Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Are you addressing a condition under which Eretz Yisrael is being conquered and is to become Judenrein, and Israelis without dual citizenship would have a problem fleeing?
If there were problem is the diaspora, most Yidden would move to Eretz Yisrael, in which case no passport is needed (the countries expelling Jews wouldn’t require a passport to exit, and the Israelis wouldn’t require them for Jewish refugees to enter).
Neither event is likely. Those Arabs opposed to Israel’s existence are not especially strong militarily and given Israel’s probable nuclear weapon would face mutually assured destruction if they ever attempted to destroy Israel. In the disaspora, while crime is a problem, it isn’t directed against Jews. While the far right favor policies seen as threatening by most Jews, those policies (e.g. support for religious schools, restriction of gay rights, restricting abortion) are seen as favorable by frum Jews. While the far left (“progressives”) favor policies most frum Jews oppose, their policies are against all religions, not just Jews.
Given that the textbook “How to lie with statistics” seems to be the basis of most statistical discussions, the best way to evaluate a statistical hypothesis is to test it against real world data. If there is a serious “shiduch problem” (frum people unable to find spouses), it should be resulting in frum elementary schools having a problem of a shrinking pool of students, and having difficulty filling classrooms,since it our community, the minhag is that women start having children only after a successful shidduch. Furthermore, that can’t be faked, and is easy to confirm. If there is a “shidduch” crisis, frum schools should be closing, teachers should be being laid off and schools will be charging lower tuition since they are desperate to attract a shrinking pool of students; if this is not happening, it is highly unlikely there is a “shidduch crisis”. Note that everyone has a “shidduch” problem until they get married, and except for Adam ha-Rishon, whose problem was indeed unique, these tend to be resolved in a very mundane way.
lakewhut: The Federal government isn’t supposed to be involved in domestic relations, yet 25 years ago they passed a federal statute on same-sex marriage, and now the political winds are changed so they passing a (constitutionally) similar statute with the opposite impact.
That has minimal impact on our community since most of us live in states where the local legislature supports same-sex marriage, so the federal law is irrelevant. It also doesn’t impact the most important aspects of marriage law which pertain to the rights of parents, since in general, “gay” couples don’t have children.
IF Israel were frum by our standards, it would lose about half of its population, including most of the personnel in the most important military units, and most of the “StartUP Nation” type industries. You would lose the massive secular tourism industry, and would lose most support from Jews outside of Israel (most of whom are very secular, very rich and well connected politically).
If you are Chareidi-enough to accept a much lower standard of living, and willing to make the necessary concessions to live under Muslim rule-getting rid of the hilonim is a great idea. IF you prefer that Israel be a westernized modern country with a strong military, you probably don’t want to go gung-ho in desecularizing Eretz Yisrael.
1. The “Respect for Marriage Act” doesn’t affect us since almost all frum Yidden live in “Blue” states, where that is already the law. You do realize that the goyim has always been a bit “improper” in such matters, especially over the last few centuries???
2. A “deputy assistant secretary of Spent Fuel and Waste Disposition” is rather unimportant. IF you had such a job, and people asked what you did for a living, you would just answer “a government job”.
One should note that in Eretz Yisrael, notices against speaking Ivrit are posted in Hebrew.
Frum Yidden always spoke and read Hebrew. Aramaic was “mama loshen” only for a relatively small area. Jews in Egypt and eastern Europe spoke Greek, Jews in western Europe spoke a Latin (from whence we get such Yiddish words as “bentsch”). When Jews went from one region to another, they always spoke Hebrew even in modern times (e.g., you don’t find accounts of Ladino classes in Warsaw, or Yiddish classes in Salonika – when Warsaw and Salonika Jews got together they would communicate in Hebrew).
“How did people buy food from someone else before hashgohos”?
1. You relied on knowing the owner, including whom he/she followed in terms of halacha. Very few Jews lived in communities so large that everyone didn’t know everyone else (note: until the early 20th century, even the United States was still largely a nation of farmers).
