You are massively downplaying the seriousness of Gallant's comments. He undermined the government's position on a matter of critical importance an the eve of an historic vote. Whether you agree with the governments position or not, this was an extreme act, especially as it was done when the PM was out of the country. In addition, Gallant legitimized and even encouraged insubordination in the army by saying that that was the reason he was calling for a delay. Would you compromise with your adversary in the face of threats from them? It would just encourage them to continue to threaten to get more concessions. The statements of the other ministers you mentioned were very inappropriate, but it was clear they spoke for themselves and did not undermine the government's position on a critical issue.
That's your response to my comment? Certainly not a main point. But the refusers are certainly not half the country. I looked up "Adversary" - "one's opponent in a contest, conflict, or dispute". Are the people for and against the reform not opponents in a dispute?
there's your flaw. A given Minister does not call a press conference, while his PM is out of the country, to announce personal opposition to A MAIN PLANK OF THE GOVERNMENT PLATFORM, PERHAPS ITS LEADING ONE. that's why it's substantively different from the 5 acts or outbursts that Rav Slifkin compared them to. and a Minister certainly doesn't do it when it's not directly in the scope of his Ministry. to whatever degree one believes the protests are compromising Security, the Defense Minister shows lack of discretion and military leadership to come out in such a way. it's not the same as if the Communications or Education Minister would say the same thing; he's undercutting the army itself. such opinions can be expressed only within the internal discussions of the government. that's how the internal rules of cohesion of governing a coalition work, and the rule is more stringent when it's within the party itself, and not just a coalition partner.
But there's more to it than that. Given his opinion, which can be morally admired, the only alternative is to resign. Gallant's speech is another example of a growing trend in public life, where people with public positions feel that they can do or say what they want, without the logical consequences. it's another way of acting like a child while demanding the responsibilities of an adult.
there is also the internal political aspect of his act, which some see as an assertion of political ambition vs Bibi.
Whatever is actually Gallant's true calculus, Bibi is totally justified in firing him. It was the only thing a PM can do once Gallant said what he said at such a press conference. Otherwise, we've got anarchy within the Likud, and in the gov't, not just out in the streets.
" A MAIN PLANK OF THE GOVERNMENT PLATFORM, PERHAPS ITS LEADING ONE. that's why it's substantively different from the 5 acts or outbursts that Rav Slifkin compared them to"
I would hope that before determining what the platform is made of, one would also consider who is standing on it.
"where people with public positions feel that they can do or say what they want, without the logical consequences."
What makes you think that Gallant didn't consider the possible consequence of being fired?
"it's another way of acting like a child "
Why single out just one member of the Knesset?
"Otherwise, we've got anarchy within the Likud, and in the gov't, not just out in the streets."
Ridiculous. There's no anarchy in the streets. And the most leftist of protesters who are in favor of an elitist clique running the court can't be considered to be anarchists. That's just name calling. Like calling all non-Bibist right winger leftists while at the same time enjoying the coalition support of leftists Deri & Gafni.
"A MAIN PLANK OF THE GOVERNMENT PLATFORM [emphasis original]"
Allow for an American equivalent. What would you say about an American president getting elected with vague promises to address the unaffordability of health care and then once elected proceeding to steamroller a single-payer option through Congress?
What do you say about a President who was elected as a normal mainstream leader with a lot of experience who adopts a radical left wing agenda, e.g. Joe Biden. That’s politics.
The science is becoming clear. The longer a person stays in a position of power the greater the decay in empathy, the less able to accept new information or believe he can be wrong, and the less willing to take responsibility for his actions. Bibi has been in power too long
In all seriousness, I feel like I’m missing something here. Why can’t a system of checks and balances like that of the United States be implemented in Israel? It has a successful track record spanning two and a half centuries. It is incomprehensible that the Judiciary should possess unbridled authority, allowing them to partake in self-selection and nullify laws without any prescribed criteria, but it is likewise unconscionable for them to be deprived of all influence, while the Legislature wields unchecked power with a simple majority override. Why then cannot a reform be introduced where the justices are chosen by the legislature, and where the judiciary can solely overrule laws that are considered "unconstitutional" (requiring the composition of a proper constitution), but the legislature can override the judiciary with a two-thirds majority, by passing an amendment to the constitution? To my mind, this seems like a glaringly obvious solution.
It is. But there are a number of problems with this.
1. People in power don’t want to give it up. The legal system has had unchecked power for 30 years, they have no interest in giving it up.
2. The left realizes that it has lost the demographic battle. So if democracy is restored they will lose their power. Until now even when they lose elections the Supreme Court overrides the government.
3. The charedim are very afraid of a constitution which grants rights because those most probably will clash with Halacha or the charedi lifestyle.
The charedim are not just afraid of a constitution. They don't give a damn. They do not relate to the State any more than a fact on the ground. They have no political ideology beyond expediency which is compromised of two fundamental principles: Give us the money & leave us alone.
The courts have not been consistently been anti-Charedi, though obviously the anti-exemption decision trumps any good the court has done for Charedim.
