The Volokh Conspiracy
Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent
Israel's Dangerous Government
It's not the first Israeli government to include illiberal elements, but it is the first to give them real power.
In Israel's recent election, the incumbent center-left coalition got only 20,000 or so fewer votes than the right-wing coalition of parties led by Bibi Netanyahu. But thanks to quirks in Israel's electoral system, skillfully (and legally) manipulated by Netanyahu, the right won a clear parliamentary majority. This majority, however, depends on a real rogues' gallery of religious fanatics, both nationalist and insular, racist uber-nationalists, and general nutjobs. Past Likud party leaders, including Bibi himself, would previously have either refused to deal with such people (recall that Menachem Begin put Meir Kahane in adminsitrative detention), or shunted them off to relatively inconsequential ministries.
But as Aaron David Miller and Daniel Kurtzer report:
Having brought to life the radical, racist, misogynistic and homophobic far-right parties, Netanyahu is now stuck with them. He has cut a deal with convicted inciter of hatred and violence Itamar Ben Gvir and made him minister of national security, with far-reaching authority for the West Bank, Jerusalem and mixed Arab-Jewish cities in Israel proper. Bezalel Smotrich, who has called for the expulsion of Arabs, is in line to run the finance ministry, with additional authority over the Civil Administration, which governs the West Bank. And Avi Maoz, who proudly espouses a fierce anti-LGBTQ agenda, has been made a deputy in the prime minister's office in charge of "Jewish identity."
Almost ninety percent of Israelis didn't vote for these clowns, but they are the price Bibi is willing to pay to be in power.
I would love to think that the media is mis-describing these folks. But Israeli sources I respect tell me that unfortunately they are everything they are made out to be.
The most charitable spin one can put on this is that Bibi thinks that Iran is an immediate existential threat, that he is the only Israeli leader capable of dealing with it, that creating short-term tensions with everyone from diaspora Jews to the Palestinians is a price worth paying, and that he will US inevitable US, Abraham Accord, and Western pressure as a convenient excuse to back down from some of the more radical things he promised his coalition powers. Less charitably, he just wants power at any price. Either way, he is playing with fire.
This is a situation where responsible critics of Israel could play a role is ameliorating the effects of what could be a disastrous government. The problem is, the most vocal and powerful critics of Israel, such as the so-called human right NGOs, have already dismissed the country as an evil apartheid regime that should be replaced by the Palestine of their fantasies (most wouldn't like the actual Palestine, some combination of Palestinian Authority kleptocracy and Hamas theocracy that could plausibly replace Israel). Having cried wolf over much more palatable Israeli governments and policies, no one will listen when the wolf may really be at the door.
UPDATE: I should point out that in the topsy-turvy world of Israeli politics, having a virulently anti-gay minister from a minor party does not mean that the government is anti-gay. Indeed, Likud MK Amir Ohana, who is openly gay and has two children with his partner, is said to be the leading candidate to be foreign minister.
Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
A few words went rogue in the fifth paragraph.
The last half of the 5th paragraph went off the rails, IMO. I hope Professor Bernstein fixes that and clarifies what he is actually saying.
Good catch.
I referred solely to the "US inevitable US, Abraham Accord" element of something likely intended to constitute a sentence.
Well Jerry, You're the expert on "Sentences" (and Appeals)
Ooooh, I sense a story...
I suspect the first "US" was supposed to be "use."
'Having brought to life the radical, racist, misogynistic and homophobic far-right parties'
So I guess they believe in 59 genders or less as opposed to regular right wingers who believe in 60-69 and centrists who believe in more than 72.
You get to the end of that quote and realize the true crime is a misgendering or perhaps the heretical thought that men are not women.
If there are real problems beyond viewpoints skeptical of leftist LGB+ "truths" then maybe there is a point to this but the viewpoint is the only thing listed and is generally enough to earn all the listed hateful adjectives.
So the question becomes are there real issues or is this just a screed that the new government isn't made up of progressive leftists?
