Rav Nahman has this great idea of talking with God as one talks with a good friend. But to him it was not a casual conversation. For example he would go out in the morning to some secluded spot in the forest and spend the whole day asking God to come close to His service. And I took this idea to heart when I first arrived in Safed. [This did not last long--but the basic idea has remained with me about the importance of this sort of conversation with God.] But I also realize it has to flow out of some deep level under the layer of normal consciousness.

[That is there is some surface level of consciousness. That is the stream of thoughts. Then there is the level under that--the one doing the  thinking. Then under that there is some level that is even hidden from that level. This is commonly called the subconscious--discovered by Leibnitz. [Attributing to him by Nietzsche.] 

Military allies are as important and even more so than economic power.,,,

 I think China lost world respect by means of its actions in Hong Kong.  Or put more clearly,- it lost its ability to make friends. It has lots economic power, but not friends. I mean just think about how many friends has in South East Asia?  On the other hand, think about friends of the USA. Especially in that region. Australia and Japan and Taiwan. But in terms of just the simple fact of how many the sorts of liberal democracies are  allies of the USA. So the fact that everyone saw what was done to Hong Kong, how many Western democracies would help China in any future conflicts?

This could be corrected by keeping their word as to respecting the rights of Hong Kong as they promised when Britain gave them control.

[Military allies are as important and even more so than economic power.,,,,,   as you can see in the history of the Peloponnesian War between Sparta and Athens. It is not a matter of how many pencils China can produce. It is a matter of how may people have confidence in their word of honor. If they do not tell the truth, then the pencils do not matter.

Civil War

I have been looking at the Civil War and it seems to me the South was right from a Constitutional point of view. "Perpetual union" was mentioned in the Articles of Confederation, but not the Constitution. The union of states in the Constitution is a voluntary union. Thus, the South could leave.

 And as for the issue of slavery,  lots of people have to work. I do not see that as some great evil. [Though it is better to learn Torah. --I mean to say that there is such a thing as one accepting on himself the yoke of Torah, and then there is removed from him the the yoke of work and government. There is also trust in God. But there is nothing wrong with work.  Just the opposite. The fact that welfare recipients force work out of the working population to get free money seems to me to be  wrong.--even if they can get the government to force the issue. That does not make it right.  -( It goes against the "general welfare" clause about what taxes can be used for.) Even if the majority of the people want it, it still is unconstitutional. For welfare to be constitutional , you would have to change the Constitution, and leave out the general welfare clause. 

[Just an added thought: the general welfare clause is for what Congress can make taxes for. One of them is the general welfare which means not to tax one segment of the population (like working people) to benefit a different segment.  ( e.g., those who are not working.) It has to be "general welfare"- that which benefits all. This is just common place knowledge in Constitutional Law about what that clause is meant for.

three tribes of Indians on the east part of Ohio. (Shawnee, Wyandot, Delaware) ערוגה בת ששה טפחים על ששה טפחים

 Did it ever occur to you that the mishna ערוגה בת ששה טפחים על ששה טפחים seems a bit strained. 

[Five types of vegetables can be planted in a plot of land 6 handbreadths by 6 handbreadths]

Why plant five types of beans or vegetables in a plot of land that is a square foot? Well, the answer is there were three tribes of Indians on the east part of Ohio. (Shawnee, Wyandot, Delaware) Their practice was to plant corn --their main stable. When it sprouted a little they would make a little mound around it and plant beans on that hill. That kept the soil in place [and added nitrogen to the soil afterwards)]. Then planted pumpkins over it--that gave shade and prevented weeds.

So these three crops ["the three sisters"] were in a sort of symbiotic relation. So you can see that planting certain kinds of beans or vegetables in close proximity can be a great help-so one does have to be able to do this without transgressing mixed kinds of vegetables. [So the geometric shapes discussed in that mishna become very practical. --The mishna says 5 types can be planted  there but they have to conform to the restriction that each be not actually mixed with the other.

Litvak yeshiva

 Simchat Torah in Shar Yashuv was a profound experience for me. You could feel the love of Torah just permeating the air. That of course was a result of the fact that he whole year the love of Torah permeated the whole place. It was not just for one day. And that same point I think could be said about most any Litvak yeshiva. However I am sure who ever is reading this must have some complaints about the Litvak yeshiva world. [I have my own list and I am sure everyone else must have a similar list.] 

What sets the Litvak yeshiva apart are the ideas of the Gra. But we also know that these places do not follow the Gra in every respect. Thus, my suggestion is this: whatever you or I see as a lack in the Litvak yeshiva world is a direct result of their not following the Gra in every respect. [And I have in fact seen this. The problems I have seen are in fact related directed and result directly from the divergence from the Gra.] The answer thus is simple. They ought to follow the Gra in every respect, not just some respects.

So when people criticize the USA for having had slaves

 Forcing people to work without recompense is slavery. So should not all the people that see slavery as the greatest of all evils object to welfare? Is not the whole idea of welfare is making people work for the non working part of the population in order to get their (of the non workers) votes? So former slaves do not object to slavery when they get to be the masters.

So when people criticize the USA for having had slaves, you might ask these same people if they object as strongly to welfare? i.e. giving money to people for not working. Why do they not lobby the Congress to abolish all welfare payments? [Maybe they like the money?]

[I thought to add that the General Welfare clause of the Constitution (i.e. for what the Congress can make taxes for) means the general welfare of all the people of the USA--not to take from one group to give to another. This is a common place fact in Constitutional Law]

advice I heard from my father--many times. The idea of self reliance

 There is another bit of advice I heard from my father--many times. The idea of self reliance. So when I went to Shar Yashuv  and later the Mir in NY,I was thinking of Torah Lishma --[learning Torah for its own sake.]And the idea is more or less thus: that when one learns Torah for its own sake, then parnasah [a living] and all one's other needs come to him automatically. That is the ideal which I was striving for. And I still hold that is is a viable approach--that when one turns all his focus on learning Torah then everything else falls into place. 

But there is an aspect of Avodat Hashem [service of God] that is working at an honest job. This is gone into in the LeM of Rav Nahman vol II perek 4 [I think].