2. Restaurants rarely existed before the end of the 19th century. Also there were very few processed foods, and almost all food was grown locally and processed by the buyer and their friends. While there are advantages of buying and processing only local grown foodstuffs, any local disruption would result in famine.
3. Products that had to shipped, such as wine, a hasghacha was needed, and wine often had several (e.g. the Rav in France where it was produces, the Rav in Prague who knew and trusted the Rav in France, and your local Rav who knew and trusted the Rav in Prague, etc.).
If you can daven and managed to get a Jewish education through elementary school (meaning Humash and some Mishna, siddur and some halacha), you can communicate in Heberw if you really try. Remember that most immigrants to Eretz Yisrael had only their “cheder” Lashon Kodesh to communicate in. Sefarim such as Kitzur and Ben Ish Hai were very popular, and not as translation, meaning the average reader could read them. The same goes for Pirkei Avos and Humash.
rightwriter
actually, the goyim never saw us as wimps
they attack us to prove they can their avodah zarah’s enemies
if you look hard enough you could find some kashruth agency that would give a hecksher to a casino or a brothel (businesses prohibited by halacha), but I certainly wouldn’t eat there
Do you some basis, other than zionist and Nazi propaganda, to believe that Jews are wimps?
What is true is that our survival and welfare are a function intellect and ruchniyos.
if Ha-Shem did not want us to survive, we wouldn’t
Define “right” and “left” (and remember, those terms derive from the seating in the French legislature during their revolution, which was before any Jews were allowed to vote or hold office).
If by “right” you are referring to the groups such as the self-proclaimed Nazis, the Ku Klux Klan, Q-ANON, their rhetoric is threatening but they are regarded as nutcases by American Conservatives, and lack any potential to be more than a nuisance.
If by “right”, following groups such as the Democrats or the secular left-wing media, you are referring to those who favor capitalism, fiscal responsibility, personal autonomy, religion, policy that regards hetereosexual reproduction as normal, etc., we have no reason to fear them, and in the eyes of the American left, we are clearly part of them. Even if a frum Jews wishes to be a “Liberal”, we can’t since we are by definition religious, pro-children, and believe that an persons have free will and are responsible for their actions.
The American “left” is probably a bigger threat. It is dominated by secular Jews, are see most of what we believe, including the existence of a creator, to be incorrect ideas that require the coercive power of the state to “correct”. Unlike American conservatives with a long tradition of opposing religious discrimination, going back to the late 18th century when America became “exceptional”, the “left” sees “Freedom from religion” as a policy goal, and since we are obviously religiously oriented, they perceive a need to “cancel” us (thus we see the Democrats in New York trying to close down yeshivos and ban Bris Milah – suggesting that frum Jews should really consider moving to a more conservative, and therefore tolerant, state).
The “Black Hebrews” are very similar to many other African American religions that were created out of odds and ends picked up by people who were not only enslaved, but done so in a manner that prevented transmission of their own culture (e.g. newly enslaved persons were rarely living together with slaves who shared their own language and culture). They ended up “inventing” their own culture, which is why many African American religious groups seem a bit outlandish. The “Black Hebrews” are clearly goyim, and like many American goyim, choose aspects of Biblical (as they define it) history to “appropriate”.
As the split in the Jewish community becomes more obvious, frum Jews are decreasingly likely to be blamed for the actions of a secular cousins (whether or not they are Jews according to halacha). On the bad side, it appears that most anti-Semitism is increasingly from secular persons with Jewish ancestry. Groups like the “Nazis” are universally regarded as a bad joke (and note that contemporary “right wing” parties everywhere tend to make a point of repudiating anti-Semitism), where the “politically correct” left is a real threat to us (note who wants to close the yeshivas and prohibit Bris Milah).
So if one side decides that putting you in a concentration camp is a good idea, they should get the chance every other year????