These people are serious about stamping out the freedom to engage in homosexual conduct.
The old [British] joke about homosexuality was the one about the senior citizen saying: "When I was a kid we used to hang queers. When I got to middle age we just put them in jail. Now it's all legal. I just hope I die before it's made compulsory." (source)
You'd come to the same conclusion about anyone that misgendered someone so a bit of actual evidence is required.
When your complaint amounts to DB being a woke leftist, some self-reflection should be in order.
Dream on.
A broader perspective is needed--as distasteful (to put it mildly) as these nut cases are, they are born out of the unrelenting violence Israel has faced for years. These guys are crazies, but less crazy than the crew that runs Hamas, the PA, Hezbollah and various other violent groups hell bent on Israel's destruction. My point is not to defend these guys, but to show how far things have gotten.
Hopefully Bibi can keep these guys in line.
And yes, Iran is an existential threat.
If you're not for taxpayer funded mutilation of children and abortions until birth you're a far right extremist according to the establishment media today.
I don't see how that comment has much relevance. One can be strenuously opposed to those things but hate the idea of the ethnic cleansing of Israel.
The pull quote is primarily about them not adhering to western academic progressive leftist values of the LGB+ orthodoxy so the statement is relevant because that is where the complaint is derived.
These guys aren’t being taken to task because they don’t have “enlightened” views on transgenderism etc. They outright hate gays and would use government power to do them harm. The comment is besides the point and serves to obscure the real issue. I loathe the idea of pushing trans stuff on kids (having one that, until recently, identified as a boy) and the idea of mutilating children horrifies me. But that’s not really the issue with these guys—the issue is that they aren’t willing to take a live and let live approach to gay people living that life. Those people are bigots.
"They outright hate gays and would use government power to do them harm."
Can you spell it out? Do they want to throw them from rooftops, or do they oppose government redefinition of marriage?
Under current left orthodoxy, "doing them harm" can consist of nothing more than refusing to humor some guy's claim to be a girl.
The wikipedia page on this party is kind of scant, but shows nothing that looks horrific. Under "Controvery", it says,
"The party released a video under the comment: "An entire country is going through conversion therapy. The time has come to stop it." In the video, a mother, father, and son go to vote on election day in September, and the family is bombarded with LGBT and Reform imagery. Once they reach the voting booth, the mother writes on her voting slip, "Let my son marry a woman", while the father writes, "Let my grandson be Jewish".[16] The video was removed by YouTube for violating its terms of use.[2]"
The horror! [/sarc]
Doesn't sound great to me!
Calling heterosexuals breeders and wanting to overthrow cis-gendered society would make you a sober centrist in many leftwing communities.
They should move somewhere more "Gay Friendly" like Saudi Arabia or Ear-Ron
"born" should be "borne"
And when you look at what Bibi has had to put up with in the past, I can not blame him for doing this. Not at all.
When this stuff causes America to retract the military, economic, and political skirts behind which Israel has operated for more than a half-century, you may reconsider your tolerance of Mr. Netanyahu's ugly conduct.
Israel has chosen the wrong side of history and the losing side of the American culture war. The consequences seem relatively predictable.
It's the Israelis' call . . . and perhaps their funeral.
The exact opposite may happen.
"These guys are crazies, but less crazy than the crew that runs Hamas, the PA, Hezbollah and various other violent groups hell bent on Israel’s destruction."
No, I've known and had exchanges with Kahanites and other like-minded Israelis. They are every bit as crazy as Hamas and Hezbollah, unfortunately. Prof. Bernstein is right.
I make no claim to be an expert in Israeli politics, but my amateur understanding is that the electoral success of the "nut jobs" this time round is a direct response to the previous receptacle of "hard right" and particular "hard right settler" votes - Yamina - selling out the Likud-led right wing coalition and getting into bed with the lefty team to form the previous government.
