The following is a transcript of Episode 27 of the For Heaven’s Sake Podcast. Note: This is a lightly edited transcript of a conversation, please excuse any errors.
Donniel Hartman:
My name is Donniel Hartman and I’m the president of the Shalom Hartman Institute. Today is Sunday, June 27th, 2021. And this is For Heaven’s Sake, a podcast from the Hartman Institute iEngage project. Our theme for today is entitled The Prime Minister with a Kippah: Religious Zionism and the Future of Israel. In each edition of, For Heaven’s Sake, Yossi Klein Halevi senior research fellow at the Institute here in Jerusalem and myself discuss a current issue central to Israel and the Jewish world. And then Elana Stein Hain director of the Hartman faculty in North America explores with us how classical Jewish sources can enrich our understanding of the issue. Let’s begin almost.
Donniel Hartman:
Overlooked in the dramatic changes of the last two weeks is an historic watershed. Naftali Bennett is the first Orthodox prime minister of Israel. Not everyone in the religious Zionist community is thrilled. Some accuse him of betraying religious Zionism by preferring an alliance with the center and the left rather than the political nationalist and religious right and far right.
Donniel Hartman:
However, Bennett’s so-called betrayal opens up tantalizing questions about the direction of religious Zionism, which is one of Israel’s most important communities representing 10 to 15% of the population, but with much higher presented representation in key parts and leadership in Israeli society. For example, officers in elite combat units in the IDF are often 30% from the religious Zionist community. Beyond the politics of this moment I’d like to focus our conversation today on the deeper meaning of Bennett’s choice on its implication for Israeli Jewish identity. What does this say about religious identity? Is it principally a movement concerned with Israel’s security and military issues or one which also has a voice on issues of state and religion? And if so, what is its voice. Is its voice different from that of the Haredim? And how does it position religious Zionism on these issues? As a movement so central to presentate Israel, understanding religious Zionism and unpacking the meaning of Bennett as prime minister is critical to understanding Israel’s future.
Donniel Hartman:
Yossi, great to be with you again. Both of us are a little bit, I don’t know, are we, are we both members of the religious Zionist community. A little bit, no?
Yossi Klein Halevi:
I asked myself that question and I don’t, I still don’t know the answer 40 years after living in Israel. I’m a Zionist, am I a religious Zionist that has very particular implications?
Donniel Hartman:
So what is it? So what are the implications. Let’s briefly, you know, we could do an advanced seminar on this, but let, let’s try to briefly, you know, as much as you and I could do anything brief or at least I’m speaking for myself. You’re not supposed to laugh at that. Yossi, I’m allowed to make fun of myself. You’re not gonna make fun of me.
Yossi Klein Halevi:
We’re making fun of it. We’re a team, Donniel. You know, Donniel, I have a neighbor who, a secular neighbor, who said to me once it was before one of, one of our elections and he said I asked him who you’re voting for? He said, I don’t know. He says, well for you, it’s easy. I said, why is it easy for me? He says, you vote for the religious Zionist party. I said, really? I said, I’ve never voted for the religious Zionist party. And so why? Because I wear not just a kippah, I wear a knitted kippah. Now I wear a knitted kippah because I like it. I like the way it looks.
Donniel Hartman:
Yossi, I’m sorry. You also have a frum beard. It’s like, it looks a little, you know, it’s impressive. What is this movement? Joking aside, but you know, you and I let’s go a little deeper. What, what do you believe is the essence of the religious Zionist community?
Yossi Klein Halevi:
It’s both an ideology and a culture. The ideology is that the state of Israel is not in its essence, a secular phenomenon. It has religious meaning. How much religious meaning is debated in the religious Zionist community. And that’s where you have a spectrum. Culturally religious Zionism functions, to use the language we use at Hartman, it’s a, it’s a tribe. It is a tribe of very distinct dress. You can immediately identify a religious Zionist man by the kippah. And a religious Zionist woman by the kind of skirt and the sandals. And it has a specific place in, in, in the Israeli mythos. There are certain moments of Israeli history that are identified, especially with religious Zionism, 1967, the wall. There are moments that have become part of the religious Zionist mythos.
Donniel Hartman:
Now you spoke, what was it about their cultural dimension? And the first one was on their ideological. I want to break out the ideological. You said the ideological one is that they see the state of Israel as a value.