If you don’t like democracy, try moving to a country without free elections, preferably one with a dictator who doesn’t like you. While some democracies make serious mistakes (e.g Japan’s democratically elected government was very dumb to enter World War II, the local governments in many American cities were dumb to give a “green light” to criminals, the Confederacy’s decision to go to war to protect slavery though in all fairness had they had free elections that wouldn’t have happened, etc.), there is really no alternative unless HaShem decides to take direct control of the political system by smiting idiotic politicians.
Trump has made a point of alienating huge groups of Republicans, including those favoring a strong national defense and a foreign policy of America being “first” in defending freedom, of welcoming immigrants, of fiscal sanity and monetary responsibility,etc. The Republicans who liked Ronald Reagan and Dwight Eisenhower are the ones alienated by Trump (though much of his policy appeals to those who liked Robert Taft and Herbert Hoover). With the necons, and the Tea Party, and the “Chamber of Commerce Republicans”, no Republican has a chance. Trump has burned his bridges and unless he wants to be remember as one of the most humiliating failures in American history, he needs to back down and focus on helping the Republicans win in 2024. That means not taking sides in the primaries, focusing on issues, and working to get his base to support the ticket.
…beat Michelle Obama
Attacking an old lady (and former First Lady) would definitely get you thrown in jail, “elder bashing” is consider outrageous, and unlike the House Speaker’s husband, she is protected by the Secret Service
P.S. and in any event, the Democratic Party has a secret weapon which is used very effectively in the 2022 election – they run against Donald Trump; they managed to convince most voters to overlook Joe Biden’s flaws, which was a major accomplishment
Blame the Democrats since they are the party that prefer global cooling.
So what, most of the 1% class support the Democrats. You have to go back a generation to find a period where the wealthy tended to vote Republican. The Republicans tend to be the party of the working class (a.k.a. the “deplorables” as the Democrats call them). Are you coming out in favor of a change in the law to ban rich people from donating to political parties, and to replace it with the government funding all campaigns, limited of course to those with socially acceptable views (a change the WOKE Democrats favor).
The closest thing to “rigging” was that in the Republican primaries, the Democrats funded candidates supported by Donald Trump, knowing that those candidates were likely to lose in the general election.
A lot of the reasons the major countries became less barbaric, starting in the 19th and especially the 20th century had to do with Jewish influences (sometimes directly, or by way of goyim “appropriating” ideas from us), as well as the growth of mass media putting a spotlight on barbarity and making the barbarians look bad. There were always people who though that genocide was morally wrong and should be banned, or that drawing and quartering was savage – but it is only recently that these views can to predominate.
To Yabia Omer: You need to consider what was done to criminals until the invention of modern prisons in the early 19th century. If you think killing a bunch of children is barbaric, what do you think of American and British “ethnic cleansing” in the 17th to 19th century, where the murderers were hailed as national heroes. Baruch ha-Shem we live in a world in which criminals no longer plea bargain for a merciful death, and that genocide and torture result in one being labelled “Hostis humani generis” (“enemy of all mankind” – a legal term the until recently was only applied to some pirates and that only some of the time).
It is very inappropriate to make fun of people who are foaming at the mouth.
And it is inappropriate to make fun of Biden and Trump since at their age, they can’t help themselves.
Blame the fools who vote candidates who well past recommended retirement dates.
A test of election fraud is whether the results are consistent with what someone stuffing the ballot box would do. For example, how is it that Government Kemp in Georgia won a significant victory over a well funded and well know opponent, while Herschel Walker managed to come in second place. If the far left is stuffing ballot boxes, why did conservatives do well in New York. I have check Russian history, and except for the very last election held under Communists, the Communists typically got close to 100% of the votes.
Ballot stuffers don’t split their tickets. You never encountered some of the famous Democrat election cheats in the past (e.g.Tammany Hall in Manhattan), letting some Republicans win just for show.
