Pigeon bones from 1,500 years ago. (photo from University of Haifa via Ashernet)
Israel’s Negev Desert has not always been a dusty, almost treeless place – 1,500 years ago, many parts of the Negev were green and produced basic foods. And a new study – led by Dr. Nimrod Marom of the University of Haifa and Tel Hai College, in cooperation with Prof. Guy Bar-Oz and Dr. Yotam Tepper of the Institute of Archeology at the University of Haifa and Dr. Baruch Rosen of the Volcani Centre – reveals the first archeological evidence of the role played by pigeons in Byzantine agriculture: improving and fertilizing soil in vineyards and orchards. Among other goals, the researchers are interested in understanding how the Byzantines managed to maintain a broad-based agricultural system in the desert, and what led to the sudden abandonment and eventual collapse of these flourishing communities.
שגרירת קנדה בישראל, דברה לאיונס, נפגשה לאחרונה עם ראשי הפדרציה היהודית של ונקובר, נציגים של ארגונים יהודים ואנשי עסקים בוונקובר. השגרירה לאיונס כתבה בעקבות הביקור מכתב לפדרציה ובו אמרה בין היתר: “קנדה מאמינה בפתרון שתי המדינות והיא תמשיך לעבוד לקראת מטרה זו, כדי להשכין שלום בין בין ישראל לפלסטינים. לדברי שרת החוץ הקנדית לאור הכזרתו של נשיא ארה”ב” דונלד טראמפ, “מעמדה של ירושלים יבוא לידי פתרון רק במשא ומתן בין הצדדים. אנו ממשיכים במחויבות שלנו להשגת שלום במזרח התיכון, הכולל הקמת מדינה פלסטינית לצד ישראל”. אני עובדת מקרוב עם שגריר ארה”ב בישראל, דיוויד פדרמן, כדי שלקנדה יהיה תפקיד יעיל לתמוך בישראל ובפלסטינים, לצד הקולגות האמריקניים.
קדימה אחורה-אחורה קדימה: בית קפה בוונקובר אוסר להכניס מחשבים בסופי השבוע
בבית קפה בדאון טאון ונקובר החליטו לחזור אחורה ולעצור את הטכנולוגיה בסופי שבוע, כדי לאפשר לקהל הלקוחות כמו בעבר לנהל שיחות עם אחרים, במקום להמשיך ולהסתתר מאחורי הלפטופים שלהם.
הבעלים של קפה מוסאט ברחוב בורארד פינת רחוב הארווד, החליט בשבועיים האחרונים לשנות את המדיניות של המקום ולהנהיג טרנד ישן. מעתה נאסר על הלקוחות לבוא עם מחשבים ניידים בשבת ובראשון. במקביל חלות מגבלות על השימוש בווי פיי לחצי שעה בלבד. וזאת רק למי מהלקוחות שרכשו מוצרים בקופה. השימוש בווי פיי מעבר לכך אינו בחינם עוד בסופי שבוע. שלט על החלון בכניסה לקפה מזכיר ללקוחות להשאיר את הלפטופים בבית בשבת ובראשון.
מעבר לכוונה לאפשר ללקוחות לדבר אחד עם השני כמו פעם יש גם היבט עיסקי מאחורי המדיניות החדשה: לאפשר תחלופה גדולה יותר של לקוחות. לפני השינוי במדיניות רבים מהלקוחות שבאו עם מחשבים ניידים בשבת ובראשון העמוסים יותר, ישבו סביב השולחנות שעות רבות והתמקדו במסכים. המתבונן מהצד ראה “ים” של מסכים אלקטרוניים כאשר המשתמשים בלפטופים שלהם, פשוט הפכו את המקום למשרדם הפרטי, בזמן שאף אחד לא מדבר עם רעהו והמקום היה שקט להחריד. מעתה מאמין המנהל של בית הקפה, קולטר ג’ונס, כי התחלופה של הלקוחות תגבר ואף אחד לא יתפוס מקום לזמן רב מדי.
קפה מוסאט הפך כבר מזמן למוקד מפגש קבוע של רוכבי אופניים חובבים ומקצועים מרחבי העיר. ג’ונס חושב שהאיסור על שימוש במחשבים ניידים בסופי השבוע, יאפשר לקהל הלקוחות לנהל מפגשים של שיחות והתקשרות של אחד עם השני, בצורה נעימה יותר. הוא מציין כי הלקוחות אוהבים את השינוי המרענן ורבים יותר פוקדים את הקפה. רק מעטים כועסים והודיעו כי יחפשו לעצמם בתי קפה אחרים. והם אלה שבוודאי מסוגלים בעזרת המחשבים שלהם לכתוב ביקורת שלילית, על המדיניות החדשה של מוסאט, שלא מתאימה לאורח החיים “האלקטרוניים” שלהם.
בתי קפה נוספים בוונקובר בודקים מקרוב מה נעשה במוסאט, וגם הם שוקלים להנהיג את המדיניות החדשה-ישנה ולאסור על השימוש במכשירים האלקטרוניים בסופי שבוע. חלק מהם פנו למוסאט וביקשו לבדוק לפרטים את המדיניות החדשה שלהם.
בבתי קפה בערים אחרות בקנדה כמו טורונטו, מונטריאול והליפקס כבר נוקטים במדיניות דומה, ומגבילים את שעות השימוש במחשבים הניידים בסופי השבוע וכן בחגים, ואפילו גם בשעות אחר הצהרים העמוסות בימי השבוע הרגילים. חלק מבתי הקפה בערים אלה אף מונעים מהלקחות להטעין את הסלולות של הטלפונים הניידים שלהם. כך נעשה גם במדינות שונות באירופה בהן בריטניה ודנמרק, כאשר הטרנד הישן צובר תאוצה והלקחות מסתבר אוהבים זאת.
Maung Zarni, right, with a 67-year-old Rohingya man from Maungdaw, who had been a leader at a township level in former prime minister Ne Win’s early days, when Rohingyas were recognized as an ethnic community with full citizenship rights. (photo from Maung Zarni)
Calls are mounting to recognize Myanmar’s violent campaign against the Rohingya as genocide. At the United Nations’ Human Rights Council in Geneva on March 12, Yanghee Lee, special rapporteur on the human rights situation in Myanmar, said she is “becoming more and more convinced that the crimes committed … bear the hallmarks of genocide and call[s] in the strongest terms for accountability.”
Nearly 800,000 Rohingya have fled state-sanctioned and -organized violence in Myanmar (Burma) since August 2017, after the government – blaming an alleged attack on Myanmar’s security forces by Rohingya militants – initiated a brutal campaign of arson, murder and systematic rape and torture against the civilian Rohingya population in Rakhine state. The violence follows decades of oppressive measures against the Rohingya, which, in recent years, have included restrictions on education and medical care, deliberate starvation, state-imposed birth control, property seizure, and removal of citizenship and civil rights.
“These human rights violations constitute nothing less than a slow-burning genocide,” human rights activist Maung Zarni, founder of the Free Burma Coalition, told the Jewish Independent.
With respect to the situation in Myanmar, for months terms like “atrocities,” “military crackdown” or “state-sanctioned violence” have been used to describe it, instead of using the word “genocide.” The UN has previously called what is happening in Myanmar, a majority Buddhist country, whose dominant ethnic group is Bamar, “ethnic cleansing.”
There have been some exceptions to the hesitancy to call the government’s actions genocide. For example, French President Emmanuel Macron called it that last September. And independent tribunals and experts like the International State Crime Initiative and the Permanent Peoples’ Tribunal have also called it genocide. But the media and other international organizations have generally not been using the word.
A young girl in a displaced person’s camp shows how her hands were tied behind her while she was raped; one of her finger tips was cut off for resisting. (photo from Maung Zarni)
“There is a high barrier for the use of the term genocide, and I think this is correct,” said Rainer Schulze, professor of modern European history at the University of Essex and founder of The Holocaust in History and Memory journal, speaking at the Berlin Conference on Myanmar Genocide Feb. 26, which the Jewish Independent attended. “We should not use the term genocide lightly. Not every human rights violation, ethnic cleansing or forced resettlement is a genocide. The Genocide Convention gives us a very clear definition, but, with regards to the Rohingya, it is appropriate and must be used.”
Gianni Tognoni, general secretary of the Permanent Peoples’ Tribunal in Rome, agreed. “The UN has been playing with names,” he said at the conference. “To declare something as genocide is to declare it as something intolerable for the international community. Instead, this is delayed.”
“Governments, in general, are very reluctant to use the term genocide for fear that it could damage diplomatic initiatives to secure peace or damage bilateral relationships,” Kyle Matthews, executive director of the Montreal Institute for Genocide and Human Rights Studies at Concordia University, said in conversation with the Independent. “In some cases, governments have refused to label atrocity crimes as a genocide for fear it would force them to take a stronger response, such as intervening militarily.”
The Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide adopted by the UN in 1948 obliges signatories to take concrete steps to respond to genocide. As of December 2017, 149 states had ratified or acceded to the treaty, including Canada. In 2005, all member states of the UN endorsed the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) doctrine, a doctrine Canada was instrumental in promoting. The Canadian government continues to avoid the term genocide, however – although it has taken some steps towards addressing the situation.