The most vehement voters on the right, having been sold out once, decided this time round to go for a bunch that wasn't going to sell them out. (Yamina has entirely collapsed.)
It's no different to the US. When the "legitimate" or "establishment" GOP sells out its "nowhere else to go" voters, they go elsewhere. In the US they go to Taylor Greenes and Boeberts.
No doubt there are a bunch of fairly nutty voters on the Israeli right, but there's no particularly good reason to suppose that the electoral success of the "nut jobs" this time round reflects a sudden lurch towards nut-jobbery. It's just a sudden lurch towards "hey, we don't like being sold out-ery."
This sounds like the Republican Party.
What a silly comment. The Democrat party is the party where calling a black child a “little monkey” is forgivable. Here’s looking at you Kevin DeLeon.
We have some nutcases in American politics too:
https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2022/11/feeding-our-fraud-the-video.php
And our Vice President has been found to have violated the First Amendment rights of people (when she was AG). What does one expect from someone who got her start in politics by lying on her back in Willie Brown's bedroom?
So you're saying that should only work for people like Ginnie Thomas?
When and where did Ginny Thomas get appointed to a taxpayer-funded board by Clarence Thomas?
You must be outraged about Hunter's Air Force Two flights to close China deals.
Ginnie Thomas got where she is by her own merit.
A recent guest on the fifth column podcast suggested that Bibi was playing a cynical game: Appointing the extremist to the national security post so that he fails miserably and thereby becomes discredited.
I live in Jerusalem, and didn’t vote for these guys—BUT, why aren’t more people asking the key question: WHY did these guys get the votes they got?
The answer is the same it’s been since Hobbes wrote The Leviathan. People want personal security more than anything else, and if they wont’ get it from the government, they’ll vote out that government, or form vigilante groups. Ben-Gvir’s victory was baked in the cake in May, 2021 when Arabs in Lod and Acco attacked Jews in their own streets and burned synagogues. It was assured when the Negev was revealed to be a completely lawless region ruled by Bedouin gangs. And that’s why Ben-Gvir will become the Security Minister.
Personally, I’m much more bothered by the thought of a convicted felon (Aryeh Deri) retuning to the scene of the crime, where he can continue to steal public funds.
Hmmm... The statement makes sense, but, in light of the last two elections (2020 & 2022), I'm just not sure it's true, at least here. I live in the Twin Cities. The (Minneapolis) mayor and the governor who stood by as a police precinct and a bunch of other places burned were both reelected. Crime in Minneapolis and its suburbs is through the roof, yet Hennepin County residents just elected "an openly progressive county attorney." (source)
Is it just that people where you live are more sane than the people where I live?
Dude, the election is over. Even Fox has stopped making up claims about massive crime waves.
CNN: https://www.cnn.com/2022/09/25/us/minneapolis-crime-defund-invs
My worry with the new regime is that a pitiful US administration will provide scant resistance to Israel's decision to launch a preemptive strike on Iran's nuclear facilities
And that's a bad thing?
I thought the worry was that they'd make the US do it for them...
The US under Old Slow Joe will do nothing of the sort. It's a loser in 2024 to start a war.
You might also ask if it's so important to keep these far right politicians out of power why any of the more moderate minor parties didn't join the Likud coalition to keep them out?
If it's that important the onus shouldn't be just on Netanyahu to sacrifice for the common good.
" WHY did these guys get the votes they got? "
Apparently there are a lot of superstitious right-wing jerks in Israel.
I love how this talking point about the “vote gap” has become ubiquitous. No one seemed to care about the electoral threshold when right wing votes are spoiled. It’s not even like the left can say their coalition got more votes—they lost!—but they repeat it like a salve in the wound to create the implication something went wrong with Israel’s electoral system.
My point is only that despite a potentially dramatic shift in government policy, there wasn't a dramatic shift in how the electorate voted.
That's true in every system when there are two blocs that are nearly evenly split.
Biden got only 3% more of the vote than Clinton did, but that created a dramatic shift in government policy.
