Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Israel/Palestine
In reply to the discussion: Bennett Threatens To ‘Topple Government’ To Prevent Palestinian State [View all]Israeli
(4,306 posts)20. To sum up ......
After 50 Years of Occupation, Israeli Politics Have Reached a Dead End
The right has the authority but doesn't have a policy, while the left has a policy but doesn't have the people.
Carolina Landsmann Jun 10, 2016
The political system is caught in a paradox: To get Zionist Union into the coalition, Habayit Hayehudi will have to go, but if Habayit Hayehudi quit the coalition before Zionist Union comes in the government falls and one cant really expect Zionist Union to resist the temptation to let it fall.
So how to add Zionist Union to the coalition when you have to first get rid of Habayit Hayehudi, without first getting rid of Habayit Hayehudi?
Zionist Unions dilemma is real: On the one hand, if a historic window of opportunity for a diplomatic accord is truly opening due to a new geopolitical constellation and the prime ministers personal and political difficulties, its unthinkable that the left would be the one to slam it shut. On the other hand, it means joining forces with Benjamin Netanyahu, the man whose name is a synonym for diplomatic intransigence and personal and public disloyalty.
Youd have to be a hopeless optimist to really believe that there is a scenario in which Netanyahu is the person who ends the occupation.
Zionist Union must therefore take a political leap of faith here, when there is seemingly no good reason to do so. Reason says that if theres a chance of taking down Netanyahu, then thats what needs to be done.
Even before the terror attack in Tel Aviv, which served as a reminder of the rights most fervently-denied truth that it has no answer for Israels security problems, and before the latest corruption allegations against Netanyahu, and before the crisis with Shas, there were plenty of good reasons to hold early elections.
Distrust now permeates the entire political system, crossing all party lines: Ministers dont trust the prime minister, MKs dont trust their parties, the public doesnt trust its representatives, and above all the military doesnt trust the government. But theres no guarantee whatsoever that another election season will produce a new result thats significantly different from what came out of the last election, or those that preceded it, because its very possible that the political system has really reached a dead end.
Whats happening to the right now is important, because its being forced to confront its lack of tenability: Its not possible to stay in power for the long-term without a policy, or at least the illusion of a policy. But the opposition also has to be honest with itself: Is it ready for new elections? Is the leftist camp really ready to take back the reins of the country? This camp seems clearly unable to coalesce around a leader. The left has a tendency to belittle the importance of leadership as if good ideas or just some diligent field work were sufficient to win the publics trust.
But ideas have to be connected to people, and its been a long time since the leftist camp has had anyone at its head whose name the people (or even just the members of its political party) could shout out loud.
Maybe the sense that theres no real opposition comes from a genuine (despite all the yelling) near-unity of opinion, or more accurately, an across-the-board feeling of hopelessness in the face of the real dilemma Israel must cope with: the Palestinian problem. Having slid down the slope of the occupation for close to 50 years now, it just doesnt know how to solve the problem. Not when it says two states for two peoples and certainly not when it says one state.
So the political paradox may be a consequence of a national psychological strategy aimed at evading the responsibility that comes with authority: The right has a leader and an electorate but no viable policy, and the left has a policy, at least on paper, but it lacks the people.
When this is the situation, Netanyahu suddenly goes from being a problem to being a part of the solution: Thanks to him the right enjoys authority devoid of responsibility, while the left has responsibility devoid of authority. Netanyahu is just the face and embodiment of our futility.
Source: http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/.premium-1.724174
The right has the authority but doesn't have a policy, while the left has a policy but doesn't have the people.
Carolina Landsmann Jun 10, 2016
The political system is caught in a paradox: To get Zionist Union into the coalition, Habayit Hayehudi will have to go, but if Habayit Hayehudi quit the coalition before Zionist Union comes in the government falls and one cant really expect Zionist Union to resist the temptation to let it fall.
So how to add Zionist Union to the coalition when you have to first get rid of Habayit Hayehudi, without first getting rid of Habayit Hayehudi?
Zionist Unions dilemma is real: On the one hand, if a historic window of opportunity for a diplomatic accord is truly opening due to a new geopolitical constellation and the prime ministers personal and political difficulties, its unthinkable that the left would be the one to slam it shut. On the other hand, it means joining forces with Benjamin Netanyahu, the man whose name is a synonym for diplomatic intransigence and personal and public disloyalty.
Youd have to be a hopeless optimist to really believe that there is a scenario in which Netanyahu is the person who ends the occupation.
Zionist Union must therefore take a political leap of faith here, when there is seemingly no good reason to do so. Reason says that if theres a chance of taking down Netanyahu, then thats what needs to be done.
Even before the terror attack in Tel Aviv, which served as a reminder of the rights most fervently-denied truth that it has no answer for Israels security problems, and before the latest corruption allegations against Netanyahu, and before the crisis with Shas, there were plenty of good reasons to hold early elections.
Distrust now permeates the entire political system, crossing all party lines: Ministers dont trust the prime minister, MKs dont trust their parties, the public doesnt trust its representatives, and above all the military doesnt trust the government. But theres no guarantee whatsoever that another election season will produce a new result thats significantly different from what came out of the last election, or those that preceded it, because its very possible that the political system has really reached a dead end.
Whats happening to the right now is important, because its being forced to confront its lack of tenability: Its not possible to stay in power for the long-term without a policy, or at least the illusion of a policy. But the opposition also has to be honest with itself: Is it ready for new elections? Is the leftist camp really ready to take back the reins of the country? This camp seems clearly unable to coalesce around a leader. The left has a tendency to belittle the importance of leadership as if good ideas or just some diligent field work were sufficient to win the publics trust.
But ideas have to be connected to people, and its been a long time since the leftist camp has had anyone at its head whose name the people (or even just the members of its political party) could shout out loud.
Maybe the sense that theres no real opposition comes from a genuine (despite all the yelling) near-unity of opinion, or more accurately, an across-the-board feeling of hopelessness in the face of the real dilemma Israel must cope with: the Palestinian problem. Having slid down the slope of the occupation for close to 50 years now, it just doesnt know how to solve the problem. Not when it says two states for two peoples and certainly not when it says one state.
So the political paradox may be a consequence of a national psychological strategy aimed at evading the responsibility that comes with authority: The right has a leader and an electorate but no viable policy, and the left has a policy, at least on paper, but it lacks the people.
When this is the situation, Netanyahu suddenly goes from being a problem to being a part of the solution: Thanks to him the right enjoys authority devoid of responsibility, while the left has responsibility devoid of authority. Netanyahu is just the face and embodiment of our futility.
Source: http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/.premium-1.724174
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
20 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Bennett Threatens To ‘Topple Government’ To Prevent Palestinian State [View all]
Purveyor
Jun 2016
OP
I think with you wishing the terrorist Jew hating murderers "Godspeed" like you did,
King_David
Jun 2016
#1
This op has been viewed 110 times at this point. That is all I care about. Isn't about me... nt
Purveyor
Jun 2016
#2
The thing about our election here this time is that it is very unusual to have both parties split
bemildred
Jun 2016
#14
Shockingly, PM that tries to bamboozle the entire world is found untrustworthy
geek tragedy
Jun 2016
#15