But a coalition, not compromising UTJ, and unchecked by the courts, will necessarily cause headaches for the Charedi community. It's a rule of history, that the Charedi parties can never make a correct important decision.
I believe that the first and second issues can be seen as interconnected. It appears that the Judiciary, and by extension the left, are reluctant to relinquish their seemingly unlimited power. If the Right is indeed willing to implement a system of checks and balances, yet the left still opposes it, then it is the left who may be seen as acting irresponsibly.
Regarding the third issue, it is important to consider whether the Charedi community will truly have an issue with it. It is not necessary to completely rebuild the country from scratch. Instead, the legislature could simply ratify whichever Basic Laws they deem appropriate as the Constitution. Currently, the country's constitution is based on a law passed by only 31 lawmakers who never intended the law to be the basic constitution and definitely did not understand the gravity of how far their law would be taken. This innovation of Aharon Barak was appropriate for a banana republic and is not a process that is seen in most democratic nations. As a bystander, I find it amusing that Barak considers himself to be so brilliant, whereas his move is quite glaringly nothing more than an old-fashioned, egregious, unsophisticated power grab, with shortsightedness rivalling the legally blind. However, although it is evident that the situation in which we find ourselves was initiated by Barak's own hubris, we must now deal with it in a responsible manner.
I am unfamiliar with the blow-to-blow coverage of the topic, but if ruling coalition is ready to negotiate and the left is unwilling to engage in productive dialogue and instead resorts to making threats such as not showing up for army service, divesting their investments, or moving out, then they may be viewed as the problem.
I hope you are right but I am afraid that the left after winning this battle will see no reason to compromise. It is patently obvious that the press is on the side of the left. So will they hold them accountable if they don’t negotiate or negotiate in bad faith? I am quite skeptical
Well Rabbi Slifkin, who seems to consume a lot of left-wing media, tried blaming the fact that the left refuses to negotiate on the coalition for not "pausing". Now what the heck is that supposed to mean?? Seems like a pre-canned blame-game talking point to me! I think Micah Goodman has the most fair, balanced take on this that I've seen.
I agree with his take. I think the current proposal by Levin goes too far but the reason why it does is because it’s a reaction to the jurocracy. The legal system has accumulated so much power that they are swinging the pendulum too far in the opposite direction
I'm totally with you. If I had to guess, you're American too. Despite all it's flaws, America has one of the most balanced democracies in the world. We take balanced democracy for granted, but perhaps you need to be American to realize how both sides of this argument are totally out of whack.
I'm missing something here. Why do they just make this or that obvious to me change to their constitutional order. After all, that is exactly what America did after it declared independence. The continental congress simply got together and the majority voted of the obviously right thing with no fuss at all. There were no false starts or conflicts and it was over in a day and the resulting constitution has been followed peacefully since that day. That's how it happened, right?
David, I must say, I am consistently astounded by your brilliant arguments. What do you do for a living? Plunge toilets? Please reread my comment. Did I ever say that it was easy creating the American constitution? America was one of the first real democracies and we needed to blaze the way. However, since then, almost every real democracy has adopted at least some form of checks and balances. See the Micah Goodman article that I linked to where he points this out. Israel is one of the only "democracies" that does not. No checks and balances. Both the Left and the Right are completely wrong in this instance, as every other democratic country in the world already knows. No need to try and reinvent the wheel here.
The Israeli political system is patterned in many ways after the UK. The UK has no written written constitution and in fact has no checks and balances. The courts in the UK have no real power of judicial review, parliament is completely sovereign. Until the 1990s, israel was pretty much the same. It was only after Baraks judicial revolution that the Supreme Court took unchecked power. The UK system works because of tradition and the nature of the British. Israel has neither.
In fact I do plunge my own drains and use a power auger in my sewer drain when needed. I quite admire people who do real work for a living. I appreciate you associating me with them.
That’s not how it happened. In 1781 the Articles of Confederation came into effect creating a very weak central government. It was only in 1787 when they saw that the articles were not working did they start drafting the current constitution. The US enjoyed relative peace after the revolutionary war and had no real external threats. They were also pretty rich with natural resources. Therefore they could devote the time and energy to create a working constitution. The state of Israel on the other hand was in a constant state of war and had to to deal with absorbing millions of poor immigrants. It didn’t have the luxury of taking the time and energy to create a constitution.
That is a terrible excuse. Legislation takes a long time. There is plenty of time between the first and second readings to negotiate and change things. To blackmail the government like this is as the article that I quoted said is non rule and the opposite of democracy.
Yup. There are three elements of the legislation package:
1) Override of court decisions by a minimum majority
2) Protecting the personal legal interests of two individuals
3) Reducing the influence of non-elected officials from the appointment process of court members
There's definitely room for compromise. But Lapid has nothing to offer. I cynically predict that any compromise acceptable to Bibi will water down #1 and #2, but retain #2 in full force.