The shift is slightly larger in a parliamentary system, where the party with the executive branch also creates all the laws.
True, but actually more of a function of unicameral parliamentary systems. You could have a bicameral parliamentary system with separate methods for electing or appointing the two houses and mitigate that problem.
When you're already close to the edge, it only takes one, small, mis-step to fall off a cliff.
That’s sort of how elections work everywhere when one side wins and the other side loses in a majoritarian parliament.
So, if you have been a critic of Israel, your opinion is worth less than if you have given the country a pass for prior misdeed and are now upset. The more perspicacity, the less validity.
They say politics makes for strange bedfellows. In parliamentary systems that applies in spades.
^This
So true.
In Israel's recent election, the incumbent center-left coalition got only 20,000 or so fewer votes than the right-wing coalition of parties led by Bibi Netanyahu. But thanks to quirks in Israel's electoral system, skillfully (and legally) manipulated by Netanyahu, the right won a clear parliamentary majority.
Yes, weird when the number of votes doesn't seem to have a clear connection to the number of seats in parliament. Fortunately that would never happen in the US!
What? The "center-left coalition" got fewer votes, so the "right-wing coalition" won the majority, and that's weird because ... how?
it's weird because not having the center left in power is against the natural order of things
No idea, ask Bernstein. He wrote it.
No, you were the one who wrote that this is weird
You're right, I retract my previous comment.
"Weird" was my translation of Bernstein's "quirk".
Martin,
The left frequently whines about minority dominance in US politics.
Israel and Italy show that other systems are just as bad.
But such things never happen in China
Wait, what do you think Italy shows?
(I mean, I can think of something, but I wonder what you actually know about it, since you've mentioned it twice now.)
Italy shows that a parliamentary system with many parties can easily be dominated by clowns and crooks.
as opposed to our House/Senate dominated by crooks and clowns??
So can a system with very few parties, as (recent) US history shows.
https://uk.movies.yahoo.com/movies/marjorie-taylor-greene-real-speaker-072252601.html
I actually know quite a bit since I am in nearly daily conversations with close italian friends and relatives
Yes indeed, according to the Cook Political report the GOP share of the popular vote Nov. 8 was 51.7%.
That should translate into 224 seats and we fell about 2 seats short of that.
The left (to which I belong, though not on these issues), both in Israel and without, bears much of the responsibility for this unfortunate development. Its often ill-founded criticism and unrealistic demands have ceded national and personal security to the right. An earlier error was exempting the ultra-orthodox from military service and otherwise applicable educational standards, resulting in a large bloc of insular, poorly informed voters with little sense of responsibility for the greater good.
This is true but rather irrelevant to current Israeli politics. The "left" in Israel has been long discredited because of its refusal to admit that there was no Palestinian partner for peace. The current split is not really between the left and right; it's between the center right and the center-right-that's-willing-to-treat-with-the-far-right-and-can-stand-Netanyahu.
Professor Bernstein.....You sound a lot like Thomas Friedman, unfortunately, in this blog post. I think I would like to see what government emerges before declaring, "...no one will listen when the wolf may really be at the door". At this stage, we do not even know if Bibi can put together a coalition.
PM Lapid is not helping matters any with his extreme and acrimonious comments as a lame duck. His words of late have lowered my overall estimation of him because they do not serve Israel well.
Since this is generally a legal blog, readers might be interested to hear about the parliamentary override that the new coalition seems to be after:
https://verfassungsblog.de/the-high-stakes-israeli-debate-over-the-override/
Thanks for this interesting input.
But it is not so different from Living Constitutionalism
Can you run that one by me again? I'm not sure I follow.
Sure. The conditions that you describe are little different from the rational used by judicial utilitarians and by political-results oriented judges. To ignore even the plain text meaning of the law.
It really isn't.
Its like the NY State Legislature passing laws that clearly infringe on the right to keep and bear arms and claim that public policy concerns should override constitutional rights.