Yossi Klein Halevi:
Vested with religious meaning.
Donniel Hartman:
Meaning, right. Thank you. I want to, I think that’s historically correct when you look at the religious Zionist community from its inception. But I think when you look at it today, I think there is a clear ideological split within the religious Zionist community one, which sees the essence of religious Zionism and the essence of Zionism in many ways, or what you called the religious value of Zionism is essentially connected to the land of Israel. Religious Zionists don’t just dress a certain way. They have created and led and constitute the majority of the Israel’s settlement community. And while not every religious Zionist is a, settler almost all the settlers are religious Zionists and most religious Zionists, even if they’re don’t support it completely, they are on the political right.
Donniel Hartman:
Seeing the sanctity of the land of Israel as of ultimate significance. And in this way, they’re very different from American orthodoxy, whatever it might be. This is a movement which, which sees of the 613 commandments, the most important commandment is to settle the land of Israel. And it is the settling of the land, which makes all the other commandments possible. For it is only within the land that the fullness of mitzvah, the fullness of spirituality, the fullness of God’s presence can be expressed. So they brought to Israel, not a sanctification of the state of Israel, but after ’67 was the sanctification of the land and political right-wingness is therefore an essential feature. The other part of the religious Zionist community, and here too, there’s a spectrum. They are Orthodox like the ultra Orthodox, but their principle difference is that modernity is a part of their value system. Modernity is a part of their system. Modernity is important for some, it’s just living in modernity, but for many of them, and I think this is especially what we see in Bennett they’re not just comfortable in modernity, but modern values. Modern values, which include gender pluralism, open-Mindedness the need for Halakhic change from time to time, or even a certain modernity as a smell of secularism. In other words, there are these two ideological polls land overriding or defining Halakha. And the other one is modernity conscribing or living side-by-side with Halakha.
Yossi Klein Halevi:
Yeah, I think, I think you’re laying out the tensions beautifully because what, what is, what is being played out now with Bennett is the tension between the cultural commitment to modernity on the one hand and the political commitment to settling the land on the other. Onecommitment leads them to one kind of coalition. And that’s Bennett’s current coalition. Now that’s a cultural coalition, a cultural coalition of modernity. The other coalition, the political coalition of settling the land, leads them to the Likud and the Smotrich and the Haredim. Bennett has chosen a cultural coalition over his political coalition.
Donniel Hartman:
Do you use cultural in the way that I use ideological?
Yossi Klein Halevi:
I’m using cultural in terms of commitment to modernity. And not as an ideological.
Donniel Hartman:
So ideological. So he has two ideologies. The way to see the current discourse in Israel is that this is a decision in the religious Zionist community, that at this moment, what is more important? So then the natural question, like which part of my religious Zionism, my modernity or the land of Israel takes precedence. Why in your mind, like why now he ran all the time?
Yossi Klein Halevi:
Oh, it’s so interesting, Donniel, because then it remains committed to settle the land, the complete land of Israel. But what he’s done in choosing this coalition is prioritize very subtly, but clearly prioritizing his commitment to a cultural coalition of modernity, a vision of an Israel that is modern functioning, high-tech, successful, over an Israel, that mortgages everything to the value of settlement. That’s what he refuses to do.
Donniel Hartman:
I love this, Yossi, because you know, what’s really interesting here because the essence of Netanyahu’s coalition was a willingness to sacrifice Jewish modernity or Judaism’s modernity in order to achieve a coalition with the ultra Orthodox parties who in return delivered on right wing nationalism. So right wing nationalism gave up modern Judaism for the sake of right-wing nationalism. And that was the essence of the Likud-Bennett,-religious Zionist-Haredi coalition. Bennett is changing the order. And in many ways he’s trying to create a right-wing Israel, which doesn’t require a rejection of modernity. Now that’s big news. That’s really big news. You know, you and I, we spend our whole lives trying to engage world Jewry with Israel. There’s in addition, a vision of Israel today, which Jews who embrace modernity on the whole spectrum of liberals, Judaism from modern Orthodox, the Conservative, Reform, Reconstructions, Post-Denominational, I’m breathing. I think I got everybody. But there they’re going to find within Bennett there’s, there’s an Israel moving in another direction. So this is a, a critical, critical move. And now that religious Zionists are part of it is what’s tilting the scale because otherwise religious Zionists and ultra Orthodox who make up 25, 30% of the society, you can, you can never make that move. If you excluded both of them, then it would be a civil war.
