Everything else is written by others.
+++++++++++++++++++++++
Definition of a clean sweep:
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Remember Einstein's comment: "There is
a major difference between intelligence and
stupidity; intelligence has its limits."
+++++++++
++++
Journalist Who First Reported Hunter Biden Laptop Story Had the Perfect Response to This Question
BY Matt Vespa
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Democrat slogan?
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
+++
Written by an Israeli relative who teaches at a United States University:
Like many, my heart aches these days.
I'll try to give a few points here that I hope that in the end they will connect to some understanding.
Turned out to be a long one. While you don't agree with the insights, you can also get angry. But I would be happy if there was a real attempt to listen. I'll thank whoever will try to read and respond. If you agreed with some, you're also welcome to share.
1. The uniqueness of the current crisis.
Israeli society has gone through major crises in the past, but it seems that this crisis is united by the fact that it touches at the same time every exposed nerve possible: right and left, religion and state, recruitment to the IDF, tribalism, nationality versus art, center versus periphery, religious. Everything. Everywhere. All in one go.
It's clear to everyone that the celebrations of the last days are not about the highest probability. The legal amendments that are coming now, if they were presented by another government, I doubt if they would reach page eight in the daily newspaper. The protests that broke out - and those who oppose them, ride on our hardest depth questions here.
And strangely, as I will try to show at the end of my words, this thing actually gives me optimism.
2. The loss of legitimacy of the other side.
If you have to put your finger on the breaking point, then in my opinion the issue is to move the messiah of dispute, as hard as it may be, to the talk of absolute illegitimacy on the other side. This has come to my mind already in the previous government when the right wing looted all the talks with the government even on handling important civil issues, and it continues now to force some of the leaders of the protest to zero talks no matter what.
And this is a disaster.
In the French Revolution there was a stage in which the victors of democracy that had begun, collapsed into themselves. It was when the next sentence was said by Robsphere:
"In France there are only two parties: the people and the enemies of the people. And we must destroy the miserable bastards who are always plotting against human rights... We must destroy all our enemies! ".
Democracy, is a field where people who share greatly about each other, engage in take-and-give relations. Some tug of war where there are more or less earnings, but for the most part, nobody takes the whole cash register. A balance is created in which even the loser keeps his rights and receives a significant portion of his wishes. This is what democracy is about.
But the moment the sides do not see the opponent as such that you can carry and give with him - but as a real enemy, with whom there is no cooperation to be done, and all of his resources and budgets must be drained, that is when democracy is broken.
3. Too much power to the small tribes.
As you know, the Israeli society is divided into tribes and streams. Correct balance that manages to see the need and uniqueness of each tribe - can make tribalism a great blessing. I've expanded it a lot before and I won't expand it now. The chaos begins when there is too much power for a few tribes that manage to manipulate the system far beyond their relative power.
And in recent years it's been getting more and more official.
The big parties are not willing to sit with each other and therefore they must rely one hundred percent on small parties that represent prominent streams, when every small party that leaves crushes the government. This is how every small party can demand high and sometimes crazy prices that are harmful to all sides. Yes on all sides.
And this phenomenon has only been increasing in recent years.
Why?
Exactly because of the previous clause- the non-compromising boycotts section.
For example: after the last elections and before the establishment of the government, I spoke with a good friend from the left. She told me that to her the fact that a man is going to be a minister is just a disaster. That's the end for her. I told her, but your leaders can solve it in less than a minute; demand them to stop with the boycotts and be ready to sit with the Likud, and immediately Netanyahu will take them in the place of Ben Gvir.
She looked at me with amazement:
To sit with Netanyahu? Never in a way !
She preferred that a government be formed that to her is a national disaster, and only not sit with Netanyahu (as Lenin said: the worse it is, the better). This case is not just a small story that really happened, it reflects the mentality of everything or nothing. Of priority to feel one hundred percent pure and right at the expense of the ability to make an exchange of compromise - like you do in a functioning democracy. The boycott of huge public - Pushed everyone to fortify themselves at the base. In the camps whose walls and wire fences are getting higher and higher every day.
4. Most get swept away by the edges.
On a personal level, I have very good friends from both camps. Every conversation with them shakes me: I can relate to the fear of anyone who feels that this government neglects its most basic Zionist, Jewish and humane values. I can relate to the amazement of those who ask themselves what their vote is even worth if the one who lost the election is willing to close the switch on everything-until he decides them.
The thing is that the polls show that most of the people want balance and dialogue. That the majority don't want to fortify themselves in Bastille with cannons. They have an opinion - but they are willing to give up a little - and ultimately gain much more.
But the tragedy is, that both camps are now run by those who talk about everything or nothing. On the total decision of the other side.
From the battle of the protesters and the opposition leaders - it seems that there is no stopping point. The impression received is that for many of them this is another opportunity to overthrow Netanyahu and all his associates to the boards. No compromise will help for them.