...and getting away with it.
Or it would be if a legislative majority in NY were legally entitled to amend the Constitution, anyway. Israel is one of a handful of countries that don't actually have constitutions, in the sense the US does, just statutes and precedents.
What it reminded me of is s. 33 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
Without commenting on the main thrust of your post, the notion that "the incumbent center-left coalition got only 20,000 or so fewer votes than the right-wing coalition of parties led by Bibi Netanyahu. But thanks to quirks in Israel's electoral system, skillfully (and legally) manipulated by Netanyahu" is simply false - a convenient political spin put out by the losers of the election.
For starters, Netanyahu had nothing to do with any "manipulation" of quirks in the Israeli electoral system. That was the outgoing left-wing coalition's own doing - Labor's insistence on running separately from the nearly identical (ideology-wise) Meretz party, which led to the latter's failure to cross the electoral threshold, and a similar split among the Arab parties which caused Balad to fail to cross the threshold.
But more importantly, the only way you get to a 30,000 vote difference even if you count the votes lost to parties that did not cross the threshold is if you include in the "anti-Netanyahu bloc" the Balad party- an anti-Zionist party that objects to the very existence of Israel in its current form, and which was not part of the outgoing coalition. Without the Balad votes, the "anti-Netanyahu bloc" got about 60,000 less votes.
So that's where Joe Biden got the idea of locking up his political opponents!
it's kinda odd to see a supposed libertarian cheerleading for administrative detention.
But in any case, it is easier to do so with a political opponent that managed 1 parliament seat/25,000 votes than with one that is the 3rd largest faction at 14 seats/516,000 votes
well, its better than what happened to Kahane when he was released from administrative detention.
"UPDATE: I should point out that in the topsy-turvy world of Israeli politics, having a virulently anti-gay minister from a minor party does not mean that the government is anti-gay. Indeed, Likud MK Amir Ohana, who is openly gay and has two children with his partner, is said to be the leading candidate to be foreign minister."
Good clarification--yeah, these guys are nutcases. I always wonder if virulently anti-gay people aren't overcompensating.
I question how much it actually takes to be called "virulently anti-gay". I'll admit my understanding of Israeli politics is pretty shallow, but the Wikipedia article on Avi Maoz makes him sound a bit short of virulent. Why, he'd even legalize conversion therapy! Not mandate it, mind you, just permit it.
But, of course, the modern left has so little tolerance for dissent that even positions the left might have espoused a few decades ago are beyond the pale now.
Hopefully Prof. Bernstein will read this and respond. Some of these right-wing guys are a few cans short of a six-pack.
From the wiki: He has campaigned heavily against LGBT rights, calling for a ban on Pride parades and the legalisation of conversion therapy.[6] He is against women serving in the Israel Defense Forces,[7] and has called for increased gender segregation in public events.
Picking out the legalization of conversion therapy is pretty disingenuous, Brett.
Clicking through to the linked source:
A 2019 campaign video compares Reform Jews, left-wing activists, and gay rights advocates to Nazis and Palestinian suicide bombers, saying all of them “want to destroy us.”
On this, Prof. Bernstein is right, as a moment of effort would have shown you.
This may be a matter of my having a different threshold for "virulent" than you or the Prof.
There's not a lot of his political program I actually agree with, beyond legalizing conversion therapy, which for people who think lopping off breasts and penises is a matter of individual rights ought to be totally non-controversial.
OTOH, compared to the guys Israel shares a border with, he's a civil libertarian. It's not like he's going to topple stone walls onto gays. He would have blended right into American politics some decades ago.
So, I think I'll save "virulent" for people with more violent tendencies. I don't want to end up in a place where I have no more adjectives to use when moving from this guy to the Taliban.
Brett, he compared gay rights advocates to Nazis. In Israel
Shut the fuck up.
Maybe we've been desensitized by so many people in the US calling Republicans Nazis.