Did they talk when they destroyed Jewish communities? The people demand change. Bibi is partly a leftist, he must deliver on his campaign promises. Down with the leftist bolsheviks!
They are when they are lawless and are meant to prevent the legitimately ejected government from governing. Refusing to serve in the army, pulling money out of the country etc. are not legitimate forms of protest. Elections are supposed to matter. There was an election in November and Bibi won and the left lost. So are you proposing that we ignore election’s and whoever screams the loudest shoujd din?
Integrity? Are you kidding? Here is what Lapid said a few years ago.
In a past address to the Kohelet Forum, opposition leader Yair Lapid set out a position on judicial activism completely aligned with Levin’s package. Indeed, Lapid’s remarks laid the foundations of the current reform.
In that speech, Lapid said, “I have opposed, and I still oppose, judicial activism of the sort introduced by [former Supreme Court President and the father of Israel’s judicial revolution] Justice Aharon Barak. I don’t think it is right that everything is justiciable. I don’t think it is right for the Supreme Court to change fundamental things in accordance with what it refers to as the judgment of ‘the reasonable person.’ That’s an amorphous and completely subjective definition that the Knesset never introduced to the legal code. It’s not right in my mind that the separation of powers, the sacrosanct foundation of the democratic method, should be breached by one branch of government placing itself above the others.”
Sigh.... The first points mentioned are par for the course for the Likud and don't directly contradict government policy. But a cabinet minister in any country must toe the line if he speaks out against government policy or not, whether or not his comment is correct. He knew he would be toast, Bibi had no choice but to dismiss him. He fell on his sword because as he stated in his tweet that for him the security of Israel is number one. He likely hopes that somehow his action, tog ether with the others (Edelstein, Amsalem ey al) will have an effect.
David, I don't know you or what you believe, but you seem not to have a grasp of what this is all about. It is a Kulturkampf over the soul of Klal Yisroel that has been waged from the day the British mandate over "Palestine" handed off management of Jewish affairs to the secular Zionist establishment after WWI. Zionism sought to transform Judaism from a Torah based lifestyle to a Western Culture lifestyle. The Zionists sought to relegate Torah Judaism into a mere commemoration of our ancient culture, much as "a living museum" just like other cultures dress up like their ancient progenitors on specific occasions and perform the song and dance from days of yore.
Torah Judaism believes living by Emuna in Hashem and the Mitzvos of the Torah is as germane today as it was when they were given on Mt. Sinai 3300 years ago. Due to numerous reasons, the Kulturkampf throughout the years sometimes flares up and sometimes goes dormant. The reason it has flared up now is because the remnant of the old Zionist views the ISC as the last hope of winning the Kulturkampf. After all, part of atheistic Western Culture is man lives only to fulfill his physical taavos and that includes not being encumbered with lots of children. Torah Judaism is the opposite. Thus when you have a Democracy, the popular vote is supposed to determine who sets the rules, in our case, the character of Israel. The old guard atheist Zionists, promoting abortion and small families are destroying their numbers. As a result, needing votes, they brought in goyim from Russia and Ethiopia to make up population in the State of people they believed would side with them in the Kulturkampf. But in the long run, BE"H they will fail. As the Kulturkampf continues, the forces of those who believe in and/or practice the Torah are getting stronger, and the opposing forces are getting desperate.
What I explained above is the correct understanding of why the Gedolei Yisroel have pushed so hard for no draft for Torah learners and women, and why the secular Zionists have pushed to draft them into their slavery. This has been the most seminal issue of the Kulturkampf.
Emasculating the ISC, is a great harbinger for the Geula!
You may ask, but Netanyahu and a lot of his friends are not Torah Jews? Isn't he doing this because it benefits him personally, politically? But they are from the 60-70% of Israelis who deep down believe in Hashem and that He gave us Eretz Yisroel. They know in their hearts that the Law and "culture" of the Jews is the Torah. Shelo Lshma Ba Lshma.
The Israel Declaration of Independence sought to omit the justification for declaring a state that Hashem gave us the Land. But in recent times, Danny Danon, UN rep of Israel got up in the UN, put on a kippa, took out a Tanach, held it up and stated, “This is our Title Deed to Eretz Yisroel!”
I oppose the judicial reform but I'm also going to disagree with you on this specific issue. Gallant came out against the stated position of the government on a core political issue, and firing him would be the standard response no matter who the PM is.
He is power hungry and needs the support of the extreme right and Haredim to survive- so who cares about the country. He also needs his court case to go away and so needs control of the court. He doesn’t care if he destroys the country in the process.
You are putting out a pshat without drash. In pshat Shaul did nothing really wrong and lost kingship. David in pshat transgressed quite a big sin and got MUCH less. There is depth behind everything. I'm not excusing or commenting on your examples but it doesn't add up to a compromise on a subject of LANDING BIBI IN JAIL, losing Deri and keeping the 9 absolutely left wing judges who are an anathema to Bibi's entire contingency. In USA 5-4 or 6-3 ratio is screamed about. In the past they never wanted any compromise and now they're paying for it. I am not exonerating anyone ( the general outlook is that the Bibi thing is ridiculous and Deri one has merit though that's not the issue) but it's not narcissistic to fight for your life as in Bibi's case.Deri is simply a fixture for many reasons and no one can change that. A compromise that keeps those 2 in and in general lessens the strength of the court but not fully is something the left would listen to? On three subjects the right winning by at least 2.33 to.66? This is why Gallant got fired, compromise has no real starting point.