While 2020 had a lot of believable anarchy since absentee ballot use was encouraged due to paranoia about Covid, especially among “blue” voters (since being paranoid about Covid generally correlates with “blueness” which is why absentee votes were more likely to be Democratic than those cast in person), the 2022 election was conducted with record breaking scrutiny.
The problem with the Trump fan club is there inability to understand that most Americans expect their leaders to act mentch-like, and someone who makes rude jokes and makes fun of people is not acting like a mentsch – which is why Trump’s support (and supporting Trump) was detrimental to Republican candidates.
One should also note that Stacey Adams who had really great career prospects as a moderate Democratic politician, wrecked them by insisting that the 2018 election she lost had been stolen, and being a sore loser. In a democracy, if you make a claim that an election was stolen, you need to back it up or face political disgrace.
Exit polls were always unreliable, and even more so now. One should not take the “instant” reports based on exit polls as being proof of anything.
Most pre-election polling suggests a Republican win, and usually the polls “lean” Democratic. However the Republicans seemed to be “surging” at the end, meaning that the mail-in and early voting might have missed the surge.
The lawsuits should largely vanish in non-close elections.
Undated but verified envelopes (meaning the voters name is on the outside can be checked) are unlikely to be forged, especially if they have a postmark. One has to ask as to why one assumes that Democrats are more likely than Republicans to improperly fill out the absentee ballot forms (being a Democrat probably indicates poor economic and political judgement, but doesn’t indicate inability to fill out a form).
for Yidden in particular, the election has no good reason to get excited. Some of Biden’s supporters are anti-Jewish, as are some of Trump’s. Biden’s ambiguous foreign policy (back stabbing allies in Afghanistan which encourage the Russians to attack Ukraine, and giving Ukraine enough aid to survive but not win) does endanger Israel, as does Trump’s “America First” foreign policy (since that attitude changes Israel from an endangered ally to a foreign entanglement).
Economically, the Democrats “big spending” policies are highly inflationary, but many Yidden derive benefit from them. While the war in Ukraine (caused by Biden’s incompetence, coming after Trump’s neo-isolationism) is causing serious inflationary disruption in grain and energy markets, the Democrats “green” agenda is also a major source of disruption and price increases in the food and energy markets. Plus, the underlying cause of inflation is a falling labor supply, caused by a falling birthrate and lower immigration, none of which are really “Jewish issues”.
If you look at American history, the country is doing well from most perspectives. The poor have never been better off, minorities (even frum Jews) have more opportunities than ever. Most of the concern that the country is falling apart can be attributed to sensationalist media and the fools who believe them.
Depending on what state they are in, they should have already voted. No reason to be bitul Torah when there are plenty of options for mail-in or early voting.
1. Like most Chareidim, historically, Shas was pro-peace. The reason Chareidim tend to be pro-peace is that the continued existence of a constant state of war tends to undermine Torah life whether by glorifying soldiers (rather than the traditional Jewish glorifying of Torah scholars), conscription of young adults, and severe economic discrimination against those who haven’t served in the army.
2. Also note that the left wing parties and Chareidim usually agreed on social programs that benefit the poor, whereas the more nationalist parties tend to be less than thrilled about creating and expanding entitlements.
3. If the left wing parties were no so committed to the anti-religious commandments of their Marxist pseudo-religion, the Chareidim would probably be considered inherently left wing , however the Israeli left regardless of what it feels about issues such as national security and economics, sees its highest priority as being to opposed Torah and the Chareidim (to make Israel into an “Am Hofshi” – free from Torah).
Hard to say. If someone is meikel about needing to support one’s family without relying on charity or handouts from the goyim, so they have more time to learn, is that good or bad?
ujm and Philosopher: But anyone frum who learns Humash without Rashi is likely to actually be learning Humash according to Rashi, since that is how Jews understand Humash.
