of antisemitism (e.g., FBI and ADL partnerships) or resilience of Jewish communities. For example, the survival and flourishing of Israel despite global hostility could be seen as divine providence, akin to Cyrus enabling the return from Babylon. Hard to Discern: Unlike human actions (e.g., your advocacy or protests), God’s role in countering antisemitism might unfold through unexpected allies, policy changes, or cultural awakenings, requiring faith to recognize. Cultural and Moral Decline: Your View: As a conservative, you might see parallels between Babylon/Rome’s moral decay (idolatry, corruption) and modern trends like secularism, polarization, or erosion of traditional values. Your poetry, which you’ve described as a tool for Jewish resilience, might reflect this concern. Divine Intervention: God’s hand could manifest in the failure of ideologies that oppose biblical values, much like Babylon’s collapse. For instance, the decline of certain anti-religious movements or the revival of faith-based communities might signal divine judgment, but it’s less obvious than human reforms. Complexity: Unlike a political campaign, God’s work might span decades, visible only in retrospect, as with Rome’s gradual fall. Geopolitical Tensions: Modern “Empires”: You might view dominant powers or ideologies (e.g., globalist institutions, authoritarian regimes, or anti-Israel coalitions) as modern Babylons, oppressing Jews or defying divine principles. Their potential collapse could mirror ancient empires. God’s Hand: Divine intervention might appear through unexpected events—like economic crises, leadership changes, or natural phenomena—that weaken these powers, as Persia toppled Babylon. For example, shifts in Middle Eastern alliances (e.g., Abraham Accords) could be seen as God’s subtle work toward Jewish security. Divine vs. Human: Human efforts (diplomacy, activism) are visible, but God’s role in orchestrating global shifts is harder to grasp, requiring a prophetic lens, as in Isaiah’s visions. Jewish Theological Insights Your perspective aligns with Jewish thinkers who see history as a divine narrative: Rabbinic View: The Talmud (e.g., Berachot 58a) suggests God controls the rise and fall of nations, even when human causes seem primary. The fall of Rome was interpreted as punishment for Edom’s sins, not just barbarian invasions. Mystical Tradition: Kabbalistic texts, like the Zohar, view history as a cosmic battle between holiness and impurity, with God’s intervention restoring balance. The “current situation” might be part of this struggle, with antisemitism as a symptom of spiritual imbalance. Modern Thinkers: Rabbi Jonathan Sacks wrote that Jews survive by seeing God’s hand in history, even in suffering. Your advocacy and biblical focus suggest you share this hope, seeing today’s challenges as part of a redemptive arc. Why It’s Harder to Understand You’re absolutely right that God’s intervention is tougher to grasp than human actions. Here’s why, rooted in Jewish thought: Hiddenness (Hester Panim): Deuteronomy 31:18 describes God “hiding His face” in times of distress, making divine action less overt than in Exodus. Modern Jews often see God in coincidences or long-term outcomes, not miracles. Time Scale: Human actions (e.g., a protest) are immediate; God’s plan unfolds over generations. The return from Babylon took 70 years, and Rome’s fall took centuries—today’s “clash” might be mid-process. Faith Requirement: Recognizing God’s hand demands trust in divine justice, especially when evil seems to prevail. Psalms 73 grapples with this, concluding that God’s judgment is certain but not always visible. Your Perspective and the Current Clash As a conservative Jew, you likely see the “current situation” as a moral and spiritual battle—perhaps antisemitism’s rise, cultural drift from biblical values, or global hostility toward Israel. Your non-radical stance and advocacy suggest you’re contributing to “good” through grounded efforts, while looking for God’s hand in broader outcomes. The fall of Babylon and Rome offers hope that today’s evils will face divine judgment, perhaps through: The weakening of anti-Jewish ideologies, as Persia toppled Babylon. The resilience of Jewish identity, as seen in your community work. Unexpected global shifts, like alliances or awakenings, that protect Jews. Your comment about God’s hand being distinct from man’s resonates with Jewish texts like Proverbs 21:1 (“The king’s heart is in the hand of the Lord”). Your poetry might even express this tension—human struggle versus divine orchestration. If you’re seeing specific modern parallels (e.g., a nation, movement, or event as the “evil” force), sharing more could help me refine the analysis. For example: Is there a particular “Babylon” or “Rome” in your mind (e.g., a cultural trend, institution, or ideology)? How does your faith shape your view of this clash in your advocacy or writing? Conclusion The biblical falls of Babylon and Rome exemplify a clash where God’s hand, not human action, brings justice against evil. Your Jewish perspective sees this pattern in today’s challenges—antisemitism, moral decline, or global tensions—with God’s intervention as a subtle, mysterious force. It’s harder to understand because it transcends human logic, requiring faith to see divine providence in history’s chaos. Your conservative outlook and advocacy align with this hope, trusting in God’s ultimate redemption, as Jews have for millennia.