Yossi Klein Halevi:
Now noted earlier that there’s a great deal of ambivalence in the religious community about the first religious Zionist prime minister. Now, this is a moment, Donniel, that religious Zionism has been dreaming of since the Six-Day War, the moment that they would inherit labor Zionism and אhey would be the carriers of the Zionist ethos. Bennett has now fulfilled that dream, but he’s done it at a very steep price for the community. He’s forcing religious Zionists to choose to prioritize, right? Yes, I’m committed to settlement and I’m committed to modernity, but here’s the trade-off: in order for me to actually lead the country I have to prioritize modernity over the land of Israel.
Donniel Hartman:
But I think there’s another move as you were talking that I began to think about, you know, you spoke about, and here, I actually want to go back to your opening notion that when you see the state of Israel as a religious value, I think maybe what’s happening is religious Zionism is going back to its roots in which it embraces the religious value of the state of Israel and not just of the land of Israel. That what Bennett is saying is that I want to embrace the state of Israel is its citizens, it’s its people.
Yossi Klein Halevi:
Even Israeli Arabs.
Donniel Hartman:
Even that’s interesting, even Israeli Arabs, he’s doing it. That’s true. He was doing that. But I think that what you see here also is religious Zionism making not only a choice to embrace modernity, but to realize that what happens inside the borders of Israel is of equal religious significance to what happens on the borders and where the borders are. And what happens in Israel. is not just a question of, of the rabbinate and Kashrut and which buses run, but here too, he’s making another priority. He’s saying that that Ahavas Yisrael, fighting Sinat Chinam, that loving Israel, fighting senseless hatred, that’s a Jewish value even more than what bus or which rabbi is going to perform which conversion. So there’s, there’s also a deep revolution within the definition of religiosity. The fact that we are a people obligates him and you know, where you saw that when he was minister and for him, it was self-evident when he, when he was Minister of Diaspora Affairs, it was self-evident for Bennett to go into a Conservative or Reform shul. He was lambasted in Israel because we know Reform is the equivalent of, you know, the enemy. But for him, it’s his Zionism means that he has to embrace his people. And that’s also a very, for a long time, that voice was absent in our community.
Yossi Klein Halevi:
Yeah. And I think what we’re going to be seeing from Bennett’s government in terms of religion and state is first of all, a change in tone, a softening, an embrace, which will include Reform and Conservative Judaism as part of the Israeli whole.
Donniel Hartman:
Yossi, what we’re then seeing is – it’s not just a political shift, but it’s a religious shift from a national perspective. How significant do you see this shift in changing the secular-religious dichotomy? The whole discourse around religion are secular Israelis changing also?
Yossi Klein Halevi:
I think that what we’re seeing taking shape in this government is the belated reflection on the top of the revolution that’s already happened on the ground. Secular and religious Israelis, there’s a fluidity and interaction and not just socially, personally, but culturally, you see it in the music. You see how Israeli rock music is so comfortable with religious themes. This is not the same Israel of a generation or two ago.
Donniel Hartman:
The biggest stars today. I probably – the number one Israeli pop star, many of them are Orthodox.
Yossi Klein Halevi:
Absolutely. And Hanan Ben Ari and Ishai Ribo. Evyatar Banai. They’ve transformed Israeli music in a seamless way. They didn’t do it in a provocative or revolutionary way. And so what we’re seeing happening now on the top is a reflection of what Israel actually is. And I think Bennett understands this. Look, he lives it, he lives it, he married a secular woman. And so what, what I love about this government is that it’s finally giving us back who we really are. There was something in the last years where I felt that our real faith was being denied us by the government.
Donniel Hartman:
Yeah. Actually, if I would analyze the consequence or what is the exercise that we just did? The president Rivlin speaks of four tribes: Haredi, religious Zionist, secular, and Arab. And he says, we have to learn how to be a multi-tribal society calling for pluralism. But paradoxically by delineating such clear lines between the tribes, he actually makes coexistence impossible. When we’re so different, we become so entrenched. It becomes very, very hard to transcend your tribe. When we actually scratch, when we analyze what Bennett has done, when we analyze the consequences of his choices, what we’re seeing is that in fact, religious Zionism is much more complicated than we wanted to see it as. It’s not monolithic. Religious Zionism is not settlers. Bennett is not a settler. There’s a big difference between Bennett and Smotrich. There’s a significance to his choices to be willing, to sit with, with Meretz and Labor and to say, these are my friends, and these are lovers of Israel.