He's part of the cabinet for crying out loud. Imagine a Secretary of Defense giving a press conference against a president's signature legislation he's trying to enact.
The whole cabinet leadership falls apart, everyone will feel free to undermine the leader if he doesn't take action.
It was an honorable sacrifice.
How can he publicly undermine the prime minister and anyone expect him to keep his job (his job is to communicate privately his concerns).
Of course he won't keep his job, and he knew it. Honorable it may have been, but let's not catastrophize.
Perhaps Bibi, a VERY savvy and ambitious politician, recognizes in Gallant another VERY savvy and ambitious politician, who's not merely offering advice as to what's best for the country, but looking towards his own ambitions (just as Bibi himself is)?
A) All politicians become corrupted the longer they in the government. This is about as certain as gravity.
B) "Say about a country with which Israel just made peace that you don’t like it and would never go back there" - Is the reference to UAE, the fickle "friend." which is voicing its displeasure to Israel
's policies by threatening to downgrade relations?
C) "Call on the IDF to wipe out an entire village" - An apology and explanation has already been issue for this, one that perhaps should not have been issued. And this was before the ARabs of Huwara tried to murder another Jew, David Stern.
And I'm convinced that you (and many others who hate R' Slifkin) continue to read this blog and comment upon it simply because you're bored, angry, and have no life.
If you mean that which was written by צבי, it's indicative of how the comment section here is more and more being hijacked by bored and angry people looking for an outlet to fill the emptiness in their lives. Some of them hate Slifkin and some hate Orthodox Judaism.
Neither group has anything to say that contributes to the conversation and both groups should be blocked from posting here.
Do you know how to say anything besides "Slifkin won this round"?? Seriously, I think that has been the upshot of the last ten comments you made on this site. 'I'm not on Sllifkin's team, but I think he won this round'. You've even made these comments when Slifkin wasn't even making an argument, like in last post, or when he made a fool out of himself, like in the Torah protecting posts. You are a serious troll. Do you even bother reading his posts and the comments?? Does Slifkin pay you to say that by any chance?
Calling Slifkin a secret atheist, an ignoramus who doesn't know how to learn or a leftist instead of engaging in a substantive discussion or just not commenting gives the win to him. This is very simple, mates. Slifkin is an eccentric person and you have to take his posts accordingly. I'm here because I find his evolution interesting to watch and I sympathize with his predicament. The poor chap is hittimg a new bottom with almost every post. He deserves rahmonus, not venom.
In an attempt to get closer to the truth there is more than scoring on the people one disagrees with. The proposition can be a starting point for discussion, an endpoint for declaring loyalty or something else entirely.
Or, since we're mostly yidden, it can be an opportunity for our traditional ethnic sport, spirited argument where the interaction is the fun. Or as my best Gentile friend puts it "That's your people and how you entertain yourselves."
Disgusting leftist Slifkin. Your hatred of the Haredim knows no bounds. You want to support the leftist dictatorship that controlled and controls Israel. What "democracy"? Is that? Galant is a leftist that only destroyed Jewish community in Gust Katif and elsewhere. Nothibf Jewish about him and his ilk.
Dude, you wouldn't recognize an actual "Leftist" if one bit you on the tuchis. It's just an all-purpose bombastic hate word you use for anyone who isn't just like you. Same as the Nazis and Christofascists in the US . Different flavor, same pathology.
You are massively downplaying the seriousness of Gallant's comments. He undermined the government's position on a matter of critical importance an the eve of an historic vote. Whether you agree with the governments position or not, this was an extreme act, especially as it was done when the PM was out of the country. In addition, Gallant legitimized and even encouraged insubordination in the army by saying that that was the reason he was calling for a delay. Would you compromise with your adversary in the face of threats from them? It would just encourage them to continue to threaten to get more concessions. The statements of the other ministers you mentioned were very inappropriate, but it was clear they spoke for themselves and did not undermine the government's position on a critical issue.
So half of Israel is the "adversary"?!
That's your response to my comment? Certainly not a main point. But the refusers are certainly not half the country. I looked up "Adversary" - "one's opponent in a contest, conflict, or dispute". Are the people for and against the reform not opponents in a dispute?
That we Jews tend to be our worst enemies? That's a yes. With plentiful historical evidence.