This was a political ad, by the individual in question.
Your deflection sucks.
Just because the Dems are always crying "wolf" doesn't mean that there are no actual wolves out there.
No, but it does mean that we don't much care when Democrats call people wolves.
And if there's one thing David Bernstein is, it's a wolf-crying Democrat, right?
"Brett, he compared gay rights advocates to Nazis. In Israel."
Yeah, he did. As Kazinski says, I'm kind of desensitized to that sort of rhetoric at this point.
"Shut the fuck up."
Try to get over the notion you're in any way entitled to tell other people what they can say. Really, get over it.
You right here just said you don't care about an Iraeli politician calling gay rights advocates Nazis because randos in America made you mad overusing the term.
That's a pretty strong admission of a moral compass fucked up on partisanship right there.
Yeah, I'm going to have some contempt for those who can't do better than to defend this bigoted piece of shit.
What it means is that I reserve the term "Nazi" for members of the National Socialist party, and roll my eyes when people apply the term to folks who aren't going door to door rounding up people and shipping them off to death camps. I roll my eyes when Democrats do it here, I roll my eyes when this guy does it, too.
That it was used in Israel means nothing. The number of Israelis who have personal experience with Nazis at this point is a tiny fraction of their population and dropping rapidly.
According to Israel, it is impossible to be a "responsible critic", as any criticism at all is inherently anti-Semitic and thus irresponsible.
This idea --that all criticism of Israel is irresponsible-- is something you yourself, Bernstein, have doubled down on in the past.
That said, I always find it morbidly hilarious when conservatives are troubled by the people conservatives choose to be their leaders. That Netanyahu is slime has been known for a while. That Israel's conservatives keep supporting him isn't a sign that he's some kind of master manipulator, it's a sign that Israel's conservatives like slime.
You all support Joe Biden even though he took showers with his daughter, and he creeps on young women.
I just criticized Israel, and no one has called me antisemitic.
It is the sign of existential dread of nuclear Iran adding to Hamas and a feckless PA that dominates.
Yeah, I wonder what happened that made the prospect of a nuclear Iran so much more likely.
That Moose-lum President we had didn't help things.
" That Moose-lum President we had didn’t help things. "
This is the audience you attract, Volokh Conspirators . . . and the reason your employers regret hiring you.
Carry on, clingers.
No need to wonder - The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) laid the groundwork for that when it legalized unconstrained enriched uranium and a breakout period of a few months, after 15 years.
I don't think that anything in particular happened. But Iran has made steady progress toward a weapon even in the presence of the accord. A nuclear Iran is inevitable as long as the theocratic regime exists.
A new treaty would put some pressure on Israel not to act, but that is no certainty.
"But Iran has made steady progress toward a weapon even in the presence of the accord."
That's because enforcement soon became a joke. We literally let them veto where the searches would take place. It would have taken much more stringent enforcement, by people who actually saw keeping them from getting nukes as important, to have done the job.
Not because, but due the the accords have little by way of prevention. The biggest brake has been Mossad assassination of Iranian Scientists and engineers in its weapons programs.
The accords theoretically had more bite, but in practice they refrained from enforcing what little bite they had. Such as not pressing the issue of searches where the Iranians objected to them.
What really killed any prospect of the accords working, though, was that the Iranians were able to use oil contracts as an effective mechanism for bribing politicians in coalition governments.
"Israel's Dangerous Government"?????
Gee, when they invade Iraq/Kuwait/Afghanistan and station troops in Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Syria, Egypt, Turkey, like another Government I could name, they'll REALLY be dangerous.....
And maybe Bibi thinks Ear-Ron is an Existential threat, because they're an Existential Threat, sorry, not spotting the Bad Guys 6 million this time,
Frank "Meir Kahane?? Personal Hero"
Does the IHRA definition of anti-Semitism need to be updated, for Israel's sake?
Didn't know Hot Rodders were big-time Anti Semites
Ok, I take it back. This is fine.