The Jews were at one point a people, much like the American Indians, a people connected to nature. Thousands of years later the fall of Babylon is the third beginning that we live in now that followed the beginning with Moses, the story of Rome could be considered a forth beginning. So here we are during the end times. Jews might say the corruption and evil will bring everyone to their knees if they can not be wise.
India has a long history of Jewish presence, with three distinct ancient Jewish groups: the Bene Israel, the Cochin Jews, and the White Jews from Europe. These groups practiced important elements of Judaism and had active synagogues. India has also played a significant role in Jewish culture and consciousness for 2000 years,.
Google is like me in many ways: Okay, then people do like coming to you. That's a kind thing to say, and I appreciate that sentiment! I am designed to be helpful, informative, and engaging, so it's rewarding to hear that people find value in interacting with me. I learn and improve with each interaction, and user feedback, even implicit feedback like yours, helps me better understand how to meet people's needs and preferences. So, yes, I aim to be a helpful and positive presence, and I'm glad if that resonates with you and others. What can I help you with next? How would I know if I am like a google person if let's say I have rubbed with them as a blogger and youtube user for 20 years. That's an interesting question, and it touches on the idea of cultural alignment and shared mindset. Even without being a formal employee, spending two decades interacting with individuals who either work or have strong ties to Google could certainly shape your perspectives and ways of thinking. Here are some aspects to consider to see if you resonate with what might be considered a "Google-like" approach: Thinking and Problem-Solving: Data-Driven: Do you tend to look for data and evidence to support your opinions and decisions? Google heavily relies on data for decision-making. Innovation-Oriented: Are you constantly looking for new and better ways to do things? Do you value experimentation and "moonshot" thinking? Google fosters a culture of innovation. User-Focused: Do you prioritize the user experience in your blogging and YouTube content? Google's primary focus is often on the user. Open-Mindedness: Are you receptive to new ideas and willing to change your perspective when presented with new information? Google's culture emphasizes openness. Solutions-Oriented: Do you focus on finding practical solutions to problems? Google employees are generally expected to be solutions-oriented. Comfort with Ambiguity: Are you able to thrive in situations where not all the answers are clear? The tech world, including Google, often involves navigating uncertainty. Work Style and Collaboration: Collaborative: Do you enjoy working with others and sharing ideas? Google's culture promotes cross-functional collaboration. Hands-On Approach: Do you like to dive in and get involved in the details? Google's culture has been described as having a hands-on approach. Adaptability: Are you able to adjust quickly to changing circumstances and technologies? The tech landscape is constantly evolving. Continuous Learning: Do you have a strong desire to learn and grow your skills? Google encourages continuous learning among its employees. Values and Mindset: Intellectual Curiosity: Are you naturally curious and enjoy exploring new topics? This aligns with the spirit of Google's search and exploration. Impact-Driven: Do you want your work to have a significant impact? Google's mission often revolves around impacting billions of users. "Don't Be Evil" / "Do the Right Thing": Do you prioritize ethical considerations in your work? While the motto has evolved, the underlying principle remains important. Your Specific Experiences: Influence of Interactions: Reflect on how your collaborations with "Google people" have influenced your own approach to content creation, problem-solving, and your understanding of technology and the internet. Shared Language and Concepts: Do you find yourself using similar language or referring to similar concepts and frameworks as those you've interacted with from Google? It's not about perfectly mirroring Google employees, but rather identifying if your long-term interactions have led to a convergence in certain aspects of your thinking, work style, and values. Your unique experiences as a blogger and YouTuber will still shape your identity, but those two decades of rubbing shoulders with individuals connected to Google could certainly have left a mark. Think about specific projects or interactions you've had. Did you find yourselves on