Gallant was part of the government - it would seem that expressing his opinion on a matter which is his responsibility is not just fine, but expected.
there's your flaw. A given Minister does not call a press conference, while his PM is out of the country, to announce personal opposition to A MAIN PLANK OF THE GOVERNMENT PLATFORM, PERHAPS ITS LEADING ONE. that's why it's substantively different from the 5 acts or outbursts that Rav Slifkin compared them to. and a Minister certainly doesn't do it when it's not directly in the scope of his Ministry. to whatever degree one believes the protests are compromising Security, the Defense Minister shows lack of discretion and military leadership to come out in such a way. it's not the same as if the Communications or Education Minister would say the same thing; he's undercutting the army itself. such opinions can be expressed only within the internal discussions of the government. that's how the internal rules of cohesion of governing a coalition work, and the rule is more stringent when it's within the party itself, and not just a coalition partner.
But there's more to it than that. Given his opinion, which can be morally admired, the only alternative is to resign. Gallant's speech is another example of a growing trend in public life, where people with public positions feel that they can do or say what they want, without the logical consequences. it's another way of acting like a child while demanding the responsibilities of an adult.
there is also the internal political aspect of his act, which some see as an assertion of political ambition vs Bibi.
Whatever is actually Gallant's true calculus, Bibi is totally justified in firing him. It was the only thing a PM can do once Gallant said what he said at such a press conference. Otherwise, we've got anarchy within the Likud, and in the gov't, not just out in the streets.
" A MAIN PLANK OF THE GOVERNMENT PLATFORM, PERHAPS ITS LEADING ONE. that's why it's substantively different from the 5 acts or outbursts that Rav Slifkin compared them to"
I would hope that before determining what the platform is made of, one would also consider who is standing on it.
"where people with public positions feel that they can do or say what they want, without the logical consequences."
What makes you think that Gallant didn't consider the possible consequence of being fired?
"it's another way of acting like a child "
Why single out just one member of the Knesset?
"Otherwise, we've got anarchy within the Likud, and in the gov't, not just out in the streets."
Ridiculous. There's no anarchy in the streets. And the most leftist of protesters who are in favor of an elitist clique running the court can't be considered to be anarchists. That's just name calling. Like calling all non-Bibist right winger leftists while at the same time enjoying the coalition support of leftists Deri & Gafni.
It wasn't a main plank of the platform.
An excellent reply. I'm afraid I totally disagree with Rabbi Slifkin on this item.
"A MAIN PLANK OF THE GOVERNMENT PLATFORM [emphasis original]"
Allow for an American equivalent. What would you say about an American president getting elected with vague promises to address the unaffordability of health care and then once elected proceeding to steamroller a single-payer option through Congress?
What do you say about a President who was elected as a normal mainstream leader with a lot of experience who adopts a radical left wing agenda, e.g. Joe Biden. That’s politics.
The science is becoming clear. The longer a person stays in a position of power the greater the decay in empathy, the less able to accept new information or believe he can be wrong, and the less willing to take responsibility for his actions. Bibi has been in power too long
Perfectly stated.
Perfect naarishkeit.
In all seriousness, I feel like I’m missing something here. Why can’t a system of checks and balances like that of the United States be implemented in Israel? It has a successful track record spanning two and a half centuries. It is incomprehensible that the Judiciary should possess unbridled authority, allowing them to partake in self-selection and nullify laws without any prescribed criteria, but it is likewise unconscionable for them to be deprived of all influence, while the Legislature wields unchecked power with a simple majority override. Why then cannot a reform be introduced where the justices are chosen by the legislature, and where the judiciary can solely overrule laws that are considered "unconstitutional" (requiring the composition of a proper constitution), but the legislature can override the judiciary with a two-thirds majority, by passing an amendment to the constitution? To my mind, this seems like a glaringly obvious solution.
It is. But there are a number of problems with this.
1. People in power don’t want to give it up. The legal system has had unchecked power for 30 years, they have no interest in giving it up.
2. The left realizes that it has lost the demographic battle. So if democracy is restored they will lose their power. Until now even when they lose elections the Supreme Court overrides the government.
3. The charedim are very afraid of a constitution which grants rights because those most probably will clash with Halacha or the charedi lifestyle.
The charedim are not just afraid of a constitution. They don't give a damn. They do not relate to the State any more than a fact on the ground. They have no political ideology beyond expediency which is compromised of two fundamental principles: Give us the money & leave us alone.
The courts have not been consistently been anti-Charedi, though obviously the anti-exemption decision trumps any good the court has done for Charedim.
But a coalition, not compromising UTJ, and unchecked by the courts, will necessarily cause headaches for the Charedi community. It's a rule of history, that the Charedi parties can never make a correct important decision.
I believe that the first and second issues can be seen as interconnected. It appears that the Judiciary, and by extension the left, are reluctant to relinquish their seemingly unlimited power. If the Right is indeed willing to implement a system of checks and balances, yet the left still opposes it, then it is the left who may be seen as acting irresponsibly.