By way of contrast, goyim and frei Jews learn “Bible” based on the text without reference to the oral tradition which is why they end up with rather queer (meaning weird and deviant with no special reference to the 21st century meaning of the word which we don’t discuss) ideas about Tanach. Indeed, the basic tenet of the “fundamentalists” is that “Bible”, meaning King James’s adaptation, must be understood solely by looking at the text without reference to external sources; no frum Yid would ever be a “fundamentalist”.
I strongly suspect that the editors of YWN were “trained” in the English-studies programs of our yeshivos, and had little or no formal training in journalism – and that their native languages are some combination of “Brooklynese” and “Yeshivish”. Looking at it this way, they are doing very well (and elite intellectual snobs with fancy academic degrees, such as myself, should refrain from criticizing them on such matters).
BarryLS1: Israel already deports (or incarcerates) terrorists. That is established party. What the Religious Zionism party is talking about, is getting rid of all Arabs, or at least those Arabs who don’t support the zionists (they seem unclear on the matter, though it appears that a very considerable percentage of Israeli Arabs prefer to be living under zionist rather than Palestinian or Islamic rule). To “remove” someone from a country is rarely easy. Typically one “removes” them by putting them in a truck, or railway car or ship, and dumping them somewhere (e.g. the British use of coffin ships to get rid of rebellious Celts, the German use of railcars to get rid of us, etc.). Sometimes you can convince them to go peacefully, albeit at gunpoint (e.g. the American’s “trail of tears”). One should note that all these techniques of “removing” undesirable ethnic groups from one’s country, are now considered to be crimes against humanity, which along with terrorism, enslavement and piracy get you the legal status as “Hostis humani generis”.
Most Jewish communities have been frequent involuntary migrants (e.g. the goyim tried to kill us, so we moved). Yemen and India and perhaps Ethiopia have stayed in one place. North Africa had some disruptions. Europe was always a mess (that’s how you had German speaking Jews in Ukraine, and Spanish speaking Jews in the Balkans). What is now Iraq and Iran were fairly stable. But even a place with stability, you had constant migration. And remember that living cultures tend to be constantly changing since that’s the way Ha-Shem programmed humans – if you constancy, stick to dead things.
If you really want to reenact life in the time Amoraim (late Classical and early Dark Ages, using the European perspective), consider getting a time machine.
1, The paper ballots usually favor Likud, and especially disfavor the Arab parties and the Chareidi parties – since most of them are cast by soldiers.
2. If Balad has allied it self with another Arab party, and if Meretz had allied itself with another far-left party (e.g. Labor, which barely passed the threshold), the result would probably have been another stalemate.
3. While the Chareidi parties have options other than supporting Likud (and have some bargaining power with Netanyahu), the “Religious Zionist” party does not, so if Netanyahu rejects any of their demands they have no choice but to accept. This is because the left wing does not have to be viciously anti-Chareidi (and in the past, the Labor party tried to avoid alienating the Chareidi), whereas the “Religious Zionists” demands (such as “transfer”,i.e., “ethnic cleansing” of Arabs) are intolerable to the groups that will now be in opposition.
1. Very few Chederim (elementary schools) teach any Tanach other than Humash and the first few historical books. These books have been “best sellers” among Yidden for the last few millennia. Siddur and Talmud are okay, but if you tried teaching them to little kids it would bore them to death. Much of the rest of Tanach (with a few exceptions, such as Megillas Esther and Yonah) would not go well with kids learning to read.
2. The goyim’s “Bible” is an adaptation based on several intermediate translations of dubious accuracy, and in many ways reflecting Hellenic culture. Yidden learn the original with Rashi, which gives an entirely different result. It is not surprising the goyim are easily confused (from out perspective, they are functional illiterates). A good way to shut them up is to make it clear you have never heard of “Genesis” or “Psalms” or “Moses” or “Isaac”, and after they explain remind them what the real names are (note that the number of goyim with even cheder-leval literacy in Hebrew is negligible).
MenhemShmei: then almost everyone in the world (or at least places settled by Europeans or Middle Easterners) is a safek Jews. One Jew going off the derekh (or kidnapped) a few thousand years ago has lots of descendants, none of whom have any idea they are related to us.