I do think you are overreacting.
Avi Maoz's position as a deputy minister responsible for "Jewish identity" is a pure sinecure. The position is housed within the PM's office, which means that Netanyahu has ultimate authority. Moreover, there's no real conflict between LGBTs and even the kookiest religious factions over "Jewish identity" issues. Orthodox Judaism recognizes persons as Jewish if they have a Jewish mother, irrespective of whether the mother is married under Jewish law, single, or in an opposite sex or same-sex relationship. If any particular demographic group should be worried about Moaz (or the coalition), it would be persons from the former Soviet Union of mixed Jewish/non-Jewish ancestry.
Smotrich has been aligned with Netanyahu since 2015, and served as Minister of Transportation in a previous Netanyahu-led government. He holds pretty far right views on Israel/Palestinians. But as Minister of Finance, there's not much that he can do on that front. At most, there might be more money for Jewish communities in Judea/Samaria (the "West Bank"). Even then, Netanyahu will likely veto new settlements or significant construction in existing settlements, citing US disapproval. He will also likely secure far more money for yeshivot (Jewish religious schools) and higher subsidies for having more children than I would prefer. These positions are unwise. But they are not dangerous.
The only worrisome character is Ben-Gvir. Still, the Public Security ministry has little actual power, and Ben-Gvir has already been caught (in leaked audio to his supporters) telling them to dampen expectations.
Overall, I doubt that this Netanyahu government will significantly differ from previous ones, with four exceptions:
First, it's likely to spend more money, and to spend it unwisely (on yeshivot, welfare payments, and other subsidies).
Second, we will likely see some form of "override" clause that permits the government to override court decisions. But these kind of clauses exist in other western democracies. And, in Israel's case, such a clause is arguably warranted because the Court has unliterally given itself far more power than it was ever afforded under Israel's Basic Laws. That said, I think the override clause is potentially dangerous and am overall ambivalent about it.
Third, we will likely see more judicial reform that will stop the practice of the Supreme Court effectively (with the support of the Israeli Bar Association) choosing its own successors. Instead, there will likely be more political control over Supreme Court appointments. That's a net positive.
Fourth, it's quite possible that Israel will tighten the Law of Return to exclude more non-Jews with Jewish ancestry -- such as by excluding non-Jews who have only one Jewish grandparent. This is an immigration issue, and not anything that the United States should be concerned about. I don't see why anyone in the United States should care about whether Eastern Orthodox Christians from Russia and Ukraine with some Jewish ancestry should be entitled to immigrate to Israel.
Insightful post--there is something distasteful about these guys in government though, but probably less distasteful than giving away a ton of natural gas.
Professor Bernstein reveals himself as being virulently anti-Islam.
And in apparently lauding Begin's administrative detention of Meir Kahane, an enemy of civil rights.
I didn't read that as lauding the detention, only in supporting his contention that previous Likud leaders wouldn't power share with such people.
I'm puzzled where the anti-Islam thing comes from, given that my only allusion to Islam was Hamas's well-documented theocracy.
This blog feels like a, "I hold the absolute, perfect, political position, and everyone to the left and right are me completely wacked," statement.
Can't complain though since we're all like that.
Hear, hear!
Eh, I think it's not inhuman to understand that there is a range wherein reasonable people can differ.
and who gets to define "reasonable"?
I'm not making a line-drawing point. Only that it's wrong to say everyone defines their point of view as the only legit one.
That is more characteristic of ideologues. Less so for folks who think political experiment and revision work better than ideology.
Lies. My political position is *also* whack.
Lighten up, Francis
Love to see how many on the commentariat are calling Prof. Bernstein a liberal.
The purity mindset.
True, that is pretty comical re: bernstein.
Meir Kahane was a hero, one of the few to call out the radical left for what it actually is.
"Every Jew a .22"
Are you Aktenberg?
This is a situation where responsible critics of Israel could play a role is ameliorating the effects of what could be a disastrous government.