Regarding the third issue, it is important to consider whether the Charedi community will truly have an issue with it. It is not necessary to completely rebuild the country from scratch. Instead, the legislature could simply ratify whichever Basic Laws they deem appropriate as the Constitution. Currently, the country's constitution is based on a law passed by only 31 lawmakers who never intended the law to be the basic constitution and definitely did not understand the gravity of how far their law would be taken. This innovation of Aharon Barak was appropriate for a banana republic and is not a process that is seen in most democratic nations. As a bystander, I find it amusing that Barak considers himself to be so brilliant, whereas his move is quite glaringly nothing more than an old-fashioned, egregious, unsophisticated power grab, with shortsightedness rivalling the legally blind. However, although it is evident that the situation in which we find ourselves was initiated by Barak's own hubris, we must now deal with it in a responsible manner.
I am unfamiliar with the blow-to-blow coverage of the topic, but if ruling coalition is ready to negotiate and the left is unwilling to engage in productive dialogue and instead resorts to making threats such as not showing up for army service, divesting their investments, or moving out, then they may be viewed as the problem.
I hope you are right but I am afraid that the left after winning this battle will see no reason to compromise. It is patently obvious that the press is on the side of the left. So will they hold them accountable if they don’t negotiate or negotiate in bad faith? I am quite skeptical
Well Rabbi Slifkin, who seems to consume a lot of left-wing media, tried blaming the fact that the left refuses to negotiate on the coalition for not "pausing". Now what the heck is that supposed to mean?? Seems like a pre-canned blame-game talking point to me! I think Micah Goodman has the most fair, balanced take on this that I've seen.
https://www.timesofisrael.com/what-matters-now-to-philosopher-micah-goodman-preventing-civil-war/
I agree with his take. I think the current proposal by Levin goes too far but the reason why it does is because it’s a reaction to the jurocracy. The legal system has accumulated so much power that they are swinging the pendulum too far in the opposite direction
I'm totally with you. If I had to guess, you're American too. Despite all it's flaws, America has one of the most balanced democracies in the world. We take balanced democracy for granted, but perhaps you need to be American to realize how both sides of this argument are totally out of whack.
I'm missing something here. Why do they just make this or that obvious to me change to their constitutional order. After all, that is exactly what America did after it declared independence. The continental congress simply got together and the majority voted of the obviously right thing with no fuss at all. There were no false starts or conflicts and it was over in a day and the resulting constitution has been followed peacefully since that day. That's how it happened, right?
David, I must say, I am consistently astounded by your brilliant arguments. What do you do for a living? Plunge toilets? Please reread my comment. Did I ever say that it was easy creating the American constitution? America was one of the first real democracies and we needed to blaze the way. However, since then, almost every real democracy has adopted at least some form of checks and balances. See the Micah Goodman article that I linked to where he points this out. Israel is one of the only "democracies" that does not. No checks and balances. Both the Left and the Right are completely wrong in this instance, as every other democratic country in the world already knows. No need to try and reinvent the wheel here.
The Israeli political system is patterned in many ways after the UK. The UK has no written written constitution and in fact has no checks and balances. The courts in the UK have no real power of judicial review, parliament is completely sovereign. Until the 1990s, israel was pretty much the same. It was only after Baraks judicial revolution that the Supreme Court took unchecked power. The UK system works because of tradition and the nature of the British. Israel has neither.
In fact I do plunge my own drains and use a power auger in my sewer drain when needed. I quite admire people who do real work for a living. I appreciate you associating me with them.
That’s not how it happened. In 1781 the Articles of Confederation came into effect creating a very weak central government. It was only in 1787 when they saw that the articles were not working did they start drafting the current constitution. The US enjoyed relative peace after the revolutionary war and had no real external threats. They were also pretty rich with natural resources. Therefore they could devote the time and energy to create a working constitution. The state of Israel on the other hand was in a constant state of war and had to to deal with absorbing millions of poor immigrants. It didn’t have the luxury of taking the time and energy to create a constitution.
Reread understanding that this was my rejoinder to LOL and his "why don't we just do this simple thing like America did".
Got it. I am quite tired and missed the context.
This is so off. What compromise can you make when the other side won’t even talk? This is simply an attempt at a coup and mob rule. https://www.jewishpress.com/indepth/columns/into-the-fray-martin-sherman/into-the-fray-obviating-elections/2023/03/26/
If he pauses, they will talk.
That is a terrible excuse. Legislation takes a long time. There is plenty of time between the first and second readings to negotiate and change things. To blackmail the government like this is as the article that I quoted said is non rule and the opposite of democracy.
Yup. There are three elements of the legislation package:
1) Override of court decisions by a minimum majority
2) Protecting the personal legal interests of two individuals
3) Reducing the influence of non-elected officials from the appointment process of court members
There's definitely room for compromise. But Lapid has nothing to offer. I cynically predict that any compromise acceptable to Bibi will water down #1 and #2, but retain #2 in full force.
Did they talk when they destroyed Jewish communities? The people demand change. Bibi is partly a leftist, he must deliver on his campaign promises. Down with the leftist bolsheviks!
Bibi is no more a "leftist" than Orban, whom he strongly resembles, is. And Organ is an actual by-the-book fascist
Another fine example of words like "fascist" and "Nazi" being thrown around without actual understanding of the term.