Of course, one could argue, that everyone created in the image of HaShem is special, and according to Humash, everyone in the world was a relatively close cousin of Avraham Aveinu (remember that at least one of Noah’s kids was still alive at the time). But that sort of argument is very annoying to anyone who wants to feel that he is “special”, and being in Ha-Shem’s image and related to Avraham Aveinu is not special enough for him (and is very anti-racist and is total heresy to the scientific community).
“Most” in this case is largely a function of total population. A small village of lamed-vav’niks will probably have fewer tzaddikim that a large city most of whose inhabitants are evil, but only a small minority are tzaddikim.
Then you have to define time periods and “country”. In terms of total population with a “sovereign” country, the United States in recent generations is roughly tied with Medinat Yisrael as it is today with total population, though many would argue that the Roman Empire at one point had a great population of Jews (probably at the start of the period in which Nero was elected imperator, since he started the process of many Jews looking for non-Roman areas to migrate to combined with “ethnic cleansing” of Jews in Eretz Yisrael.
So in raw number, the most “tzaddikim” would probably be found in either Eretz Yisrael today, or the Roman Empire at the end of Bayis Sheini (estimating populations in ancient times is a problem). While the US has as many persons of Jewish descent as Eretz Yisrael today, most are assimilated.
If you look at percentages, you will have to deal with many Jewish communities in which almost everyone was frum, and many were in “sovereign” city states – but until the modern period (largely due to improved medicine and food supply) populations were much lower.
Coffee addict:
1. The “half” is if you choose the lump sum, which is roughly half of the amount paid if you wait 20 years to get it all.
2. In some years, you can donate the entire amount to charity and avoid all taxes, though usually there is roughly a 50% (or your income) cap on how much you can give away. Sometimes the government suspends the cap and you can donate your entire income to charity and thereby avoid paying income tax.
MenachemShmuel: If you use the halachic definition then you have a problem since a great many Jewish women have been assimilated (perhaps they went OTD, perhaps they were enslaved), and over the millenia, a not inconsiderable number of goyim are actual Jews (one Jewish girl enslaved during Roman times has a tremendous number of descendants scattered throughout Europe and the Middle East) . That is in addition to the fact that in recent times (the last 200 years), most members of the frum community have gone OTD, and within a generation are then absorbed in the larger population. Most Jews living today, based on the halachic definition, think they are goyim, and they are in no way tsaddikim.
I suggest limiting the use of the word “Yid” to refer only to the small minority of Jews who identify as Jews, and keep at least some of the mitsvos (particularly Shabbos and Kashrus, which more than anything set us apart for the goyim) and by doing so show great mesiras nefesh even if they don’t realize it, so that my answer to the original question is that “Yes, all Yidden are great tsadikkin”.
1. One would only get about half that since the “billion” is based on getting it in 20 year installments.
2. It would be a metsiah (something found), not income, so probably not subject to the usual limits on
giving tsdakah.3. There might be some taxes to pay.
4. One can always use a donor advised trust to send the money to the institutions in the name of “Piloni Almoni”.
If you define a “Yid” as someone who is Shomer Shabbos (meaning, most importantly, not working at your “real world” job on Shabbos), and Shomer Kashrus (meaning the for all purposes you can never eat outside the home unless you bring your own food or make special arrangements such as locating a kosher restaurant), you could say the every “Yid” is showing such tremendous meserias nefesh that they can be considered a tsaddik. Just being Shomer Shabbos and Shomer Kashrus (not to mention many other mitsvos), means you give up perhaps 90% of the employment opportunities in the United States (either because the job involves work on Shabbos, requires schooling that involves work on Shabbos, or involves travel or geographic locations where observance of Shabbos and Kashrus is not practical).