Yossi Klein Halevi:
Donniel, if this government succeeds, it will redraw the tribal map.
Donniel Hartman:
The tribal map and that the secret to redrawing the tribal map is for us to be willing to recognize much greater complexity in the other tribe. It’s not four tribes, there’s 50 tribes. Each one of us has multiple tribes and we’re on the spectrum. We could connect to each other. There’s a spectrum of Zionism. And part of what happened in the prior government is the stiltification of the discourse by creating clear lines between the tribes. And religious Zionism, what we’re saying to our audience, understand the complexity of religious Zionism. And through that, there’ll be room for you to have a more complicated understanding of Israeli society.
Donniel Hartman:
Yossi let’s take a break. And when we come back, Elana Stein Hain will join us.
Lauren Berkun – AD:
Hi, I’m Rabbi Lauren Berkun, Vice President of Rabbinic Initiatives at the Shalom Hartman Institute of North America. Even in the most challenging times for the Jewish people, scholars at the Shalom Hartman Institute in Israel and North America, push themselves to think about what could be and to focus on a Torah of possibility. That’s why we’re so excited to announce that registration for our virtual summer symposium is now open. Over two weeks from July 5th to July 15th, we’ll be running public lectures, small seminars, and lots of opportunities for conversation exploring possible futures for Israel and the diaspora, Zionism and Jewish identity. Featuring top scholars like Donniel Hartman, Yehuda Kurtzer, Mijal Bitton, Rachel Korazim, and Yossi Klein Halevi. You can register today free of charge at summer.hartman.org.il
Donniel Hartman:
Elana, it’s great to be with you. I’m sorry I know my voice is very hoarse, but I think I’ve been talking too much about Israel to north American Jews. I think my throat is another casualty of the war in Gaza.
Elana Stein Hain:
I got to say, you know what? It’s so nice. It’s just nice to hear just a positive attitude thinking about the Jewish people as one, you know, we’re taping today on the 17th of Tammuz the fast day that commemorates the destruction of the walls of Jerusalem in the First and the Second Temple. And we always talk about the kind of factualism that leads to that kind of destruction. And you’re really talking about a rebuilding, which is just really inspiring. It’s really a beautiful thing. I want to say from where I sit, I have two stakes in this. And that’s where I want to go with the Torah. The first is Naftali Bennett went to my elementary school. If you want to know what tri-state area modern, Orthodox Jews are thinking, we’re not thinking about this tribe and that tribe. And who’s in what, and who’s in where we’re thinking, holy cow, he went to Yavneh academy for two years.
Elana Stein Hain:
We have a connection to the prime minister of the state of Israel. And I just think that’s so fascinating because it’s such a, it’s an outsider’s view, but it gives you, I think it gives you a window in to how modern Orthodox Jews in America see this kippah-wearing this kippah-clad man, right? There’s stuff going around him wearing tefillin, wearing phylacteries. Like there’s an excitement like, “Hey, he’s like us. Which I just find really, really interesting for the Israel diaspora relationship in terms of modern, Orthodox Jews, Israel, diaspora relationship. And then the second thing that I want and to say is I’m connected to Migal Oz, which is the sister seminary to Yeshiva Har Etzion, to Gush Eetzion. And Rabbanit Esti Rosenberg runs it. It’s right outside of Efrat. And it is a religious Zionist institution. They have a program for Americans, but it’s mostly for Israelis. And it’s before army or before national service and after army or after national service.
Elana Stein Hain:
And what was fascinating to me is they sent out a letter to all of their alumni, to their bogrot, their alumni, which goes to mostly Israelis, but also Americans saying, you know, we were invited to take a public stance to support Naftali Bennett’s governments. And we said, we can’t do that because we want to keep our study hall, our beit midrash free of politics. And we recognize that within the national religious camp, people have different opinions. And I thought that was fascinating because religious Zionism is built upon the coupling of politics and religion. And so I want to look at this moment as a moment of what’s the internal conversation, which within the religious Zionist group, recognizing like, wait a second, there’s a piece of us that’s going this way. And a piece of us that is going that way. And the concept that I want to focus on because I’ve seen it in the conversations, in the discourse, within religious Zionist communities and not just that religious communities, you have Haredi MKs getting in on this conversation as well. The concept is the chilul Hashem, profaning God’s name. What is going to be considered a profanation, meaning something that is negative, that is negating God’s sacredness and what is going to be considered a kiddush Hashem.