“I would say the Canadian government has been one of the most responsible and thoughtful governments in trying to find a solution to protect the Rohingya minority in Myanmar and in neighbouring countries,” said Matthews. “Ottawa has appointed Bob Rae as special envoy to the prime minister to help identify different policy options and strategies for engaging the government of Myanmar. Ottawa also recently imposed economic sanctions on leading figures in Myanmar’s military.”
On Feb. 16, the federal government imposed sanctions, under Canada’s new foreign human rights legislation, against Maung Maung Soe, a high-ranking member of the Myanmar military. “What has been done to the Rohingya is ethnic cleansing,” Foreign Affairs Minister Chrystia Freeland told CBC in a statement that did not use the word genocide. “This is a crime against humanity.”
The sanctions impose a “dealings prohibition,” which freezes an individual’s assets in Canada and renders them inadmissible to enter Canada under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act.
Matthews said there is much more that we could be doing. Speaking at the Berlin conference, he said, “Broader economic sanctions have to be done immediately. We should look at travel restrictions. We need to demand humanitarian access to Rakhine state [where the remaining Rohingya live, access that is currently denied by Myanmar]. We need to do more economic naming and shaming of who is associating with the regime. Myanmar embassies around the world should be protested.” The government should issue a travel advisory, he said, warning “you are going to a state that is now committing genocide.”
Matthew Gindinis a freelance journalist, writer and lecturer. He writes regularly for the Forward and All That Is Interesting, and has been published in Religion Dispatches, Situate Magazine, Tikkun and elsewhere. He can be found on Medium and Twitter.
Portrait of Dave Barrett by photographer Fred Schiffer, June 9, 1975. (photo from Jewish Museum and Archives of British Columbia)
More than four decades after he led British Columbia through one of the most tumultuous and consequential epochs in the province’s political history, British Columbia’s first – and, to date, only – Jewish premier is being remembered for an extraordinary life.
Dave Barrett died Feb. 2, several years after being diagnosed with Alzheimer’s. He served as premier for a comparatively short period, from 1972 to 1975, but his policies continue to affect everyday life for British Columbians.
In 39 months – 1,200 days – Barrett’s New Democratic Party government passed 357 diverse and sometimes radical pieces of legislation, more than any single government before or since. The landmark initiatives included the creation of the Agricultural Land Reserve, the Insurance Corporation of British Columbia, a provincial ambulance service and air ambulances, Pharmacare for seniors, neighbourhood pubs, British Columbia’s first ministry of housing, rent controls, the most expansive human rights code in Canada, mandatory kindergarten, reduced teacher-student ratios and the Seabus.
Barrett’s government also proclaimed B.C. Day as a statutory holiday. It established Whistler as Canada’s first “resort municipality” and saved Cypress Bowl from logging, turning it into a provincial park. His government ended logging and mining in provincial parks and banned the export of raw logs, funded the City of Vancouver’s purchase of the historic Orpheum Theatre, raised the minimum wage from $1.50 to $2.50 an hour and created “Mincome,” which guaranteed a minimum income of $200 per month for people over 60. The Barrett record includes the expansion of community colleges, new daycare facilities, French immersion in public schools, and Robson Square, among many other things that we now take for granted.
At a celebration of life in Vancouver March 4, and in interviews with the Jewish Independent, people close to Barrett shared their reflections of the man who led the first socialist government in the province and who was a dominant figure in the life of B.C. politics from 1960 until 1993.
* * *
In his memoir, Barrett: A Passionate Political Life, the former premier recalls growing up on McSpadden Avenue, a one-block spur off Commercial Drive on Vancouver’s East Side, in a house “crammed with books and brimming with lively political discussion.”
His father, Sam, was born in Winnipeg, his mother, Rose, north of Odessa. She was brought to Canada by a Jewish refugee agency after pogroms that followed the Russian Revolution. (In his political life, Barrett would be a strong voice for Soviet Jewry.)
David Barrett was born in Vancouver on Oct. 2, 1930, the youngest of three – his brother Isador was 4 and sister Pearl, 2.
Barrett attended Laura Second elementary and Britannia high school. On weekends, he worked with his father selling fruit and vegetables from a truck and, later, in a retail-wholesale store on Powell Street. After graduating from Britannia, he went, in 1948, to Seattle University, a Jesuit institution that helped cement Barrett’s social justice orientation.
“I had a wonderful time at university, but I was on academic probation muc
Portrait of Dave Barrett as a boy, circa 1940. (Jewish Museum and Archives of British Columbia L.00029)
h of the time,” Barrett wrote in his book.
Returning to Vancouver in summer and during winter breaks, Barrett continued to help out in the family business. One year, to make money, he sold Christmas trees across the street from his dad’s store. He also worked on a CNR train between Vancouver and Edmonton and for the City of Vancouver, pouring hot tar on cracks in the road.
In 1953, he came home with a bachelor’s in sociology and a minor in philosophy.
In his memoirs, Barrett notes that education was deeply important to his family. One day, he recalls, he received a call from his mother to say that his brother Issy, “already an internationally recognized researcher in ocean sciences, had just earned a PhD with distinction.
“There was a pause and she asked if I got the message. I said, ‘No, Mom, what’s the message?’ And she replied, ‘When are you going to return to school and make something of yourself?’”
Barrett was speaking to his mother from the premier’s office in the B.C. legislature.
* * *
When he and Shirley Hackman decided to get married, when Barrett was 22, his parents did not react positively.
“He thought I was too young to get married,” Barrett recalled of his father’s response. “My mother reverted to her traditional role: she went right up the wall. This progressive mother of mine wanted me to marry a Jewish girl, and Shirley was Anglican.”
The marriage went ahead nevertheless. The couple spent $300 on the reception and scraped coins together to make ends meet in subsequent weeks. Rose’s reservations about Shirley dissolved.
“This woman, who hadn’t wanted her Jewish son to marry a gentile girl, did a complete reversal.” Barrett wrote in his memoir. “Now I was no good. I didn’t deserve this wonderful woman. They had an incredible relationship.”
Barrett got a job at the Children’s Aid Society and later worked with young offenders at Oakalla, an overcrowded provincial prison in Burnaby. But he realized he would have to continue his education to advance in the field.
After he was turned down by the social work school at the University of British Columbia, he visited an older mentor in Seattle, who advised him to apply to St. Louis University, another Jesuit institution, in Missouri. While his grades weren’t good, and he had repeated run-ins with authority figures, Barrett had apparently impressed the priests at Seattle University, whom he credited with facilitating his admission to graduate school.
In St. Louis, with a wife and newborn son, Barrett took a side job at the Young Men’s Hebrew Association, working with teenagers. When he graduated, he was offered a job back home in British Columbia, at the Haney Correctional Institute, for $355 a month. There, he created programs including sports, drama, occupational training and rehabilitation for the inmates.
But he was disenchanted with the correctional system and decided the only way to make systemic change was through politics. So, he announced his intention to run for the legislature, on behalf of the Cooperative Commonwealth Federation (the CCF, which, in 1961, became the NDP). As a provincial employee engaging in politics, Barrett was already poking the bear. He was eventually fired from his job for criticizing the corrections and social services system during his campaign for the nomination.
The Vancouver Sun ran the story big and Barrett was thrust into the spotlight, losing his livelihood but becoming a political sensation before even winning the party’s nomination – which he did, in a first-ballot landslide.
Because the general election was still some time away – and because being a member of the legislative assembly at that time was a part-time job that paid $12,500 a year – Barrett secured a position at the John Howard Society, an organization that works with people in, or at risk of entering, the criminal justice system. It was there that he met Norm Levi, who would also become an MLA and play a central role in Barrett’s government, as the one responsible for welfare policy, including “Mincome.”
Elected to the legislature in 1960 in the constituency of Dewdney, Barrett remained a fixture in Vancouver’s Jewish community through the decade. He attended the relatively short annual sittings of the legislature and spent the rest of the year balancing constituency responsibilities and working at the Jewish Family Services Agency, where his mentor was Jessie Allman, and as director of the Jewish Community Centre, even as he rose in the ranks of provincial politics and was recognized as an emerging star.
* * *
Gloria Levi worked at the JCC when Barrett was director.
“It was a riot,” she told the Independent. Gloria and her husband, Norm, had returned from a two-year stint in Israel at the end of the 1950s and the couple became fast friends with Shirley and Dave Barrett.
As Barrett’s career progressed, he would become Norm Levi’s supervisor at the John Howard Society. Gloria Levi recalled something that drew the two couples together.
“[Barrett] was very respectful and very admiring of Norm and me because we wore our Judaism on our sleeve and he didn’t,” she said. “But it meant a lot to him. I think his whole social ethic came from feeling Jewish. I think his sense of justice was definitely influenced from being Jewish. He was always the one who was seen as different because he was Jewish. He was an East Side kid and he had to fight his way a lot of times.”
The Levi and Barrett daughters, as well as the daughter of another (non-Jewish) NDP stalwart, Stu Leggett, attended Camp Miriam and remain friends today. The parents also hung out in the 1960s and ’70s, playing cards at the Barrett home in Coquitlam.