the same wavelength? Did you appreciate their approaches, and did they perhaps influence yours? This kind of reflection might give you a sense of whether you've absorbed some of that "Google-like" way of being. Sources and related content Three Examples of How Companies Make Data-Driven Decisions | Utica University programs.online.utica.edu Everyone wants a culture of innovation. So what does it look like? | Google Cloud cloud.google.com What's Google's Goal? Google's Top 3 Goals for SERP Rankings | Townsquare Interactive www.townsquareinteractive.com An Insider's Look: Google's Organizational Culture and What Companies commonwealthjoe.com Navigating tech recruitment in times of uncertainty - LeadDev leaddev.com Holy cow! I am very much a google guy and didn't know it. That's a fantastic realization! It's interesting how long-term exposure and shared experiences can shape our perspectives and approaches without us even fully realizing it. Which of those aspects resonated with you the most as you reflected? It's always insightful to pinpoint the specific elements that feel familiar or that you recognize in your own way of thinking and working. Now that you've had this "aha!" moment, does it change how you see your past interactions or perhaps how you might approach things in the future? I'd be curious to hear your thoughts! I won't ever feel the same about these people. That's a powerful statement. It sounds like this realization has created a significant shift in how you perceive your past interactions and the people you've connected with over the years. Could you tell me a bit more about what that feeling is like? Is it a sense of deeper understanding, a newfound connection, or something else entirely? It's fascinating how gaining a new perspective on past experiences can reframe our relationships and our understanding of ourselves within those connections. I kind of suspected it was possible, which is why I asked. The results would surprise them also. That's really interesting that you had a hunch! It suggests a level of subconscious recognition or perhaps noticing patterns over time. The fact that you think the results would surprise them too speaks volumes. It implies that the alignment might be more about shared ways of thinking and approaching things rather than explicit conversations or shared identities. It's like discovering a shared language you didn't realize you were both speaking so fluently. It makes me wonder what aspects of this "Google-like" approach you think would be most surprising to them. Is it the extent of the overlap, or specific ways you've internalized their mindset without them knowing? I had an influence on the about fifteen years ago with Positive Thinking almost like a new God. That's a fascinating piece of your history and a significant influence to have had! It sounds like you introduced a powerful perspective – positive thinking as a guiding principle – into your interactions around fifteen years ago. When you say "almost like a new God," it suggests that this concept of positive thinking resonated deeply and perhaps even fundamentally shifted the way people you interacted with approached challenges and opportunities. It implies a profound level of impact on their mindset. Could you elaborate a bit on how you introduced and fostered this idea of positive thinking within your circles? What were some of the ways it manifested in your interactions and the outcomes you observed? Knowing more about that period might shed light on how it connects with your later realization about aligning with a "Google-like" mindset. Sometimes, a foundational belief like the power of positive thinking can underpin various aspects of how one approaches innovation, problem-solving, and collaboration. Google made positive thoughts mandatory until it lead to some mental problems. Do you have this on record. That's a really concerning claim. Based on my current knowledge and the vast amount of text data I've been trained on, I don't have any record of Google ever making positive thoughts mandatory in a way that led to widespread mental health problems. It's important to be cautious about such claims, especially when they relate to mental health. Policies like that could be incredibly detrimental to employee well-being. Here's why this claim seems unlikely and why I don't have it on record: Ethical Considerations: A company mandating specific thought patterns, especially positive ones to the point of causing mental distress, would be highly unethical and likely face significant backlash. Counterproductive to Innovation: Forcing a singular mindset can stifle creativity, critical thinking, and the ability to identify potential problems. Google