Donniel Hartman:
I just want to make sure that you’re – that this you’re seeing a division within religious Zionism or within orthodoxy around this category.
Elana Stein Hain:
Yes. Meaning we’ll get to it in a second, what that division is. But first I just want to put on the table that it is an operative term that is being thrown around. There’s a grave grave concern right now that everything you Yossi and Donniel you talk about of, are we going to prefer modernity or are we going to prefer the sanctity of the land that somebody may be doing something that because they represent a religious observance of God’s law kind of approach, because they represent someone religious that if they do something wrong, it’s profaning God’s name. And there’s actually disagreement within the Dati Leumi, with the religious Zionist community as to what constitutes profaning God’s name. It’ll become clear. Let’s just look at the concept for a second. First of all, if you want to know where it comes from, we’re looking in the Torah, we’re looking at Leviticus chapter 22, verse 32, “and you shall not profane my holy name, but I will be sanctified among the children of Israel. I am the Lord who sanctifies you.”
Elana Stein Hain:
Which it comes in a passage that doesn’t make completely clear what this “sanctifying of God’s name” is or what this “profaning of God’s name” is. And the truth is that over time, there are moments in Jewish history where sanctifying God’s name means that if somebody tells you convert to Christianity or die, in order to sanctify God’s name, you allow yourself to be killed. So it can go really, really far, but there are places in the Talmud where we talk about this idea of what constitutes a chilul Hashem, profaning God’s name, or what constitutes a kiddush Hashem, sanctifying God’s name. And there – it’s actually a little bit more prosaic than that. And I think the prosaic and the differences are really at odds here, because it’s a different kind of breakdown than what you two suggested where you said, is it modernity or is it land?
Elana Stein Hain:
I want to suggest a different kind of breakdown, which is what constitutes sanctifying God’s name? And what constitutes profaning it? Because I think there is a serious argument in the heart or religious Zionism right now on that issue. So here goes, we’re in Yoma, the tractate that is basically about Yom Kippur, 86a. The Talmud asks what is an example of desecrating God’s name. And it’s a long excerpt. I always want people to go to the source and see more, but I’m going to give you a piece of it. “Rabbi Yochanan said: Here’s an example. If I would walk four cubits without Torah and without wearing my Teffilin, my phylacteries, that would be profaning God’s name.” Now that’s really interesting. It sounds like what he’s saying is if I’m walking around, not performing the duties that I’m supposed to perform religiously, then that’s profaning God’s name.
Elana Stein Hain:
Maybe people will think that you don’t have to wear phylacteries. Now, remember back then the big rabbis walked around with their factories all day. So if he’s not wearing them, people may think, well, you don’t have to wear them. They’re not that important. Essentially, he’s shirking his religious duties, but then there’s another suggestion. Yitzhak the school of Rabbi Yanai says: I’ll give you an example. You know, what’s profaning, God’s name, any case where one’s friends are embarrassed on account of one’s reputation, meaning they hear people saying, oh, that person really doesn’t behave very nicely. That’s a desecration of God’s name. That’s quite different from saying that you’re not wearing your tefillin, you’re not wearing your phylacteries. That’s Hey, you heard so-and-so who’s so religious?You should hear the way he talks to his mother. Right? You see so-and-so who’s so pious, you should see what he says when he’s outside of Bennett’s house protesting, right?
Elana Stein Hain:
To me, there are two very different understandings of what would be a desecration of God’s name. One is you’re doing something that’s religiously wrong, inappropriate you’ve crossed the line. And the other is, he just doesn’t look right to people. When people hear what you do and see what you do. You’re not making Torah look good. And I’m seeing this conversation happening within religious Zionist circles, whether it’s people who are calling and saying, it’s actually a chilul Hashem, it’s a profanation of God’s name to create a coalition like this. It’s profaning God’s name to be willing to give up on certain land issues. It’s profaning God’s name. Why? Because the focus is on whatever the religious hardline is. And then I hear others in the religious Zionist camp using the same language saying, you’re profaning God’s name if you are going to protest violently, if you’re going to say that bad things should happen to the people who are trying to make this coalition. It’s a completely different vision of what we’re actually talking about here.