“Many a Saturday night we would go over to their house – this was when we were all elected – and we’d play poker,” Levi said. “I have to say, the person with the best poker face, who could win, was Shirley Barrett.”
The anecdote is telling not only because of what it says about the poker skills of the wife of the future premier, but because, for whatever else one might discern about Dave Barrett, he rarely would or could conceal his feelings.
* * *
Barrett became leader of the British Columbia NDP in 1969, shortly after the party lost its 12th consecutive election.
Premier W.A.C. Bennett, the Social Credit leader who had led the province since 1952, declared Barrett “the most dangerous leader the socialists have ever had in B.C.”
From the perspective of a premier who had triumphed over opponents in seven provincial elections, Barrett was indeed dangerous.
Barrett had seen how Tommy Douglas, the federal NDP leader, used humour to deflect the electorate’s fear of the left, and Barrett used his natural jocularity to his political benefit. In his memoir, Barrett claims people just laughed at Bennett’s assertions.
“Nobody saw me as a threat,” he wrote. “I was just a social worker, a little overweight, maybe, but quite jolly. A funny little guy.”
In 1972, Barrett led the NDP to victory, taking 38 seats to the Socreds’ 10. While Bennett was reelected in South Okanagan, most of his cabinet was wiped out.
The emotions on election night were overwhelming on both sides. For Social Credit, the Bennett family and their supporters, the era that had seen British Columbia’s most expansive economic growth under a seemingly invincible leader was at an end.
Among New Democrats, for whom losing elections had seemed a congenital disorder, there was disbelief and jubilation. Speaking at the celebration of life for Barrett at the Croatian Cultural Centre on Commercial Drive on March 4, former premier Dan Miller recalled the power of the moment.
“When we won in 1972, the euphoria I experienced that night has never been duplicated,” said Miller, who was premier for six months after Glen Clark resigned in 1999. “Not when I ran myself in 1986, not when we formed a government in 1991, not even when Glen Clark outsmarted and out-campaigned Gordon Campbell to give him a back-to-back victory for the first time for the NDP. And not even when John Horgan formed the government last year.”
Miller compared Barrett to Jean Lesage, the premier of Quebec who, in 1960, ended more than three decades of rule by the Union Nationale and ushered in what came to be known as the Quiet Revolution.
“I think he was transformational,” Miller said of Barrett. “He brought B.C. into the modern era – and I guess you might be able to describe his revolution as a noisy one.”
When Barrett ended the 20 years of Bennett’s premiership, the legislature had no question period, there was no Hansard (the written record of house proceedings), the entire NDP caucus was forced to share a single office with no support staff, and members of the legislative press gallery were earning pocket money writing news releases and speeches for members of Bennett’s cabinet.
Even as resource revenues were filling government coffers in the 1950s and ’60s, Bennett’s parsimony was so legendary that government travel outside the province was banned – to the extent that the premier himself (who preferred the title “Prime Minister of British Columbia”) avoided federal-provincial conferences. Even long-distance telephone calls by cabinet ministers had to be pre-approved by the premier’s office.
Among Barrett’s first acts in office was to improve conditions and funding for opposition MLAs and institute question period.
* * *
Marc Eliesen served as Barrett’s deputy minister and remained one of the premier’s closest friends and confidants to the end.
“I think, in part, the reason why the two of us connected was that we both came from Jewish working-class backgrounds,” Eliesen told the Independent. “While both of us were not religious – we were secular in belief – we had a very proud and conscious recognition historically of what our particular people had done through history in fighting for social justice and economic equality and I think that dominates basically the orientation of where he was going and what he stood for. He never detracted from that. The upbringing by his folks reflected that particular orientation, for lack of a better description, of being for the little guy and wanting to make life a little bit better.”
Eliesen knew Barrett’s parents and described Rose Barrett’s affinity for communism – and for a time, Stalin – as like a religion.
“Dave very clearly saw the extremes, which were not for him,” Eliesen said. Sam Barrett was a Fabian socialist, a gradualist, and that was the ideology that affected young Dave the most, he said. While the younger Barrett was no revolutionary – seeking change through democratic, parliamentary processes, like his father’s approach would dictate – the record of his fairly short time in the highest office was, if not revolutionary, certainly unprecedented and groundbreaking.
* * *
At the end of the emotional, laughter-filled celebration of life, local band Trooper’s 1977 hit “We’re Here for a Good Time (Not a Long Time)” blasted through the house.
While the Barrett administration predated the song by at least two years, legend has Barrett, at his first cabinet meeting, taking off his shoes, getting up on the polished cabinet table and sliding from one end to the other, demanding of his ministers: “Are we here for a good time, or a long time?”
The veracity of this story is ambiguous but, in his memoir, Barrett acknowledges that the choice was made to go for broke. The stars that aligned in 1972 – including a tired incumbent premier, who had served two decades, and a four-way split in the popular vote – might not align again in the subsequent election. (The party would, in fact, lose again four successive times, three of them under Barrett’s continued leadership, before sitting around that cabinet table again.)
“We discussed whether we were really going to make fundamental changes in British Columbia, or whether we would try to hang on for another term, rationalizing that we’d get the job done next time around. We agreed unanimously to strike while the iron was hot,” he wrote.
No government before or since has passed so much legislation or brought so much change to Victoria in so short a time.
The new government doubled the pay of MLAs to $25,000 and made the role more full-time, significantly increased welfare rates and nearly doubled human resources spending as a percentage of the budget (to 15.1% from 8.5%). The new government provided collective bargaining rights, including the right to strike, to government employees. It introduced a new labour code, established the Islands Trust to thwart uncontrolled development on the Gulf Islands, purchased the Princess Marguerite, which maintained ferry service between Victoria and Seattle, refurbished the Royal Hudson steam locomotive and made it a rail tourism attraction, created a police commission to determine policing standards in British Columbia and set out provisions for dealing with complaints against the police from members of the public.
For the first time, legislation required elected and appointed officials to disclose their financial holdings so that the public could see real or potential conflicts of interest. The government increased funding for the arts and legal aid, initiated the province’s first consumer services ministry and introduced Canada’s strongest, at the time, consumer protection legislation. Legislation eliminated succession duties on farms transferring from parents to children.
The Barrett government launched a range of self-determination initiatives for First Nations. It created a provincial Status of Women office and funded women’s shelters and health facilities, including agencies for victims of rape. It overhauled the province’s family court apparatus.
The NDP had condemned the Social Credit regime for what Barrett viewed as allowing the resources of the province to enrich the wealthy, without benefiting the general population. To address this, the government created the B.C. Energy Commission to regulate utilities and monitor oil and gas prices, upped mineral royalties and increased government royalties on coal 600%.
Alarming many in the business sector, the new government became very directly involved in the economy. The NDP government purchased two pulp mills, two sawmills and a poultry operation to prevent them from going out of business. (With the exception of the chicken business, all became profitable.) The government acquired Shaughnessy Veterans’ Hospital, which would be transformed into B.C. Children’s Hospital. And pay toilets were outlawed.
* * *
Barrett’s Jewishness was not a factor, apparently, one way or another in his election. But the fact that British Columbia – and Canada – elected its first Jewish premier was not overlooked by those with negative biases.
Marc Eliesen was raised in Montreal and served as deputy minister to Manitoba’s first NDP premier, Ed Schreyer, before being coaxed to take the same role in Barrett’s Victoria administration.
“When I was there, there was no question that antisemitism was still around,” he told the Independent. “I saw all the letters that would come in. Being the first Jewish premier … Dave never shied away from the fact of who he was. He was very conscious of people criticizing him not necessarily for the policies he was doing but for his ethnic background. I saw that front and centre and it was much more extensive than a lot of people would want to believe. It was reflected also in death threats that came through.”
Eliesen remembers the words of the mayor of Victoria at the time, Peter Pollen, who would go on to become leader of the B.C. Conservative party.
“There is the mayor of Victoria, when I was hired, making comments saying, ‘Dave Barrett could think nothing more of putting us Christians down and surrounding himself with a Jewish coterie.’ That was the kind of thing that was taking place at the time,” said Eliesen. He thought the words would spark outrage, but they didn’t.
“I’ll never forget it,” he said. “It’s one of those things that shocks you at the time.”
* * *
This photo appeared in the Jewish Western Bulletin Nov. 9, 1978.
Bernie Simpson, who later became an MLA in the government of Mike Harcourt, met Barrett in Jewish communal activities and was persuaded by him to join the NDP.
“From a political point of view, he was my mentor,” Simpson said. “I was with him from the very beginning.”
Under Barrett’s tutelage, Simpson became advertising director of the Democrat, the party’s official organ. Advertising sales is a notoriously tough business and that experience would lead Simpson to become one of the party’s leading fundraisers in years to come.
Simpson takes exception to suggestions from some quarters that Barrett was not connected to his Jewishness or to the community.
“There is a perception out there that he didn’t consider himself that Jewish,” Simpson told the Independent. “It’s actually the contrary. I remember distinctly how proud he was of being the first Jewish premier.”