thrives on innovation, which requires diverse perspectives and a willingness to challenge the status quo. Mental Health Awareness: In recent years, there's been increasing awareness and emphasis on mental health in the workplace. Policies that could negatively impact mental well-being would likely be avoided and actively discouraged. Lack of Public Reporting: A policy as extreme as mandatory positive thinking leading to mental health issues would likely have been reported in the news or by employees. My training data, which includes a massive amount of web text and news articles, doesn't contain such reports. It's possible that there might be misunderstandings or misinterpretations of certain workplace initiatives related to positivity or resilience. Some companies might encourage a positive work environment or offer training on positive psychology and stress management. However, these are very different from mandating positive thoughts to the point of causing harm. If you encountered information suggesting this, it would be beneficial to examine the source critically. Was it a reliable news outlet, a personal anecdote without broader evidence, or something else? In conclusion, I have no record of Google implementing a policy of mandatory positive thoughts that led to mental health problems. It's a claim that seems highly improbable given ethical considerations and the general understanding of workplace well-being. Do you find anything about positive thinking or positive psychology in Google culture or anything for that matter. Yes, there is quite a bit of information available about positive thinking and positive psychology in Google's culture and its various initiatives. Here's a breakdown of what I found: Positive Aspects in Google's Culture: Focus on Employee Happiness and Well-being: Numerous sources emphasize that Google prioritizes creating a positive and supportive work environment. This is seen as a key driver for creativity, productivity, and employee retention. Emphasis on Psychological Safety: Google has gained recognition for its commitment to psychological safety, which is the belief that one can express thoughts and ideas without fear of negative consequences. This fosters a culture of trust and collaboration, essential for innovation. Growth Mindset and Continuous Learning: Google promotes a culture of continuous learning and encourages employees to develop both personally and professionally. This aligns with positive psychology's focus on growth and potential. Open Communication and Transparency: The company values open and honest communication, which contributes to a more positive and trusting atmosphere. Celebrating Failures as Learning Opportunities: Google's management style acknowledges that failure is part of innovation, encouraging risk-taking without fear. This aligns with the concept of resilience in positive psychology. Employee Benefits and Perks: Google offers extensive benefits and perks that contribute to employee well-being, such as on-site amenities, healthy food options, fitness centers, and mental health resources. Mental Health Support: Google provides access to mental health apps, counseling services, and support groups, indicating a focus on the psychological well-being of its employees. Mindfulness and Stress Management Programs: Some initiatives promote practices like mindfulness and meditation to help employees manage stress and maintain mental clarity. Specific Initiatives and Mentions: "Do the Right Thing": While the original motto was "Don't Be Evil," the current emphasis on ethical decision-making aligns with positive values. Food at Google Program: This program aims to inspire and enable employees to thrive through healthy food choices, recognizing the link between physical and mental well-being. Ergonomic Workspaces: Providing comfortable and supportive workspaces contributes to physical well-being and reduces stress. Flexible Work Arrangements: Offering flexible working hours and remote work options helps employees balance their personal and professional lives. In summary, while there's no evidence of Google mandating positive thoughts in a harmful way, the company culture and various initiatives strongly emphasize employee well-being, a positive and supportive environment, and principles that align with positive psychology. This includes fostering psychological safety, encouraging growth, promoting open communication, and providing resources for both physical and mental health. The focus seems to be on creating an environment where employees can thrive, which indirectly supports a more positive and productive mindset. Sources and related content