From the other side also in the coalition you can hear more and more noises of crushing the other side, grabbing the whole cash register, completely ignoring the pain and just pushing forward with all the power.
We are in an atmosphere where if someone from the left shows some signs of understanding to the elected - he is brutally run over by his friends. If someone on the right talks about softening - he is defined as weak and idiot at best or as a israel in the more advanced case.
In an atmosphere like this - the people you thought were more involved - just go silent. Like in a classroom where two goons drag everyone into violent power struggles even though most people would just want to kick those two goons out and sit for ten break.
5. What do I want to say here.
If I take everything I have assumed so far, it turns out that there is one central and practical root which is the first and basic development to get out of the crisis:
An immediate end to the boycott method.
I'm not only talking about those who voted for the central parties. I'm talking about people from all parties, who understand that the game here is not just fuck the other as you can, but a game where I will try to bring my positions without running over the other. You are also on the left, you are also on the right, as long as you support the exclusion of entire public from the Israeli story - you help push us all into the abyss we will not get out of.
Let's assume that tomorrow morning all the discussion of boycotts and insults, both from the brains and the members of the Knesset, stops. Like that, in a heartbeat. Note: I am not talking about a change of opinion. Nobody's opinions change. Everyone continues to hold his opinion; continue with a hard, burning, painful argument, but do not boycott any current.
What's going to happen then?
In the short term: a great chance to reach a compromise, even if temporarily. The beginning of the rehabilitation.
In the medium term: establishing a government in which there is a manifestation of more currents. It will not necessarily be a unity government - but what has been here for the absolute majority of the state's years: a left government or a right government that has expression on the other side, even if not all of it. Such a thing also allows a lot more people to see themselves as partners of the Israeli story, and also solves the problem of other power for the smaller tribes: they are very desirable in every government, but the moment they are not in its balance, they get what they deserve, with great joy. Nothing more, nothing less.
This point is important to me to emphasize because many will say - what the hell - I want a right-wing government on full swing! - I want a full left government!
Well history has shown that every time there has been left on full- or right on full, it has led to tragedy. Not specifically because of a specific policy - but because in such a government, immediately, there is no legitimacy for the processes it does, and then it is forced to do the processes with unbalanced force in order to still succeed in bringing achievements, which ends up, almost always, very bad.
I come to say, that whether you are on the right or on the left - a government where there are more votes: is in your interest. Again, or specifically a unity government, but as it has been here almost always - governments with a wider range of voices than just the right or just the left.
6. And the long-term profit from the immediate end of the boycott conversation?
Not as an advertisement, but two years ago his books "Brief History of Israeli" came out; it opened in a crisis that may reach the country in the 1970s, and ended in thinking towards a solution. Right now, how to say, things seem to be going according to the book...
And at the end of the day I'm optimistic, for the simple reason that this crisis must've happened sometime. It's a crisis from which all the demons and all the fears come out, and that's why it sucks, and hard, and ugly sometimes.
As an educator, I noticed an interesting phenomenon: Our cycles that have gone through some kind of crisis throughout the year, have come out much stronger and stronger over the years. And specifically cycles that had everything "ok" for them, disappeared quickly and almost didn't keep in touch.
This crisis touches on the most exposed nerves and asks the hardest questions:
What is Zionism? What have we come to do here in this country? What is our attitude to israel tradition? For the liberals ? What is our attitude to currents that think one hundred and eighty degrees than us?
This heated argument, filled with burning fire, could end in a total disintegration, and could end in a new construction.
I believe he will end up in a new construction. In tribes that understand the value of other tribes. In a society stronger, more united, more Jewish, more Israeli, more Zionist. It won't be happening tomorrow. Not in two years either. But my unfounded gut feeling, that in the 1980s - we would be in a much better place.
7. Rabbi Steiman RIP, one of the leaders of the ultra-Orthodox public once said:
"Boy I was old too, I've seen a lot in my life, I can testify, I've never seen someone lose cause they gave up"
If you've made it this far,
Not taken for granted.
Thank you.
You are invited to comment
Nothing but light and good
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Are these obstructions of justice and political interference with a presidential election ? You did not have to go to law school to answer? Are these blatant violations of a candidate's legitimate constitutional rights.
a) Justice Department prevents further investigation by those whose job is to investigate potential wrongdoings.
b) Is purposely delaying a legal investigation beyond the dictates of the statute of limits period obstruction?
c) Is leaking information against defendants wrong?
d) Is it unconstitutional to bring series of trials against a presidential candidate close to the time of their election so as to deprive said candidate his/her right to campaign?
e) Does a U.S president have the legal right to inquire of another country's president whether corruption is occurring that possibly impacts transactions between their two countries?
f) Does a presidential candidate, who has lost re-election in a state, have the right to ask the secretary of that state to find more votes in an election that is questionable? Particularly where this presidential candidate's has already experienced several failed impeachment efforts that have been investigated and failed?
g) Should political harassment that interferes with the legal rights of a nominee for office be allowed to stand?
+++
No comments:
Post a Comment