Simpson went on to say that a core group of leaders attempted to convince Barrett to abandon politics and remain at the helm of the JCC, but, Simpson said, Barrett had determined early in the 1960s that he wanted to be premier.
Simpson recounted another memorable incident in Barrett’s time in politics.
Barrett met Shimon Peres at the Vancouver airport. The man who would become the eighth prime minister and, later, the ninth president of Israel, was tired. But the Hadassah Bazaar was on at the time, at the Pacific National Exhibition grounds, and Barrett thought Peres should see it.
Simpson recalled Peres’s initial response, “Hadassah, Shmadassah. I want to go to the Bayshore to rest.”
But Barrett convinced the Israeli leader to go to the then-annual spectacle. The former premier was mobbed. The future Nobel laureate, who had not yet reached the heights of Israeli politics but was already legendary, was largely disregarded.
“He was kind of ignored, Shimon Peres,” Simpson recalled with a laugh. “It’s not all Jews there at the forum at the PNE and Peres was pissed off. But, 15 years later, I see Peres. The first thing he says it is, ‘How is Dave Barrett?’ Remember, this is 15 years later, after we picked him up at the airport. Which goes to show you two things: one is the prodigious memory of Shimon Peres, and the second thing is the charismatic personality of Dave Barrett, that he would leave such an impression on Shimon Peres.”
Peres and Barrett actually did cross paths in Israel shortly after the Hadassah incident, when Barrett was opposition leader. In his book,
Barrett recalls an invitation to a conference in Jerusalem on international terrorism. The confab included Peres, Israel’s then-prime minister Menachem Begin, George Bush, who was then the head of the Central Intelligence Agency, and other world leaders.
For Dave and Shirley Barrett, it was the first trip to the region and, while there was plenty to see outside of business hours, it was also an opportunity to connect with mishpachah. While Barrett’s mother, Rose, had migrated to Canada, her brother had fled to Palestine. On this trip, Barrett finally met his uncle, as well as cousins and second cousins he had never known.
* * *
For all the new government’s ambitious undertakings, there was not only the domestic political situation to consider, but global realities to be faced.
The early 1970s saw a period of steep inflation, caused in part by the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries, whose embargoes were sending global fuel prices through the roof. With oil prices spiking the cost of everything, wage demands naturally responded.
British Columbia was, at the time, among the most highly unionized workforces in North America. During Barrett’s term, inflation led to increasing expectations from private and public employees and, eventually, to the most intense period of labour unrest in the province’s history, with major parts of the B.C. economy halted by strikes.
Barrett brought in back-to-work legislation, an extraordinary act for an avowedly socialist government, and one from which he would not recover. The legislation was seen as an attack on collective bargaining rights and drove a wedge between the NDP and its crucial union supporters.
At the celebration of life, Jim Sinclair, a past president of the B.C. Federation of Labour, joked about the often-strained relations between Barrett’s NDP and the trade union movement.
“I would like to say that the relationship with the labour movement during that time was just rock solid,” he said. “But I think it was more rocky than solid.”
While Barrett’s government frequently clashed with union leaders, Sinclair said, “There was nothing wrong with the relationship between Dave Barrett, the premier of this province, and ordinary working people in this province.”
Meanwhile, the opposition was uniting, with three of five Liberal MLAs and one of the two Conservatives in the legislature defecting to the Social Credit caucus, now led by W.A.C. Bennett’s son, Bill Bennett.
In 1975, just over three years into his mandate, Barrett made a gut decision to go to the polls. Though he had introduced scads of popular initiatives – Mincome among them – he had disrupted every aspect of the status quo. There was probably not a sector, policy area or demographic that had not been affected by his government’s legislation. Many voters were supportive. Plenty were outraged.
Barrett jumped the gun, hoping that he might catch the strengthening opposition before they were sufficiently unified and ready. It was a miscalculation.
“There was reluctance on the part of some members, followed by a fatalistic acceptance,” Barrett writes in his memoir, acknowledging that few in his government thought the gambit would work.
If it was true that Barrett flung himself down the cabinet table at that first meeting asking if they were there for a good time or a long time, the answer came on Dec. 11, 1975. His government was defeated in a landslide and Barrett lost his home riding of Coquitlam.
* * *
Dawn Black was a young mother volunteering to reelect Barrett in Coquitlam in 1975.
She would later follow him into the legislature and to Parliament in Ottawa, where she viewed him as “den father” of the B.C. NDP caucus.
At the celebration of life, Black spoke about a contentious policy decision of the Barrett government from a personal perspective.
“As premier, Dave Barrett named Eileen Dailly as education minister and she was [also] the first woman deputy premier,” Black told the audience. “She banned corporal punishment in the schools, making us the first jurisdiction in Canada [to do so]. And not till a full 30 years later did the Supreme Court of Canada take action on that issue.”
The public blowback to Dailly’s decision, Black said, was enormous and unanticipated.
“You’d have thought they were banning blackboards and textbooks,” she recalled. “The pundits were screaming, they were hysterical that the kids would be running the schools, they’d be running roughshod over the teachers and every school in B.C. would be like a scene out of Lord of the Flies.”
But Black had a different reaction.
“I remember when I was strapped,” she said. “I remember the fury, the humiliation. And I can still feel that sting half a century later. I remember feeling so powerless in the face of the physical force of an adult.”
Banning the strap, she said, forced teachers to find better, more effective ways to keep order in the classroom and ensured that children did not come home traumatized.
“In fact, they learned a whole new lesson. There are better options – there are always better options than violence – to resolve conflict,” Black said to an enormous ovation.
Black also credited the Barrett government’s creation of the B.C. Cancer Agency.
“You are never more powerless than when one of your kids is diagnosed with cancer,” she said. “I’ve gone through that with two of my kids. I can tell you firsthand: going to the cancer agency in B.C. and knowing that your family is going to be treated to the highest standard of care in the world, that meant everything to me and it means everything to all of the other people who go through that door.”
* * *
Marc Eliesen believes part of Barrett’s success was that some people underestimated him.
“Because of his fantastic performance as an orator and an individual who was very funny and [had a] quick wit, there was often the impression that he was an off-the-cuff kind of guy and instantaneous kinds of observations would be made on contemporary political developments,” Eliesen said. “In fact, he was systematic, he was deliberate and he was rigourous. He thought very clearly as to what he wanted to do and how he wanted to do it.
“That government accomplished more than any other government in Canadian history in so little time,” Eliesen said. “I think there were a number of factors responsible for it. Number one was the overall leadership provided by Dave. He had chutzpah. He had political will. He was quite different than what you see in the contemporary political scene where politicians, regardless of their parties, tend to shift positions depending on the political winds.
“The second thing is that he had a cabinet and a caucus that wanted to do things, that wanted to deliver. He allowed a wide scope for them to initiate the kinds of things that they had collectively decided on. It wasn’t what you see today in political affairs, where things at the centre are micromanaged.”
Hindsight suggests Barrett knew he only had one shot.
“Not that there was a kind of a death wish associated with a one-term government,” Eliesen said, laughing. “But they knew the vagaries of political life and they said, look, we’ve got a majority government. We have a mandate from the people. We went out and talked about all these things. Let’s deliver. And they did it with great gusto.”
After the 1975 defeat, the Barretts and the Eliesens went to Manzanillo, Mexico, for a couple of weeks to decide what to do with the rest of their lives.
“Dave decided that, if there was support, he would go back and be the leader of the opposition, and there was support,” said Eliesen, who went on to head Ontario Hydro, Manitoba Hydro and, eventually, B.C. Hydro.
Barrett led his party to two more defeats before retiring as leader. In each of his three defeats, the share of the NDP vote was significantly higher than his winning tally in 1972, but it always came up short against the unified centre-right.
* * *
Joy MacPhail, who served in many senior cabinet portfolios in the 1990s, represented a part of East Vancouver that Barrett had also served after returning to the house in a by-election following his 1975 Coquitlam defeat.
After the NDP was routed by Gordon Campbell’s Liberals in 2001, MacPhail was leader of the opposition from 2001 to 2005, heading a caucus of two that included fellow East Van MLA Jenny Kwan. MacPhail thought she would get some sympathy from Barrett when he visited them at the legislature. Instead, she got tough love.
“He leaned across the desk,” said MacPhail, “and he said to me, ‘Listen, two of you and 77 of those sons of bitches seems like a fair match. Now get in there and do it.’ We went in there, we did it, and we never won a thing, but we felt we could, because of Dave.”
She recalled meeting with the Barretts when Dave was considering a run for federal Parliament, in 1988.
“We were sitting around, the four of us, there was lots of talk about logistics, tactics, strategy, is it good for the province, what would it be like being in Ottawa, and the three of us were talking and Shirley wasn’t saying anything. So I knew that this was not right and I turned to Shirley after a half-hour of the rest of us BSing and I said, ‘Well, Shirley, what do you think?’ And she said, ‘Listen, anything to get the clown out of the house.’”
MacPhail added: “And I want to say, it wasn’t ‘clown.’ But … we’re not allowed to say what she really said.”