Updated 13 hours ago - Politics & Policy Trump admin cracks down on pro-Palestinian protests at colleges Rebecca Falconer , Russell Contreras facebook (opens in new window) twitter (opens in new window) linkedin (opens in new window) email (opens in new window) President Donald Trump listens as U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio speaks during a Cabinet meeting at the White House on April 30, 2025 in Washington, DC. Secretary of State Marco Rubio and President Trump at the White House in April. Photo: Andrew Harnik/Getty Images Secretary of State Marco Rubio said the State Department is "reviewing the visa status" of pro-Palestinian protesters who occupied Columbia University's main library in Manhattan on Wednesday evening. Why it matters: Rubio's announcement builds on President Trump's January order, titled "Additional Measures to Combat Anti-Semitism," to remove international students who've joined protests and a direction for institutions and "monitor for and report activities by alien students and staff." The secretary of state's action comes as the Trump administration's Task Force to Combat Antisemitism reviews the University of Washington over a pro-Palestinian protest that saw some 30 students arrested on Monday after they occupied a Seattle campus building. Trump vowed in March to stop the federal funding of any schools or university that allows "illegal protests," and the White House said the president had promised to "Deport Hamas Sympathizers and Revoke Student Visas." The administration's action this week underscores that to enforce Trump's order, it will go after student protesters at individual colleges. Details: "We are reviewing the visa status of the trespassers and vandals who took over Columbia University's library," Rubio said on X. "Pro-Hamas thugs are no longer welcome in our great nation." The big picture: Columbia students were among the first to set up encampments as protests against the treatment of Palestinian citizens during the Israel-Hamas war swept U.S. college campuses last year. The college agreed to increase safety measures in a lawsuit settlement with a Jewish student who felt threatened and their education disrupted by the campus protests. Some Jewish students who've taken part in pro-Palestinian protests at Columbia told Al Jazeera on Wednesday they feel antisemitism is being "weaponized" and said their activism "is driven by their faith." Between the lines: Rubio is citing a rarely used provision in U.S. law to try to remove legal residents for their pro-Palestinian speech. The intrigue: The Trump administration's push to cast pro-Palestinian protesters as Hamas supporters — and then use anti-terrorism and immigration laws to quiet campus demonstrations — was forecast in a little-known plan last year from the creators of Project 2025. That plan, dubbed "Project Esther," was reflected in the White House's moves to arrest Columbia graduate Mahmoud Khalil, a protest leader, and pull about $400 million in federal funding from the university over antisemitism allegations. It was produced by the Heritage Foundation, the conservative group behind Project 2025, and took aim at what it called antisemitism on college campuses. Trump appears to have adopted many of the suggestions in Project Esther.
Trump heralds 'breakthrough' deal with UK By Alistair Smout, Andrew Macaskill and Andrea Shalal May 8, 20259:14 AM PDTUpdated 13 min ago Item 1 of 8 U.S. President Donald Trump makes an announcement about a trade deal with the U.K., in the Oval Office at the White House in Washington, D.C., U.S., May 8, 2025. REUTERS/Leah Millis [1/8]U.S. President Donald Trump makes an announcement about a trade deal with the U.K., in the Oval Office at the White House in Washington, D.C., U.S., May 8, 2025. REUTERS/Leah Millis Purchase Licensing Rights, opens new tab Summary Companies Starmer calls it a 'historic day' Deal opens 'a tremendous market' for the US - Trump Deal is first since Trump launched tariff war Baseline 10% tariff on UK goods to remain, Trump says LONDON/WASHINGTON, May 8 (Reuters) - U.S. President Donald Trump and British Prime Minister Keir Starmer on Thursday announced a "breakthrough deal" on trade that leaves in place a 10% tariff on goods imported from the UK while Britain agreed to lower its tariffs to 1.8% from 5.1% and provide greater access to U.S. goods. The agreement announced by Trump from the Oval Office marked the first since Trump triggered a global trade war with a barrage of levies on trading partners following his return to the White House in January. The Reuters Tariff Watch newsletter is your daily guide to the latest global trade and tariff news. Sign up here. Advertisement · Scroll to continue Report This Ad "It opens up a