1. “religious matters” was defined vary narrowly to exclude any involvement by Orthodox Jews in public affairs. Remember that in the first elections, Ben Gurion’s principal opponents were parties on the left (who advocated banning yeshivos and changing the day of rest, among other things). If you are in to alternative history, consider what if Ben Gurion lost (e.g. Israel as a member of Comecon and the Warsaw Pact).
2. In part because they believed their own propaganda, it was assumed that in a generation there would be so few Orthodox Jews left that it would be no problem to wait and then get to work on closing yeshivos, conscripting all frum children, and realizing the long term zionist dream of being an “Am Hofshi” (secular state, free from the yoke of Torah). It took awhile before it dawned on them that the socialist revolution would end up in the dustbin of history.
“hecksher”??? for a student club?
What does the hecksher entail (what refreshments they serve? what they do on Shabbos? off campus “social” (sic) activities?)
Would they give a hecksher to a club studying how to make money engaging in Ribis (buying and sell securities, including bonds, stocks on margin, leveraged loans, etc.)?
There different is a global community of frum Jews, perhaps most broadly defined as including all halachic Jews who are Shomer Shabbos and Shomer Kashrus – which is probably broader than any member would probably acknowledge.
1. In the UK, if the Head of State (who has minimal political importance) can be replaced by a regent, which under current law would not be a problem. The Head of Government not only tend to be younger (than American presidents) but are very easy to replace (since, in theory, they serve at the pleasure of the monarch, so with approval of the majority party, they can be replaced if disabled).
2. The United States combined Head of State with Head of Government, and we have no easy way of replacing a disabled president (other than with the vice-president, which itself raises problems. There is no provision for a special election. And the US tends to elect only someone who is well established (and therefore old). And since American president is Head of Government, he has manage the government on a day to day basis. So it is reasonable that many Americans are concerned that both parties seem to be oriented towards nominating presidential candidates who are well past their “sell by” dates.
The number of online shiurim is tremendous. “Kol Halashon” has dozens, and there are many such sites. Since virtually all shiurim learn the Talmud Babli according to Rashi, you probably have to sample the various shiurim to see what you like. While a directory, covering all webwsites, describing each shiur in detail would be nice, that doesn’t exist.
They are not police station. They are undercover agents, who can be prosecuted as unregistered agents of a foreign power (and if they are diplomats can be expelled for engaging in inappropriate activities).
China has not had a “communist” economic system for over a generation. It has system of “free” enterprise with heavy involvement by the government in guiding the economy. Its political system, while showing some traces of its “communist” origin, is basically a standard authoritarian dictatorship. In most ways, China more closely resembles Germany during the Third Reich, or Italy during the fascist period, than a “communist” country such as China during Mao’s leadership, or the Soviet Union.
I heard from someone (I believe one of my rabbanim, a very long time ago), that the best analogy is to a country’s embassy, which under modern international law is considered to be the territory of the country who owns the embassy rather than the country within whose territory the embassy is located.
In the past a country could simply conquer territory and annex it, but that is no longer considered acceptable behavior, hence the need to stage a referendum. International law in the 21st century requires the consent of the governed, even if that consent is obtained at gunpoint through a fraudulent election.
P.S. I wouldn’t put too much weight in reports about Russia hitting any specific target, as there is growing evidence suggesting the Russia military is incapable of aiming at a given target and then hitting the target.
If a statute (act of Congress, signed by the president) mere says the president can declassify documents without specifying a formal procedure, meaning they left it for the president to decide on the procedure (which would be the procedure under administrative law theory), then Trump as president could declassify by “thought” or more significantly, by physically removing the documents from the White House and taking them to his personal residence.
If the statute has a formal procedure that Trump didn’t follow, Trump doesn’t have a valid argument, since the president is subject to all statutes. However if the procedure is a matter of administrative law, the president has head of the administration can largely do anything he feels like unless it violates the constitution or a statute.
One should note that for most of the last 80 years, the Congress has tended to pass laws that tell the administration to make the rules to implement the law, and leave all the details to the administration (rather than putting the details in the statute).