MacPhail, who was appointed last year by the new NDP government to head the Insurance Corporation of British Columbia, recalled the history before the provincial auto insurer was in place.
“Working people couldn’t afford to insure their cars, so they were driving around without insurance and there were huge consequences for families in terms of when crashes occurred, and lives were destroyed,” she said. “People who survived but had no ability to heal, get healthcare and pay for the damage they’d done to other lives, as well.… To know that that was done within the first few months of the Barrett government and survives to this day … I can only hope that – and I do see it as my mandate – to bring it back to the great corporation that it once was.”
* * *
B.C. Premier John Horgan credits Barrett for his own attraction to a political career. During the Solidarity movement opposing premier Bill Bennett’s “restraint” program, Horgan went with a friend to a rally on the lawn of the legislature.
“I was not overly political at that time. Two years earlier, I had met Tommy Douglas and I had wanted to be a social worker, but transferred into political science after hearing Tommy Douglas speak,” Horgan told the Croatian centre audience. “Dave would start a little bit low, you had to lean in to hear what he had to say. Then he would start to build and the people in the audience would start to move with him, this way, that way.… That was the power of his delivery. But, more importantly, it was the power of his message. I left the legislature, I walked up Blanshard Street in Victoria, I went into the local NDP office and said, ‘What can I do to help?’”
Glen Clark, another former NDP premier, said that Barrett’s demeanour should be a model for today and he added a quip that brought down the room.
“Social injustice is worse than ever,” Clark said. “Inequality is greater than ever. There is an opioid crisis of immeasurable proportions, with record overdose deaths every year. And perhaps the greatest challenge of our time is solving climate change. In an age of unprecedented cynicism toward government, Dave Barrett taught us that it doesn’t have to be that way. These problems are man-made and, as such, they can be solved … by women.”
* * *
The support Barrett had from his family – his wife Shirley and their three kids – was brought up repeatedly during the celebration of life.
Marc Eliesen said: “Dave would often ask Shirley, ‘Shirley why do you stick around?’ And Shirley would say, ‘Dave, I just want to see what happens next.’”
Gerry Scott, who has run countless campaigns for the NDP, said: “At school, when the kids were asked, ‘What does your dad do?’ The only answer that could be consistent was, ‘He raises hell.’ And they were proud of this.”
All three adult children spoke at the event.
Daughter Jane offered a different answer to the question, “What does your father do?”
“I often told people … he was a plumber. I told him he was up to his neck in…” she said, trailing off. “My friends would say, ‘But aren’t you proud?’ Of course I was. But not for the reason people thought. Plumber, politician, didn’t matter. He was just my dad.”
Son Joe said that Barrett was the same guy at home as he was publicly.
“There was no difference. He was funny, cheerful, always supportive of us. Of course, you’re going to make mistakes in life and he would say, ‘It’s easy not to make mistakes. Just do nothing.’”
Joe Barrett said his father faced Alzheimer’s matter-of-factly.
“He accepted it, he was peaceful, he was courageous and he stoically faced that last challenge right to the end,” he said. “Dad, he celebrated life, he loved life. As the Jews say, ‘To life! L’chaim!’”
Son Dan recalled a light moment in a dark time. One of Barrett’s closest confidants and advisors was Harvey Beech. At a time when death threats against the premier were too common, the two were walking to lunch in Victoria.
“And, one day, walking up Government Street … Harvey was lagging behind and so my dad lays into him: ‘Harvey, what are you doing back there? You gotta get up in front of me. You’re protecting me. This is the premier of the province. Some guys are going to get out and shoot me.’
“Harvey said, without skipping a beat, ‘Dave, they can kill a man but they can’t kill an idea.’ This did not give my dad a whole lot of comfort.”
Dave Barrett, then leader of the opposition, offers greetings at the Congregation Emanu-El rededication ceremony in Victoria, June 6, 1982. (photo by Cyril E. Leonoff; Jewish Museum and Archives of British Columbia L.18490)
After the ceremony, Joe Barrett told the Independent that his dad was very proud of his Jewish heritage.
“It was a fundamental, deep part of who he was,” he said. “I was reminded yesterday, one of the very first things that the government did was remove the covenants on property titles. Up until 1972, landowners – I guess in the British Properties in particular – could write ‘no Jews, no Sikhs, no blacks.’ The very first thing they did. He knew who he was and where he came from and he was proud.”
There have not been a great number of Jewish people in B.C. politics, but there are two Jewish cabinet ministers in the current government.
“Dave Barrett, when I was a young man, made tremendous change in British Columbia,” George Heyman, minister of environment and climate change strategy, told the Independent. “The legacies that he left – the [agricultural] land reserve, ICBC, the ambulance service, things we take for granted now, recording proceedings in the legislature, question period – all of them go back to the brief period of ’72 to ’75. He was a warm, funny man. He could rouse a crowd like no one else and it’s an honour to me to have been able to have sat down with him on a couple of occasions and just have a quiet conversation.”
Selena Robinson, B.C. minister of municipal affairs and housing, is proud to note that she represents the riding of Coquitlam-Maillardville, the third Jewish MLA, after Barrett and Levi, to be elected in the area, which would not, by any demographic measure, be termed a “Jewish riding.”
“Unfortunately, I never got a chance to meet him,” Robinson told the Independent, “but I really feel connected to him.” Of Barrett’s legacy, Robinson said, “It really was about tikkun olam, it was about how to heal the world. It was what motivated him and I felt a kindred spirit.”
In a telephone interview, Shirley Barrett recalled Passover seders at her mother-in-law’s home and said her husband was “basically a humanist, but he was a secular Jew.”
“He always was proud to be a Jew,” she said. “He grew up with the values of his parents and he never relented on his heritage. He was an insatiable reader and one of the topics he returned to repeatedly was trying to understand the history of his people.
“He was a reader of everything that he could get his hands on as far as trying to understand why the Holocaust happened and why there was antisemitism,” she said. “He just was so interested in trying to figure out the human psyche.”
* * *
Barrett returned to politics as a member of Parliament from 1988 to 1993. He ran for the federal party leadership in 1989, coming a close second to Audrey McLaughlin on the final ballot.
He hosted a hotline radio program on CJOR, did stints as a lecturer at Harvard and McGill universities, and continued campaigning for New Democrats as long as his health allowed.
Moe Sihota, a former cabinet minister who emceed the celebration of life, remembered what the diversity of Barrett’s cabinet meant to a young Indo-Canadian person. In addition to the first female deputy premier, the Barrett government included two black MLAs and the first indigenous cabinet minister in B.C. history.
“We grew up as kids in Lake Cowichan, a small sawmill community … we always saw colour as a barrier,” Sihota said. “Dave Barrett came along and he never thought that colour was a barrier. Dave, together with the late Emery Barnes, Rosemary Brown and Frank Calder, made all of us kids in the Cowichan Valley believe we could make a change in society.”
* * *
On Cypress Mountain, at one of the most scenic views in this scenic province, looking down across Burrard Inlet at the city of Vancouver and beyond, is a plaque that reads:
“Throughout the 1960s, the future of Cypress Bowl was hotly debated. In 1964, a member of the Legislative Assembly [MLA] by the name of Dave Barrett pressed the minister of forests to honour a commitment to preserve forest lands and Cypress Bowl. What followed was an eight-year effort by MLA Barrett to save Cypress Bowl from chainsaws and residential development. Elected British Columbia’s premier in 1972, his dream was finally realized when his government established Cypress Park as a ‘Class A’ Provincial Park in 1975.
“Dave Barrett was elected to serve as an MLA in British Columbia from 1960 to 1975, and from 1976 to 1983. He was elected as a federal member of Parliament serving from 1988 to 1993. He was awarded the Order of Canada in 2005.”
Kids on the Block uses a puppet show to teach kids about juvenile arthritis. (photo from Cassie and Friends)
Juvenile arthritis (JA) affects three in 1,000 kids in Canada, making it one of the most common chronic conditions affecting children today. Yet, JA is still relatively unknown and often misunderstood.
According to Jennifer Wilson, executive director of Cassie and Friends Society for Children with Juvenile Arthritis and other Rheumatic Diseases, “Arthritis has been mislabeled as ‘an old person’s disease,’ leaving kids who suffer from JA misunderstood for their differences and the disease’s complications.”
In 2006, David Porte and Debbie Setton discovered that their then-20-month-old daughter Cassie had JA.
“When Cassie was not quite 2 years old, she woke up one morning and couldn’t walk,” recalled her mom, Debbie. “I took her to the children’s hospital and, after X-rays, blood work and several visits by specialists over the next few weeks, we received the diagnosis of JA, a painful, lifelong autoimmune condition.
“Despite being a physician, I remember feeling very scared and alone, especially as Cassie’s disease progressed to involve more and more joints. Both David and I struggled to find information and support to cope with Cassie’s condition.
“About six months after Cassie was diagnosed,” she said, “David entered the Scotiabank Charity Challenge Run. We were overwhelmed with the support we received from family and friends, raising over $18,000 in a few weeks. We decided to do something long-lasting and create a charity that would help other kids and families like us.”
Debbie and David named the Vancouver-based charity Cassie and Friends, and it has been working to transform the lives of kids and families affected by JA and other rheumatic diseases locally and across Canada.
