Posts tagged as:

links

Horizontal Links

by Ben Atlas on 01.17.2010.12:09am · 0 comments

Horizontal Links

by Ben Atlas on 12.30.2009.2:08pm · 0 comments

Horizontal Links

by Ben Atlas on 12.26.2009.10:14am · 0 comments

The Hasmonean Realpolitik

by Ben Atlas on 12.10.2009.11:36pm · 0 comments

latkes

Concise and complete post on Hasmonean history by Prof. Lawrence H. Schiffman – The Hasmonean Dynasty:

  • 152 B.C.E. Jonathan the Hasmonean becomes the ruler.
  • 143 B.C.E. Jonathan the Hasmonean murdered by Tryphon, a pretender to the Seleucid throne.
  • 142 B.C.E. Simon the brother of Jonathan becomes the ruler.
  • 140 B.C.E. The Hasmnonean Kings are now also High Priests.
  • 134 B.C.E Simon and his two sons murdered by his son-in-law with the help of Seleucids. Surviving son Yohanan Hyrkanus becomes the King and High Priest.
  • 104 B.C.E. Yohanan Hyrkanus dies and another Simon’s son Aristobulus ascends to the throne.
  • 104 B.C.E Aristobulus ruled only for one year by he managed to treat his mother with the utmost cruelty, imprison three of his brothers, and kill his another brother, Antigonus.
  • 103 B.C.E Alexander Yannai comes to power when he married Aristobulus’ widow, Salome Alexandra (Shelomzion). We are holding at a 50 year mark after the Chanukah at this point. And here is the rest of the story:

“The Maccabees had not fought only to free the Jews from foreign domination, or for power and wealth. They had risen initially against elements in the Jewish population who sought to Hellenize themselves and their countrymen. Their struggle was transformed into a war of independence against the Seleucid Empire only when it sought to aid the Hellenizers by persecuting Jews and Judaism. Yet gradually, the Hasmonean descendants of the Maccabees themselves acquired the trappings of Hellenism. They began to conduct their courts in Hellenistic fashion and were estranged from Jewish observance. This transition went way beyond the need of any monarch at that time to make use of Hellenistic-style coinage, diplomacy, and bureaucracy. The Hasmoneans employed foreign mercenaries to protect them from their own people.

Opposition to the Hasmonean house came from a variety of corners. First, they had never made peace with remnants of the old-line Hellenizers among the landed aristocracy. Second, the Pharisees opposed the concentration in Hasmonean hands of both temporal and religious power, demanding that the Hasmoneans relinquish the high priesthood, since they were not of the proper high priestly lineage. Third, other groups, whose point of view is represented in some of the Dead Sea Scrolls, accepted the legitimacy of the Hasmoneans as high priests but condemned them for also holding political power.

All these factors had already led Alexander Janneus to prepare his wife, Salome Alexandra, for the succession and to recommend to her that she compromise with the dynasty’s opponents. This she did effectively for some nine years until her death in 67 B.C.E. Yet she failed effectively to designate her successor, and her sons, Hyrcanus II and Aristobulus II, fought one another for the crown. Both eventually appealed to the Romans. By this time Rome was already in Syria and positioned to swallow up Judea. Aristobulus was remembered by later sources as a great hero, a man possessed of the spirit of the Maccabees, seeking nothing less than freedom from foreign rule. Hyrcanus was pictured as a weakling, desiring power for power’s sake, at any cost to himself and his nation. In 63 B.C.E., as the two fought with one another, each turned to the Roman general Pompey, in Syria. After a series of negotiations, Pompey decided to capitalize on the situation by satisfying the longstanding Roman desire to dominate Palestine, the strategic land bridge between Africa and Asia. He played the brothers off against each other for a time, then marched on Jerusalem and took it by storm.

Thus ended the Hasmonean dynasty. The Romans were now the country’s real rulers. They awarded the high priesthood to Hyrcanus II and imprisoned Aristobulus II. He and his sons would for years show themselves to be true Maccabean descendants, repeatedly escaping Roman imprisonment to seek against all odds to wrest Judea back from the Romans. But the Hasmonean star had set.”

Also excellent, David Brooks in the NYT – The Hanukkah Story. In passing David Brooks makes a fascinating point, the festival custom was part of the Greek culture. So much for getting rid of the Greek influences. Kudos to Brooks for highlighting the ambivalence of the story, alas even he needs to remain politically correct enough, not only he has to allude to the fact that the Hasmoneans were essentially the trailblazer for the Taliban, but he omits the sourcing of the narrative itself. And naturally the Hasmoneans invented more than the festival and the lights, they invented the spin, the narrative. So the anti Jewish atrocities that Brooks repeats are mostly sourced in the post-Hasmonean Talmud and the Apocrypha of the time. Imagine if the Taliban would win the war in Afghanistan, what would they teach in schools about the Americans? Heck you don’t even need to ask an Islamist, just ask some leftie American and you would hear that it’s all about the American torture. It gets even more complicated than Brooks would let you to imagine.