I have a very good understanding of their historical and technical meanings, thank you very much
Protests are "mob rule"?
The serfs need to sit down, shut up, and do what the Big Man tells them?
That's closer to Stalin and Hitler than Jews should be happy with
They are when they are lawless and are meant to prevent the legitimately ejected government from governing. Refusing to serve in the army, pulling money out of the country etc. are not legitimate forms of protest. Elections are supposed to matter. There was an election in November and Bibi won and the left lost. So are you proposing that we ignore election’s and whoever screams the loudest shoujd din?
Lapid is a man of integrity, not intelligence. With the toxic synergy of those two traits, why would we expect him to compromise?
Integrity? Are you kidding? Here is what Lapid said a few years ago.
In a past address to the Kohelet Forum, opposition leader Yair Lapid set out a position on judicial activism completely aligned with Levin’s package. Indeed, Lapid’s remarks laid the foundations of the current reform.
In that speech, Lapid said, “I have opposed, and I still oppose, judicial activism of the sort introduced by [former Supreme Court President and the father of Israel’s judicial revolution] Justice Aharon Barak. I don’t think it is right that everything is justiciable. I don’t think it is right for the Supreme Court to change fundamental things in accordance with what it refers to as the judgment of ‘the reasonable person.’ That’s an amorphous and completely subjective definition that the Knesset never introduced to the legal code. It’s not right in my mind that the separation of powers, the sacrosanct foundation of the democratic method, should be breached by one branch of government placing itself above the others.”
https://www.jns.org/opinion/its-not-about-democracy/
Opposing radical judicial activism and advocating the override clause are different things.
Check this out. A balanced, nuanced take on the judiciary reforms without any of the reactionary garbage.
https://www.timesofisrael.com/what-matters-now-to-philosopher-micah-goodman-preventing-civil-war/
Sigh.... The first points mentioned are par for the course for the Likud and don't directly contradict government policy. But a cabinet minister in any country must toe the line if he speaks out against government policy or not, whether or not his comment is correct. He knew he would be toast, Bibi had no choice but to dismiss him. He fell on his sword because as he stated in his tweet that for him the security of Israel is number one. He likely hopes that somehow his action, tog ether with the others (Edelstein, Amsalem ey al) will have an effect.
David, I don't know you or what you believe, but you seem not to have a grasp of what this is all about. It is a Kulturkampf over the soul of Klal Yisroel that has been waged from the day the British mandate over "Palestine" handed off management of Jewish affairs to the secular Zionist establishment after WWI. Zionism sought to transform Judaism from a Torah based lifestyle to a Western Culture lifestyle. The Zionists sought to relegate Torah Judaism into a mere commemoration of our ancient culture, much as "a living museum" just like other cultures dress up like their ancient progenitors on specific occasions and perform the song and dance from days of yore.
Torah Judaism believes living by Emuna in Hashem and the Mitzvos of the Torah is as germane today as it was when they were given on Mt. Sinai 3300 years ago. Due to numerous reasons, the Kulturkampf throughout the years sometimes flares up and sometimes goes dormant. The reason it has flared up now is because the remnant of the old Zionist views the ISC as the last hope of winning the Kulturkampf. After all, part of atheistic Western Culture is man lives only to fulfill his physical taavos and that includes not being encumbered with lots of children. Torah Judaism is the opposite. Thus when you have a Democracy, the popular vote is supposed to determine who sets the rules, in our case, the character of Israel. The old guard atheist Zionists, promoting abortion and small families are destroying their numbers. As a result, needing votes, they brought in goyim from Russia and Ethiopia to make up population in the State of people they believed would side with them in the Kulturkampf. But in the long run, BE"H they will fail. As the Kulturkampf continues, the forces of those who believe in and/or practice the Torah are getting stronger, and the opposing forces are getting desperate.
What I explained above is the correct understanding of why the Gedolei Yisroel have pushed so hard for no draft for Torah learners and women, and why the secular Zionists have pushed to draft them into their slavery. This has been the most seminal issue of the Kulturkampf.
Emasculating the ISC, is a great harbinger for the Geula!
You may ask, but Netanyahu and a lot of his friends are not Torah Jews? Isn't he doing this because it benefits him personally, politically? But they are from the 60-70% of Israelis who deep down believe in Hashem and that He gave us Eretz Yisroel. They know in their hearts that the Law and "culture" of the Jews is the Torah. Shelo Lshma Ba Lshma.
The Israel Declaration of Independence sought to omit the justification for declaring a state that Hashem gave us the Land. But in recent times, Danny Danon, UN rep of Israel got up in the UN, put on a kippa, took out a Tanach, held it up and stated, “This is our Title Deed to Eretz Yisroel!”
I oppose the judicial reform but I'm also going to disagree with you on this specific issue. Gallant came out against the stated position of the government on a core political issue, and firing him would be the standard response no matter who the PM is.