“Cassie’s disease has followed a pretty typical course of flares and remissions,” said Debbie. “At her worst, she had 16 joints affected (knee, ankles, toes, wrists, fingers). During the flares, she was unable to do the things she loves, like dance. In fact, at times, she found it hard just to walk or hold a pen. Thankfully, she is in a remission phase right now, on two different injectable medications to control the inflammation.”
According to Debbie, Cassie sometimes gets sad or frustrated because of her arthritis or its treatment. But, for the most part, Cassie is exceptionally positive and does not let her arthritis stop her. Further, Cassie’s condition has had an impact on her older brother, Ben, making him a more empathetic person after observing his sister’s struggles, said his mom.
“In the beginning, it was difficult for David and me, not knowing anyone else with a child with JA,” said Debbie. “But, now we feel like we have a whole community around us to share in the ups and downs of Cassie’s disease.”
To help kids learn about JA and other rheumatic diseases, David and Debbie created Kids on the Block (KOB) in 2009. And the KOB puppet show has been traveling, mainly around Metro Vancouver, to raise awareness about childhood arthritis, and to educate students and teachers about the issues these children face.
“The life-sized puppets – decked out in Cassie’s toddler clothes – act like real children,” said Debbie. “They help students understand what it’s like to live with JA and their skits illustrate some of the challenges a classmate with JA (or really any disease or challenge) might be facing: pain, isolation, depression and mobility challenges. Students have the chance to ask the puppets questions at the end of the performance. The puppets also help children feel positive about themselves, accepting individual differences and learning valuable personal skills.”
Kids on the Block was at Vancouver Talmud Torah on Jan. 24. (photo from Cassie and Friends)
The first-ever performance of KOB was at Vancouver Talmud Torah, when Cassie was in kindergarten. With Cassie about to graduate from the school, the show was brought back for another performance earlier this year. Cassie suggested it would be more special and have a greater impact if she were to introduce the program with her own story. At the show, there were two other children in the audience with either JA or another rheumatic condition.
“It was my suggestion to bring Kids on the Block back to VTT on Jan. 24, 2018, for the younger kids, including my Grade 1 buddy,” said Cassie. “It was fun to introduce the puppet show to the kids. They all know me and I could explain it to them in an easier way, because I am a kid and they are, too.
“I also really enjoyed watching the show again, because I didn’t remember it from kindergarten. After I had done the introduction, I also got many compliments on it because it was in the weekly email.” (Cassie’s presentation can be seen on YouTube.)
“Arthritis in kids is much more than aches and pains,” said Wilson. “JA is a chronic autoimmune disease characterized by uncontrolled inflammation and pain that can occur in any and often several parts of a child’s body. Children with JA will spend countless hours treating their condition and are often confined to the sidelines in sports, school and even life – especially during painful flares.
“For many children,” she said, “JA will also involve complex medical interventions, such as joint replacements, surgeries and aggressive, immune-suppressing medications, like chemotherapy and biologics. There is no cure and there are few treatments that are safe and specific for a growing child. Sadly, that can lead to feelings of embarrassment, social exclusion and even bullying … for a child who is already dealing with a painful, chronic and sometimes invisible disease.”
KOB is 100% free to schools and is intended for students in kindergarten through Grade 4. The show travels to 40 to 50 schools in British Columbia every year. It is supported in part by the sponsorship of Mardon Insurance and Gore Mutual Insurance Foundation.
According to Wilson, Cassie and Friends is the only charity completely dedicated to kids and families affected by juvenile arthritis and other rheumatic diseases. For more information, visit cassieandfriends.ca or email [email protected].
Rabbi Benay Lappe, founder and rosh yeshivah of Svara, in Chicago, taught Talmud at Congregation Or Shalom earlier this month. (photo from Or Shalom)
“For all you straight folks, let me tell you – you’re all queer. Your job is to find that queer part of you, wear it on you, walk it through the world. That’s how the world changes.”
Rabbi Benay Lappe, founder and rosh yeshivah of Chicago’s Svara: A Traditionally Radical Yeshivah, made this observation during a lecture at Congregation Or Shalom on March 10. Lappe is a passionate and unique teacher of Talmud, who is “dedicated to bringing the Talmud to the 99%,” meaning the majority of Jews who do not study it.
As Lappe explained at Or Shalom, there are three kinds of queer. The first refers to, as she put it, “me, a lesbian woman, and other people with non-heteronormative sexualities or folks who are trans or non-gender-conforming. The second refers to those who ally themselves with queers, embracing queer culture and rights. The third category is someone profoundly ‘othered’ or marginalized, who owns that experience and walks it through the world as a critique to the mainstream.”
It is in the third sense of the word that Lappe addressed the audience. “The rabbis who wrote the Talmud were a small group of queer, fringey people,” she said, explaining that the talmudic sages were a small group of Jews who responded to a time of crisis in Jewish history with radical creativity. When the Temple was destroyed after centuries of colonization at the hands of the Romans, only one group was poised to respond effectively – the sages who wrote the Mishnah, and their spiritual descendants, who later wrote the Talmud. “When the master story doesn’t work anymore,” said Lappe, “it matters how you respond.”
According to Lappe, for the Jews of that time, some retreated into the old story and built walls around it, many abandoned the Jewish story and assimilated, and a small group remained faithful to the Torah while radically transforming and updating it. The Talmud, she explained, records for posterity how the rabbis evolved Judaism. “The rabbis knew that master stories change,” she said, “and they encoded a set of mechanisms into their new master story that enabled constant change.”
(photo from Or Shalom)
The “new master story” is embedded in the Talmud, which was updated to reflect changing moral and social sensibilities. It shifted Judaism from a Temple-based religion practised in Israel to a home- and synagogue-based one founded on a communal and personal discipline of halachah (Jewish law) that could be practised anywhere. Lappe believes that, through studying the Talmud in a non-fundamentalist way, in a way that gives primacy to the power of our reason and moral intuition in confrontation with the text, we can learn lessons for how to transform and vitalize Judaism today. (Reason is “svara” in Aramaic, the name of her yeshivah.)
According to Lappe, Judaism is once again going through what she calls a “crash,” a shattering of its master story, and the study of Talmud provides us with case studies in how to respond.
Lappe has an enthusiastic supporter in Or Shalom’s Rabbi Hannah Dresner.
“I have known Rabbi Benay for many years; we shared a spiritual community in Chicago,” said Dresner. “She is fun and funny and tough and with the quickest mind. Her crash theory is a different languaging of Reb Zalman Schachter-Shalomi’s theory of paradigm- shifted halachah. This is based on the truth that halachah, as a path, is meant to evolve and move forward, alive in the pilpul, in the wrestling of how we can enact Torah now, in our authenticity.” (Schachter-Shalomi is the founder of the Jewish Renewal movement to which Or Shalom belongs.)
“I always thought I was at the margins of Judaism, being a queer Jewish woman,” said Alicia Jane Fridkin, who attended the weekend teachings. “Rabbi Benay helped me to realize that queer people are not at the margins: we are at the forefront of an ever-changing religion. She illustrated how each era of Judaism began with radical Jews who sought to practise in new and meaningful ways, including the era of rabbinical Judaism that we have been practising for the past 2,000 years.”
Fridkin added, “I immediately blocked off the dates in my calendar for Queer Talmud Camp at her yeshivah, Svara, which I hope to attend this summer.”
Matthew Gindinis a freelance journalist, writer and lecturer. He writes regularly for the Forward and All That Is Interesting, and has been published in Religion Dispatches, Situate Magazine, Tikkun and elsewhere. He can be found on Medium and Twitter.
This year’s Limmud Vancouver takes place April 14-15 at Beth Israel. (photo from Limmud Vancouver)
Limmud Vancouver will be holding its fourth conference April 14-15 at Congregation Beth Israel. The Vancouver program is one of 80 Limmud gatherings around the world, which have developed since Limmud was first founded in the United Kingdom in 1980. Non-denominational and multi-generational, Limmud’s goal is to take participants one step further on their Jewish journey.
Limmud Vancouver opens with a Saturday night event, starting at 7 p.m., that features three diverse presentations. Susan Barocas, the chef and writer who organized President Barack Obama’s Pesach seders, speaks on Tastes Across the Centuries: The Enduring Influence of the Foods of Spain’s Medieval Jews. Laura Duhan-Kaplan, rabbi emerita of Or Shalom and director of inter-religious studies at Vancouver School of Theology, presents Sacred Texts: Three Religious Traditions in Twenty-Five Words or Less. Avi Dolgin, a retired educator who has a longstanding interest in Jewish ritual and midrash – and who also was the founder and first chair of Limmud Vancouver – presents Yonah ben Amitai, Inc.: A Dramatized Midrash. Havdalah and refreshments follow.