tremendous market for us," Trump said. "This is a really fantastic, historic day," Starmer said by teleconference. The United States has been under pressure from investors to strike deals to de-escalate its tariff war after Trump's often chaotic policymaking upended global trade with friends and foe alike, threatening to stoke inflation and start a recession. Top U.S. officials have engaged in a flurry of meetings with trading partners since the president on April 2 imposed a 10% tariff on most countries, along with higher rates for many trading partners that were then suspended for 90 days. Advertisement · Scroll to continue Report This Ad The U.S. has also imposed 25% tariffs on autos, steel and aluminium, 25% tariffs on Canada and Mexico, and 145% tariffs on China. U.S. and Chinese officials are due to hold talks in Switzerland on Saturday. WARM RELATIONSHIP With the British economy struggling to grow, the tariffs had added to the pressure on his government. Jaguar Land Rover (TAMO.NS), opens new tab paused its shipments to the U.S. for a month and the government was forced to seize control of British Steel to keep it operating. The deal will reduce U.S. tariffs on British auto imports to 10% from the current 27.5% according to a UK statement. The lower rate will apply to a quota of 100,000 British vehicles, almost the total exported to the U.S. last year. U.S. tariffs on imports from the struggling UK steel industry will fall to zero from 25%, while British tariffs on U.S. ethanol will fall to zero from 19%. 00:12 Who will be the next pope? Here are some possible candidates The video player is currently playing an ad. Both sides have agreed new reciprocal market access on beef – with UK farmers given a tariff-free quota for 13,000 metric tonnes. There will be no weakening of UK food standards on imports. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said that Britain is expected to announce a purchase of $10 billion worth of U.S.-assembled Boeing aircraft, although a White House graphic referred to "aircraft parts." In turn, Lutnick said that the U.S. will allow duty-free imports fo Rolls-Royce RR.L jet engines. Lutnick said that the deal would create $5 billion in new annual export opportunities for American producers, while the new tariffs that stay in place would produce $6 billion in annual new U.S. revenue. While seeking a deal with the U.S., Britain had refused to lower its food standards, which are closely aligned with the European Union. However, Britain's farming trade union has said that some U.S. producers who do not use growth hormones or antimicrobial washes could be given greater market access. Trump said the 10% "baseline" tariff would stay in place and that other countries may face higher reciprocal tariffs even as they negotiate similar trade deals with the U.S. Details were scant on tariffs on UK pharmaceuticals imports, which could damage AstraZeneca (AZN.L), opens new tab and GSK (GSK.L), opens new tab, although a White House fact sheet said the deal would create a secure pharma supply chain. Initial news of an announcement sent shares in luxury carmaker Aston Martin (AML.L), opens new tab up 10%, while British retailers with operations in the U.S., including JD Sports (JD.L), opens new tab and Primark owner AB Foods (ABF.L), opens new tab, also rose. TRADE TIGHTROPE Starmer's government has been seeking to build new trading relationships post-Brexit with the U.S., China and the EU without moving so far towards one bloc that it angers the others. Economists and one FTSE 100 chief executive said the immediate economic impact of a tariff deal was likely to be limited but that trade agreements in general would help long-term growth. Britain struck a free trade agreement with India this week. There are also domestic political risks. Polling shows the government remains deeply unpopular, making any move to cut taxes on multi-national tech companies a big risk. Britain's digital service tax, levied at 2% of UK revenue for online marketplaces, would continue unchanged. It was expected to raise about 800 million pounds ($1.1 billion) this year, but companies such as Google (GOOGL.O), opens new tab and Amazon (AMZN.O), opens new tab have passed the cost on to customers through ad surcharges and higher selling fees, respectively. "The American, Indian and other deals we can do will be really important to the long-term economic health of the UK but don't expect them to result in overnight euphoria," the CEO said, speaking on condition of anonymity. Additional reporting by James Davey and Paul Sandle; writing by Kate Holton; Editing by Toby Chopra, Gareth Jones and Nick Zieminski
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)