He is power hungry and needs the support of the extreme right and Haredim to survive- so who cares about the country. He also needs his court case to go away and so needs control of the court. He doesn’t care if he destroys the country in the process.
You are putting out a pshat without drash. In pshat Shaul did nothing really wrong and lost kingship. David in pshat transgressed quite a big sin and got MUCH less. There is depth behind everything. I'm not excusing or commenting on your examples but it doesn't add up to a compromise on a subject of LANDING BIBI IN JAIL, losing Deri and keeping the 9 absolutely left wing judges who are an anathema to Bibi's entire contingency. In USA 5-4 or 6-3 ratio is screamed about. In the past they never wanted any compromise and now they're paying for it. I am not exonerating anyone ( the general outlook is that the Bibi thing is ridiculous and Deri one has merit though that's not the issue) but it's not narcissistic to fight for your life as in Bibi's case.Deri is simply a fixture for many reasons and no one can change that. A compromise that keeps those 2 in and in general lessens the strength of the court but not fully is something the left would listen to? On three subjects the right winning by at least 2.33 to.66? This is why Gallant got fired, compromise has no real starting point.
He's part of the cabinet for crying out loud. Imagine a Secretary of Defense giving a press conference against a president's signature legislation he's trying to enact.
The whole cabinet leadership falls apart, everyone will feel free to undermine the leader if he doesn't take action.
It was an honorable sacrifice.
How can he publicly undermine the prime minister and anyone expect him to keep his job (his job is to communicate privately his concerns).
Of course he won't keep his job, and he knew it. Honorable it may have been, but let's not catastrophize.
Perhaps Bibi, a VERY savvy and ambitious politician, recognizes in Gallant another VERY savvy and ambitious politician, who's not merely offering advice as to what's best for the country, but looking towards his own ambitions (just as Bibi himself is)?
A) All politicians become corrupted the longer they in the government. This is about as certain as gravity.
B) "Say about a country with which Israel just made peace that you don’t like it and would never go back there" - Is the reference to UAE, the fickle "friend." which is voicing its displeasure to Israel
's policies by threatening to downgrade relations?
C) "Call on the IDF to wipe out an entire village" - An apology and explanation has already been issue for this, one that perhaps should not have been issued. And this was before the ARabs of Huwara tried to murder another Jew, David Stern.
I'm convinced Slifkin is a secret athiest.
And I'm convinced that you (and many others who hate R' Slifkin) continue to read this blog and comment upon it simply because you're bored, angry, and have no life.
And that is relevant to this post in what way?
If you mean that which was written by צבי, it's indicative of how the comment section here is more and more being hijacked by bored and angry people looking for an outlet to fill the emptiness in their lives. Some of them hate Slifkin and some hate Orthodox Judaism.
Neither group has anything to say that contributes to the conversation and both groups should be blocked from posting here.
Comments like this are going to give this round to Slifkin again.
@Yakov
Do you know how to say anything besides "Slifkin won this round"?? Seriously, I think that has been the upshot of the last ten comments you made on this site. 'I'm not on Sllifkin's team, but I think he won this round'. You've even made these comments when Slifkin wasn't even making an argument, like in last post, or when he made a fool out of himself, like in the Torah protecting posts. You are a serious troll. Do you even bother reading his posts and the comments?? Does Slifkin pay you to say that by any chance?
Raa! I'm gonna eat you!
Calling Slifkin a secret atheist, an ignoramus who doesn't know how to learn or a leftist instead of engaging in a substantive discussion or just not commenting gives the win to him. This is very simple, mates. Slifkin is an eccentric person and you have to take his posts accordingly. I'm here because I find his evolution interesting to watch and I sympathize with his predicament. The poor chap is hittimg a new bottom with almost every post. He deserves rahmonus, not venom.
In an attempt to get closer to the truth there is more than scoring on the people one disagrees with. The proposition can be a starting point for discussion, an endpoint for declaring loyalty or something else entirely.
Or, since we're mostly yidden, it can be an opportunity for our traditional ethnic sport, spirited argument where the interaction is the fun. Or as my best Gentile friend puts it "That's your people and how you entertain yourselves."
Disgusting leftist Slifkin. Your hatred of the Haredim knows no bounds. You want to support the leftist dictatorship that controlled and controls Israel. What "democracy"? Is that? Galant is a leftist that only destroyed Jewish community in Gust Katif and elsewhere. Nothibf Jewish about him and his ilk.
Time for the leftist regime to go.
Dude, you wouldn't recognize an actual "Leftist" if one bit you on the tuchis. It's just an all-purpose bombastic hate word you use for anyone who isn't just like you. Same as the Nazis and Christofascists in the US . Different flavor, same pathology.
With opponents like this Slifkin is going to win this round. Mates, come to your senses and comment on the issue.
You’re quite the little angry incel. Aren’t you…?
Can we have some retractions now from those who claimed that Netanyahu had no choice but to fire Gallant for his comments? https://www.timesofisrael.com/netanyahu-reinstates-gallant-blames-previous-government-for-current-wave-of-attacks/