On Sunday, the Limmud “buffet” offers a wide variety of speakers, topics and formats. During the day, beginning at 9:30 a.m., there will be five time-slots, with eight presentations in each slot, on subjects such as arts and culture, history, social issues, Israel, healing, spirituality and Torah. Gloria Levi will speak on aging as an opportunity to cultivate wisdom, Dr. Efrat El-Hanany on antisemitic stereotypes in Western art, and Rabbi Binyomin Bitton on a lawsuit about the ownership of valuable manuscripts confiscated by the Nazis. Attendees can participate in Rabbi Susan Shamash’s presentation on women in 19th-century Eastern Europe, in Alden Solovy’s liturgical chevruta and in Miriam Libicki’s talk on cartooning as a way of exploring identity. They can learn from Rabbi Adam Rubin about the revival of the Hebrew language, from Gordon Cherry about Toronto’s antisemitic Christie Pits riot and from Joelle Lake about an enigmatic Qumran scroll found in the Cairo geniza. Current events will be covered in Alycia Fridkin’s presentation on Jewish LGBTQ issues and Rebecca Denham’s session on Jewish addiction community services. There are descriptions of all 40 presentations and speakers at limmudvancouver.ca.
Children and youth programming has been enhanced this year. Limmud collaborates with PJ Library on a session for ages 3-7, with local educators on sessions for kids 8-12, and with the Ismaili Centre in Burnaby on an inter-religious exchange for high school students. Also showcased this year is a children’s hamsa project, dedicated to Ruth Hess Dolgin, z”l, through whom Limmud Vancouver came about.
After attending a Limmud event in Europe, Ruth Dolgin had begun preparations for a Vancouver version when she became ill and, sadly, died, in 2012. Her husband, Avi Dolgin, has carried on with her work. Ruth Dolgin loved and collected hamsas, which have been seen as a symbol of protection and good luck throughout many cultures. Each of the presentation rooms will have a display of hamsa art created by students from the community’s Jewish day schools and after-school programs.
The conference fee is $75 (with special pricing for ages 36 and under). Registration can take place online at limmudvancouver.ca or by phone at 778-776-9215. The fee includes a kosher dairy lunch. In addition to the children’s programs, childcare is available on site, staffed by experienced members of the Habonim Dror Ken Achva.
Limmud gatherings around the world are committed to the egalitarian spirit of volunteerism – all of the organizers and presenters are volunteers, and none of the presenters receives an honorarium. Limmud is funded through donations, and Limmud Vancouver thanks its individual donors, as well as the Snider and Schusterman foundations.
Elizabeth Nichollsis a volunteer with Limmud Vancouver.
Back in university, Jeff Jacobson started working in the career he loves – being a talent agent. (photo from Jeff Jacobson)
“When I was a kid, my favourite movie was Jerry Maguire. He was an agent, and I wanted to be one, too,” said Jeff Jacobson, co-owner of Talent Bureau. “Whenever my buddies and I talked about some famous athlete or musician, I wanted to know who represented them.”
Jacobson started on the road to the career he loves when he was at the University of Victoria. “I was a promoter, organized concerts of rap and hip-hop music at UVic,” he said. “We tried to get the performers all they wanted, but I was getting tired of the musicians’ ‘diva’ attitude. I wanted to work with a different kind of performer.”
His chance came in 2007. Still a student at the time, he arranged for Al Gore to speak at the university. “Amazingly, Mr. Gore agreed. He came to Victoria. And I thought: that’s what I want to do. Many people and organizations want speakers at their events. Speakers are much better than musicians. The logistics are easier, too. Musicians often have an entourage, so you need hotels and transportation for at least a dozen people, while a speaker comes alone. Easier to arrange.”
Jacobson graduated in 2008 with a degree in American history. That year, he also organized an event featuring Colin Powell as a speaker.
“History teaches us about great men and women. It’s all about storytelling,” he said. “It’s exactly what I do professionally: bring great men and women to speak to people and help them tell their stories.”
With two powerful speakers behind him already, Jacobson went to work for the National Speakers Bureau. In 2014, he left the company and opened his own, then called Jeff Jacobson Agency.
“I don’t organize concerts or events anymore,” he said. “I’m a middleman. I bring talent and event organizers together.”
He said about 80% of his business comes from speakers.
“When people invite a speaker to speak at their event, they expect more,” he said. “They want social media. They want a YouTube video. We make sure it happens. We facilitate all the extras and help the speakers produce content. We’re a 21st-century agency. We represent the social media generation.”
For Jacobson, being a modern company means that he and his employees aren’t at their small office 9 to 5 every day. Most of their internal communications and business with clients can be done online or over the phone.
“My partner Jeff Lohnes is based in Toronto. We have staff members in Ottawa and in Nelson, B.C.,” Jacobson explained. “At the moment, our team is six people. Last year, we booked talents for approximately 300 events all over the world. We booked speakers for events in Latvia, in New Zealand, but the majority of our business comes from the events in Canada and the U.S.”
In addition to speakers, the agency handles entertainment, mostly bands, but other activities, as well. Companies will come to Talent Bureau, as the company is now called, when they want a celebrity to endorse their product or service, for example. Jacobson listed some of the speakers and organizations he has helped bring together.
“We worked with Rogers and Google, American Express and Sysco, Pfizer and Microsoft. We booked speakers for universities like UBC, McGill and Georgetown,” he said. “Recently, I placed the speakers at the SFU Public Square’s Brave New Work Event – Van Jones from CNN and Anne-Marie Slaughter. I booked former prime minister Stephen Harper to speak at the FarmTech Conference in Edmonton.”
As word-of-mouth has spread about the good job they do, more and more exclusive speakers have been asking Talent Bureau to represent them.
“To handle this level of clients, an agent needs a very thick skin,” Jacobson joked. These clients, he said, “They always want things their way, and we make sure they are satisfied. We also help the organizers to realize their ambitions for their events. We are matchmakers between talents and events.”
In addition to a thick skin, Jacobson said a keen interest in current events and a deep familiarity with pop culture are absolute necessities for his hectic profession. “I have to talk to people in different industries: sports, agriculture, manufacturing, art, science. I have to speak their lingo,” he explained, “be up to speed about everything that happens, be aware of the biggest trends.”
An obsessive consumer of news, Jacobson tweets multiple times a day, but his main focus is people. “You need a sense of humour to handle such a job and you need humility. I always remember that, although I deal with celebrities, I’m not one.”
He also stressed the need to care, to be passionate about his work. “Sometimes, bizarre challenges or obscure requests spring at you, and you must be prepared to deal with them,” he said. “For example, once a client canceled on me…. He was booked to speak at an event but, at the last minute, he remembered his daughter’s graduation and canceled. I had to find a replacement fast. Another time, a client asked the event organizers to build him a canoe on stage. Flexibility is the key.”
In general, Jacobson said he has to prove his value as an agent, earn his reputation every time he books someone. “One of the modern challenges for an agent is the democratization of talent,” he explained. “Everyone has a website. Anyone can approach him or her online, so why do they need an agent? I prove myself by caring about the people I work with. Everyone has a chaotic schedule, and it’s my job to juggle those schedules, to find good opportunities. Every day is like a Rubik’s Cube and, one day, I might even solve it.”
It was just this year that Jacobson and Lohnes rebranded the agency, changing the name to Talent Bureau. “It was a collaborative decision but it’s the right direction,” Jacobson said. “When you say Jeff Jacobson Agency, nobody knows what it is, but when you say Talent Bureau, it’s clear what we do. And we are still new enough in the business to be able to rebrand without damage.”
Dr. Mike Teschuk created this image to illustrate how a teen brain prioritizes.
“First thing you’ll notice is the largest lobe is the love lobe,” said Dr. Mike Teschuk, showing an image of how a teen brain prioritizes. “For teenagers, this is the capital lobe. ‘I love my new outfit. I love my girlfriend of two weeks, the latest YouTube video … but not necessarily my parents. Maybe they still do love their parents, but they don’t show it, for sure. You’ll notice, in the smallest corner, is the memory for chores and homework. That’s the smallest part of the teenage brain.”
Teschuk was speaking at a National Council of Jewish Women of Canada event on Feb. 6, held at the Rady JCC’s Berney Theatre in Winnipeg. It offered parents insights and suggestions as to how to best work with their (and other) teens.
Teschuk is a clinical psychologist at the University of Manitoba and with the Winnipeg Regional Health Authority. Besides having parented three adolescents who are now young adults, he has provided clinical services to children, adolescents and parents at the Health Sciences Centre in the department of clinical health psychology for the past 20 years.
According to Teschuk, while addiction to cellphones might be somewhat new, the way a teen brain is drawn to new and different things, and their contempt for authority, has always been present. Knowing this, he said, can help put teens’ odd and/or inconsistent behaviours into perspective for parents, and help them become more effective and empathetic caregivers. Changes that the teen brain goes through can be very intense and overwhelming.
“There is a great little analogy in Ron Clavier’s book Teen Brain, Teen Mind,” said Teschuk. He likens this new, more efficient brain that is emerging to getting a new computer. You get a new computer, it can do so much more than the old one. It takes awhile to get the hang of it, a new operating system. If you’re like me, it can be an intense learning process, sometimes frustrating. Sometimes, you’re overwhelmed. You long for the old computer, because it was more simple. Right? It was more predictable. I think we can feel more empathy for teenagers if we realize that this kind of stuff is happening in the brain.