Elana Stein Hain:
And then throw in, forget religious Zionists, throw in the Haredim. If we want to have a fight over religion and who represents God best in the public square. I don’t know if people saw a few weeks ago, there was a wild interaction where some of the Haredi members of Knesset, we’re talking about how Bennett should take off his kippah. This coalition is a total whole Hachette. We’re going to go to war against this. Why? Because they’re going to change kosher law and they’re going to change conversion. Meaning they’re not going to wear their tefillin in the, in the public square. This is terrible. And then who shoots back one of the new MKsMatan Kahana. He says, you don’t know anything about sanctifying God’s name, sanctifying God’s name is when you’re lying down for fear of ambush and you have to pray lying down. We make the biggest, biggest sanctification of God’s name by being in coalition with everybody. And it’s you people who make the actual chilul Hashem and the actual degradation of God’s name.
Donniel Hartman:
So would you say that a way to look at your fascinating distinction is, are you desecrating God’s name or are you desecrating God’s reputation in the eyes of human beings?
Elana Stein Hain:
Yeah, I think, I think both of them are desecrating God’s reputation. I just think it’s a question of where you place the emphasis, right? Meaning, we always talk about this, that we have responsibilities between human beings and God, and we have responsibilities and rituals that are between human beings and human beings. What I see here is really a question of where religion wants to assert itself in the Israeli public square. Meaning, is religion something that’s going to be focused primarily on what are the boundaries? And might even be that these boundaries could be between people too, right? But what are the boundaries or is religion going to assert itself as a unifying force, as a force that says a godly society looks like a unified society. And, and I think those are two impulses that are very real for anybody who has religious convictions, right? We can’t deny either of those impulses.
Donniel Hartman:
That’s then not an issue merely of religious Zionism, but then this discussion about religious Zionism in your framing is a core discussion about how we understand religion itself, whether in Israel, whether in north America, and it’s a frontline conversation, which covers denominations and transcends continents.
Elana Stein Hain:
A hundred percent. But what I love about it is it’s such an Israeli discussion because in America, we have as much separation between church and state as we can, right? Not always, doesn’t always work out perfectly, but the fact that two MKs are yelling at each other over which one of them is making religion look bad is just, I actually think that’s a contribution. Like I actually think that’s a contribution where you bring God into the public square and have an argument over what role God should play there. You know, there’s something, as a diaspora Jew, as an American Jew, and look at that and I say, oh, I know all the attendant problems with it, but this is part of struggling to have a public sphere, a Jewish public square.
Donniel Hartman:
I’ll frame it this way: the implication of Neftali Bennett’s move is that instead of just talking about issues of how do we best create an Israel, how do we separate state and religion? How does a different conversation of religion in Israel change the whole nature of the state? Because Israelis never wanted that separation. So with this religious Zionist move, the question is not whether religion will have a place in the state. What’s really changed now is which religious perspective is going to have and shape Israeli society. Yossi, do you have any last thoughts?
Yossi Klein Halevi:
I think that for us, this is such a hopeful moment because at Hartman, this is what, we’ve, what we envision is a positive expression of a Judaism that’s fully engaged with modernity in the Israeli public space that respects democratic values, that respects pluralism, but that is rooted deeply in Jewishness. That’s the essence, as I understand that of Hartman Torah. That’s why we’re all part of this work. This is a moment of vindication or at least of hope.
Donniel Hartman:
So by analyzing this movement, religious idealism. We’re really not analyzing religious idealism. We’re talking about a possible new place for religion, religious discourse, not in the legal sense – this law will pass or not – but the whole place where of what we call religious as Elana said, and what is going to be the emphasis of religion within, within Israeli society and something is beginning to change.
Donniel Hartman
Yossi, Elana It was a pleasure to be with you. Thank you. For Heaven’s Sake is a product of the Shalom Hartman Institute. It was produced by David Zvi Kalman and edited by Tali Cohen. To learn more about the Shalom Hartman Institute. Visit us online shalomhartman.org. We want to know what you think about the show you can write to us [email protected] Subscribe to our show in the apple podcast, app, Spotify and everywhere else. Podcasts. Thank you for joining us.