P.S. Also Interesting review of the new book by Hanan Eshel – The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Hasmonean State in the Biblical Archeology Review.

latkes via sassyradish

Horizontal Links

by Ben Atlas on 10.28.2009.4:13pm · 0 comments

Home Grown Cooking – Foodie Blogs

by Ben Atlas on 10.18.2009.9:01am · 0 comments

via a Mother in Israel – Blogger’s Night Out in Petach Tikva

Pyramidoidal Links

by Ben Atlas on 10.13.2009.8:20pm · 0 comments

Crain’s – Shaya Boymelgreen faces eviction from his Brooklyn HQ.
NYT - Orthodox Jews Rely More on Sex Abuse Prosecution.
Mining Weekly – Global economic storm drives Leviev onto the rocks.

Horizontal Links

by Ben Atlas on 09.9.2009.2:47pm · 0 comments

Free for All Permission Sharing

by Ben Atlas on 07.6.2009.8:25pm · 17 comments

I am jumping into the fray of the “free for all” debate. Seth Godin linked the most pertinent articles on Squidoo.

It seems that everyone takes the side and the virtual direction of his own shingle. Seth Godin in Malcolm is wrong speaks like a marketer, the internet allowed focused marketing (permission) campaigns and lubricated the display of a product, free samples and branding.

Fred Wilson speaks like a VC in Freemium and Freeconomics. As a banker Fred’s goal is to maximize the investment and while the cost of the delivery of the content is near zero, it would be most useful if the content itself is also zero. After all Google, Facebook and Twitter are not in the content creation business, they collate, sort, annotate and store what people give them for free. In Fred’s recent post about his vision for a newspaper he speaks more directly about the subject of the debate – Aggregate, Curate, Publish To Create Local Media:

“If I was starting The Village Voice today, I would not print anything. I would not hire a ton of writers. I would build a website and a mobile app (or two or three). I would hire a Publisher and a few salespeople. I would hire an editor and a few journalists. And then I’d go out and find every blog, twitter, facebook, flickr, youtube, and other social media feed out there that is related to downtown NYC and I would pull it all into an aggregation system where my editor and journalists could cull through the posts coming in, curate them, and then publish them. I’d do a bit of original reporting on the big stories but most of what I’d do would be smart curation, with a voice, and an opinion.”

Notice that nowhere in the business plan is there even a concern about how the creators of the original content get paid. The idiots just post it on Flickr and YouTube so the “editors” can start curating… It’s all deposited for free and distributed almost for free so that the bankers can scale, kill the remaining competition and maximize the return on the investment in the aggregator. This is when the “freemium” thingy kicks in. After all competition is demolished, the writers will come and beg to be published for free. And the mighty curators will rescue the lowly content creators from the abyss of obscurity. The “editors” will set fees for the writers on par with the sneaker makers in Bangladesh to make sure the adverse conditions spur the creative juices. I mean who needs Christiane Amanpour when CNN does such a good job live narrating YouTube videos during the Iran revolution? That makeup the announcers use on air has to be the most expensive part of the report. Literally no skin in that game, somebody gets bloody and you just run it on CNN freely with the ads in-between.

There is a post by Mark Cuban – Free vs Freely Distributed. Amongst his numerous business achievements Mark is an investor in Television. So I wasn’t surprised when Mark essentially articulated a TV business model. The content is distributed for free but where and how the content is displayed and monetized is tightly controlled by the content creators. Again, this is your TV model, Mark Cuban writes:

“They should distribute their content for Free where they believe it maximizes return, but should do everything possible to keep it from being distributed Freely.”

And now the idea that has been circling in my head. Permission Marketing means that you need my permission to send me an email about a product. Why don’t you need my explicit permission to use my content? You can use my photos, my text, etc, but you have to ask and agree on the terms, even if it’s free.

Ban all “embeds” and “cut & pastes”. I mean it! Redefine the internet share culture. An example, suppose Guy LeCharles Gonzalez is using a Flickr photo to illustrate his post with a credit to the photographer, naturally. Next this photo will get indexed and tagged with Guy’s text. The photo will be archived in the Google image library with Guy’s URL and will bring traffic to his blog, but rarely anything back to the original photographer. This doesn’t seem right? If you let the bird out of the cage there has to be some compensation for the person who fed and raised that bird. I remember circa 1998? Jim Cramer couldn’t get over the fact that financial Reuters feeds that previously cost thousands of dollars on the Bloomberg Terminals suddenly became free on Yahoo! This is where the trouble started!

Solution as I said is straightforward – no republishing of content without the explicit permission from a creator. No “cut & paste” and no “embeds” (brief quotes to make a point are OK). If there is one thing we did learn from Twitter is that you don’t need to republish to share. Links are perfectly fine for sharing and links should be encouraged. But free “share alike” reposts (or the widespread outright content theft) without permission are at the root of this malice.

There is already a model in the newspaper industry, the traditional opinion syndication. You want to publish editorials by Charles Krauthammer, go to Washington Post and negotiated the weekly fee (I did just that when I run a news web site). The copyright law never caught up with the internet reality and the Creative Commons license is unresponsive to the changing reality. RSS culture created the impression that content is permanently detached from the source. The remedy is to to banish the “embed” mentality! The internet sharing culture must be tweaked and reconsidered to allow people to get paid for their creative efforts.