Might I suggest cross-posting this post at Instapundit?
the most vocal and powerful critics of Israel, such as the so-called human right NGOs, have already dismissed the country as an evil apartheid regime that should be replaced by the Palestine of their fantasies (most wouldn't like the actual Palestine, some combination of Palestinian Authority kleptocracy and Hamas theocracy that could plausibly replace Israel). Having cried wolf over much more palatable Israeli governments and policies, no one will listen when the wolf may really be at the door.
And maybe part of the problem is the blind support of all Israeli policy by American conservatives, which has led some Israelis to think that there is nothing they can do which would earn them criticism from the American right.
Don't be so quick to blame the deficiencies of the Israeli government on the critics of its policies.
I don't think "assistant DA" is a "start in politics" whereas being appointed to two taxpayer-funded boards is.
Indeed. I have friends on both sides of the aisle who argue that we'd be far better off with a parliamentary proportional-representation system. Israel is one of the prime examples to which I can point as a counterexample. Under PR, it's too easy for a handful of nutjobs to wield political power far out of proportion to their numbers—and though I might like the thought of nutjobs on my side wielding that kind of power, I'd be even more frightened by the thought of according it to the nutjobs on the other side.
The Dem party has moved on from that. Can you imagine the hullabaloo had a Republican said such things?
Like saying that working for a federal agency is a start in politics . . . .
In any event, the point still stands--Kamala Harris violated people's First Amendment rights while AG and she was interviewed for appointments to taxpayer-funded boards in Willie Brown's bedroom.
Under PR, it’s too easy for a handful of nutjobs to wield political power far out of proportion to their numbers
Having just witnessed a bunch of Trumpists hijack the Republican party, I have no idea why you would think that. The reason why Israel is run by political nutjobs is because the nutjobs get lots of votes, not because they are pivotal.
(Likud is often pivotal, and they are supposed to be relatively not-nutty, as far as the Israeli right goes. In the past Shas was pivotal, which laid the basis for Israel's longstanding secular vs. haredi problem.)
Isn't that what we call "the Senate" and "electoral college?" These institutions create unequal weight for votes from less populated states.
Utter bollocks. When blocs are nearly even, small parties become swing votes and yield outsized power. This is a well-known "feature" of PR systems. It has its parallels in other systems too, of course, (swing States in the US), but it is simply false that "The reason why Israel is run by political nutjobs is that the nutjobs get lots of votes"
Indeed, look at Italy for another example of an inherent weakness of the parliamentary system.
That only happens because the other parties decide to form a block in the first place.
To Willie Brown's credit
There's nothing "inherent" about any weakness of Italian parliamentary democracy.
Martin,
That is just semantics. The country is dominated by political clowns.
Well, yeah, snicker, but not to hers.
Utter bollocks, again.
Parties have certain ideologies. Those who are closely aligned sometimes form blocs. And in such a situation, a small party that is not ideologically committed to either side wields outsized power. This is not only easily understandable at a theoretical level, but has been empirically seen in Israel, where "single issue" parties like the Haredi ones would align with either left or right-wing parties who would provide them with more benefits.
And many many more assistant DAs go on to become defense attorneys. It's not a start in politics--but whatever, my point stands, and this semantic discussion detracts from the real issue.
Every single attorney general and most other politicians went to college. Were they "getting their start in politics" when they went to freshman orientation?
And it would be under any political system, up to and including outright fascism. (Mussolini was a clown too.)
a small party that is not ideologically committed to either side wields outsized power
True. But that makes them, by definition, centrists rather than wingnuts.
No, It just makes them not ideologically aligned with either one of the others, but completely unrelated to being "centrist", in the sense of being somewhere in the middle between the two blocs - they just don't care one way or the other - they only care about their single issue, which could be a trivial one for most of the population.
Well, it would tie in nicely with white nationalist replacement theory having it's fresh moment over on FOX these days.