“These changes create a sense of anxiety and stress. And, though they vacillate, they show signs of more maturity than regression backwards. They don’t want to be treated like a little kid anymore. You get this ambivalence.
“There are interesting studies that show that early to mid teens, when they have to process information and emotional tasks – when you look at the brain with more function and see what’s happening – you see they are using those temporal lobes, the middle of the brain, to process those emotions,” he said. “Eventually, what happens with age is they move into that later stage of adolescence [and] the frontal lobes take over.
“It’s what all parents are waiting for. As the frontal lobes develop, the individual can see into the future more, inhibit their impulsive behaviours, better plan, socialize and make decisions. But remember, this is a work in process,” he cautioned.
Teens become more able to consider hypothetical ideas and are more flexible in their thinking, he said. “You begin to see it by 12, 13, 14 years old – they can consider alternative possibilities. What if there is no God? What if I decide not to continue dance class or hockey … these activities my parents signed me up for when I was 5 years old?”
Dr. Mike Teschuk spoke at a National Council of Jewish Women of Canada event on Feb. 6, held at the Rady JCC’s Berney Theatre in Winnipeg. (photo by Rebeca Kuropatwa)
Teschuk is a big proponent of looking at situations from the other person’s perspective. He said laying down the law and being confrontational does not work well with teens. He suggested instead to take the time to understand why they do things a certain way, and to find a way to work together to create a better outcome. This can be done by asking questions and listening, by dialogue.
“So, how do all these changes impact self-esteem?” he asked. “We know it has a big impact. Research says self-esteem often declines during early adolescence, and then improves again as they get a bit older. The idea is there can be discrepancies between who you are and who you think you should be. [Teens] start to reflect on how they are not the ideal person they want to be. At this stage, teens need a lot of reassurance from us. There is a symbolic kind of transition that has to happen. Like, in our family, the transition from the kids’ table to the grown-ups’ table. Going to the grown-up table is about also having your own views to express.”
According to Teschuk, at around 14 years of age, teens go through a “rejecting stage,” they don’t want to be with their parents at all. They want to pretend they don’t even have parents. But, Teschuk reassured the 100-person audience by way of personal example, his 23-year-old daughter, who went through this stage, now likes to go out for coffee with him – so, these things, too, shall pass. Your kids will not feel the same way at 23 as they did at 14, he said.
As parents, he said, we need to recognize that this is a normal stage of development. You don’t have to argue about it or be upset about it. Your teens will feel the need to reject a lot of the things they had until then taken for granted. They want to be independent, but it’s daunting for them.”
According to Teschuk, parent-to-adolescent connectedness is very important, especially when things are rough. Simply by hanging in there as a parent and showing how much you care has a large impact, he said, acknowledging that this is the most fundamental, yet hardest, thing to do when teens push back. “It’s easy to want to reject them, when someone is making your life very difficult,” said Teschuk. “It’s natural to feel that way, but, being able to hang in there is huge.
“Relationships with adults outside the family are important, too – with teachers, coaches, people in church or synagogue, extended family members – having other trusted adults. School connectedness is super-important, too. Schools offer so much more than academics,” he said. “If teens want to go to school because they’re on sports teams, in a play, or some other engaging activities … follow their lead and support them in those interests. Positive peer environments are important … but, of course, parents can have a role in creating those peer environments. Knowing your teenagers’ friends … and making your house a place where they want to hang out is a great strategy.”
Teschuk offered a couple of other tips. He suggested that parents, when driving their kids around, take the time to talk with their children and to connect with them. Also, he said, talking with them in this way gives the teens the chance to talk without being face-to-face, which can be uncomfortable and stress-inducing. Last but not least, Teschuk said family meals are also a great time to connect.
Cara Rosenbloom is trying to educate people about nutrition. In 2016, she co-authored the cookbook Nourish. (photo from Cara Rosenbloom)
When grocery shopping, how do you decide what to get when you are looking at items not familiar to you? Do you look at the ingredients? Are you drawn to packages that claim to be natural, whole food, organic?
Marketing and manipulation often go hand in hand. And it can be challenging to differentiate between products that actually offer added value and those that just say they do.
For the past 10 years, dietician Cara Rosenbloom has been running Words to Eat By, which provides nutrition education. For example, what does organic really mean in terms of food and nutrition?
When it comes to a product’s organic claims, Rosenbloom said, “I think the most important thing that people need to know about organic is that the word has nothing to do with health. An organic claim on a food does not mean it’s healthier for you. Organic is a method of farming.
“The use of the term ‘organic’ is regulated in Canada and has very clear guidelines about which foods can have that term stamped on it. It has to do with how that product – if it’s an animal, how it was raised … or, if a plant, how it was grown. But, once that organic product is used in a food product, the resulting food may not be a health food. Perfect examples are Kraft Dinner and Doritos. They now have organic versions. Those are not health foods.”
Cara Rosenbloom (photo courtesy)
Rosenbloom said claims that organically grown foods contain fewer chemicals are misleading. “Even foods that are grown organically still use pesticides and fertilizers. They’re just organic versions of it,” she said. “The word ‘chemical’ is not used appropriately in nutrition literature, in the way the media describes food. Many things are chemicals and aren’t bad for you. Water is a chemical! You need a degree in chemistry almost to understand how molecules are put together…. If you think organic food is just grown naturally in the sunshine, you’re wrong. Organic farmers use natural pesticides and herbicides. If you want to call those chemicals, too, then that’s fine.”
Rosenbloom writes a monthly column in the Washington Post, where she focuses on debunking myths and educating the readers about wellness, so people can make informed decisions about their nutrition.
In her interview with the Independent, she touched on how people get scared off by the “dirty dozen,” a list of fruits and vegetables believed to contain the highest amount of pesticides. In 2017, the Environmental Working Group’s dirty dozen were strawberries, spinach, nectarines, apples, peaches, celery, grapes, pears, cherries, tomatoes, sweet bell peppers and potatoes.
Rosenbloom explained that, too often, consumers avoid buying produce altogether if they can’t find organic versions. “That’s obviously the wrong message, and not what any dietician would recommend,” she said. “I wrote an article about how the dirty dozen list doesn’t hold weight in terms of pesticides. It’s a flawed list and has no scientific credibility. I educate people that organic is fine if you choose that, but not to fear fruits and veggies that are conventionally grown. The bottom line is that you need to eat fruits and veggies, whether you choose to eat organic or not, because they’re just a healthy thing in the diet.”
In that Jan. 18, 2017, Post article, Rosenbloom interviewed food toxicologist Carl K. Winter about the dirty dozen list, which, he said, “failed to consider the three most important factors used in authentic risk assessments – the amounts of pesticides found, the amounts of the foods consumed and the toxicity of the pesticides.” And, she notes, “Even the Environmental Working Group doesn’t recommend avoiding the items on its own dirty dozen list. Their website says ‘the health benefits of a diet rich in fruits and vegetables outweigh the risks of pesticide exposure. Eating conventionally grown produce is far better than skipping fruits and vegetables.’”
As for the claim that a product is natural, Rosenbloom explained that, while the organic label is closely regulated, the natural label is not. “Anything can be deemed natural,” she said. “So, it’s not something you want to count on. A lot of foods that are high in sugar, let’s say, can still say they are natural, because sugar comes from plants and that’s natural.
“The word natural doesn’t have a base definition that companies must satisfy in order to use that term on their foods,” she continued. “So, if you look at a product that says it’s natural, it doesn’t really tell you what that means. It lets you figure it out.
“We’re seeing more big companies that make processed food use the word natural – and misuse it. And this is leading to fewer consumers having any trust in the label natural.”
When it comes to vitamin supplements, Rosenbloom said more is not better. “There are certainly times when your body does need certain vitamins, but a lot of people are spending a lot of money on vitamins they just don’t need,” she said. “Then there are false promises made with things like vitamin IV drips and other popular myths.”
Rosenbloom has written about how to tell the difference between processed, ultra-processed and whole foods, as well as how to buy seafood that is produced in a safe, sustainable way, and much more. In 2016, she co-authored a cookbook with Chef Nettie Cronish, called Nourish: Whole Food Recipes Featuring Seeds, Nuts and Beans. It features 100 recipes, all of which are original and co-developed by the authors.
“We focused on beans, nuts and seeds in the book because these are nice sources of protein,” said Rosenbloom. “And nuts and seeds are healthy fats that are underutilized by most people in the diet, with most people relying mainly on animal-based foods for their protein. We wanted to explain that you can include seeds, nuts and beans in everyday recipes, and these 100 recipes show them how.
“It’s not solely a vegetarian cookbook,” she added. “It encourages people – wherever they are at, vegetarian or not, whoever wants to buy the book – to try out the recipes, which include meat, chicken, fish, seafood and vegetarian.
“The idea was to say, ‘Whatever you’re eating, here’s a way to add seeds, nuts and beans, to get more of those healthy ingredients into your diet.’ Take salmon, for example. It might be crusted with sesame seeds, or oatmeal might have some hemp seeds or flax seeds in it. So, we just enrich foods you eat anyway with the goodness of seeds, nuts and beans.”
