Israeli General Election (2019) II: Electric Boogaloo (17.9.2019)

[Zinneke]

Would a Zehut-New Right merger put off previous voters if either faction?

[Zinneke]

Would a Zehut-New Right merger put off previous voters if either faction?

Maybe a few of the edgy Zehut people who think that Bennet is too square and establishmentarian. And, on the other hand, a few of the more secular New Right voters who are creeped out by Zehut's Third-Templeism. But frankly the electoral benefit would far outweigh those marginal losses if they can get across the threshold (which I'm actually not sure is a given even running together).

Wait Zehut is non-secular?!

[Zinneke]

On top of the basic religious grip on our lives I assume what annoys the average secular is the fact that as time goes by they're more shameless. (though I fully think they're a bit of a straw boogeyman and the religious zionist are more dangerous).

Anyway yes, an election on religion and state is bad news for Likud

Would this be parties like Jewish Home/New Right/United Right correct? What's their stance on the theocratic model?

Also how do the religious parties justify backing somebody with questionable morals like Netenyahu? Do any of them back social justice/anti/corruption policies? I remember David posted a Shas advert where it was clearly aimed at the working poor and their real issues vs the secular middle class and their fake ones. Does that narrative still exist in religious parties.

[Zinneke]

thanks for your replies.

[Zinneke]

Aren't Meretz more of a party that advocates the strengthening and emancipation of Arabs and Palestinian identity within an Israeli (thus somewhat Jewish, although obviously secular) state context? Whereas the two others actively question the existence or necessity of a Jewish state and would favour one state solution? Or have policies changed?

sorry if this is phrased stupidly.

[Zinneke]

Aren't Meretz more of a party that advocates the strengthening and emancipation of Arabs and Palestinian identity within an Israeli (thus somewhat Jewish, although obviously secular) state context? Whereas the two others actively question the existence or necessity of a Jewish state and would favour one state solution? Or have policies changed?

sorry if this is phrased stupidly.

Meretz is a Zionist party and the Arab parties are not. That may seem like a massive gap, but in reality the difference in policy goals of each is negligible because who knows what it even means to be Zionist anymore.

Well if Zionism = Jewish self-determination then I think two state solution is the more obvious choice no? Whereas the one state solution just means a state where Jews can live and feel secure with their identity in but not have seperate political institutions as a Jewish demos (inevitably you probably trend towards a Lebanon-style compromise...but then one could argue the current Israeli state is also heavily fractionised).

[Zinneke]

Aren't Meretz more of a party that advocates the strengthening and emancipation of Arabs and Palestinian identity within an Israeli (thus somewhat Jewish, although obviously secular) state context? Whereas the two others actively question the existence or necessity of a Jewish state and would favour one state solution? Or have policies changed?

sorry if this is phrased stupidly.

Meretz is a Zionist party and the Arab parties are not. That may seem like a massive gap, but in reality the difference in policy goals of each is negligible because who knows what it even means to be Zionist anymore.

Well if Zionism = Jewish self-determination then I think two state solution is the more obvious choice no? Whereas the one state solution just means a state where Jews can live and feel secure with their identity in but not have seperate political institutions as a Jewish demos (inevitably you probably trend towards a Lebanon-style compromise...but then one could argue the current Israeli state is also heavily fractionised).

Those on the right who are pushing for a rapid expansion of the settlement enterprise in the West Bank in a way that makes a one state inevitable are doing so under the guise of Zionism ("Jews have a natural right of settlement in their historic homeland"). That's now a mainstream position on the to right and those who suggest evacuating settlements to create two states are widely considered anti-Zionistic.

The truth is that the right, left, and Arab public in Israel already realizes that there is going to be one state, even though nobody likes to talk about that openly and publicly because it's so volatile. That one state will either be Jewish or it will be democratic. The debate in Israel today is ostensibly over what that state will look like. When it comes to that question there is no daylight between Meretz and Hadash-Taal.

Very interesting, thanks. What about their stances on right to return? Do those differ?

EDIT : Also, do you not think its still possible to have a "two government" solution under a single state. A confederation as such? Like Meretz and the Israeli ionist Left may prefer that to One statism precisely because of One statism being a backdoor to allow the Israeli Right to antangonise Arabs and threaten Israeli security.

[Zinneke]

Which groups on the left would hate Shaffir?

[Zinneke]

Ben Caspit reports this morning that last week Netanyahu convened the security cabinet BEFORE consulting military officials because he wanted to launch a war in Gaza without the consultation amd  likely opposition of the military brass that could (and apparently did) prevent a war for votes.

It's perhaps hard for especially Americans to grasp what war looks and feels like here, because the US is always fighting in faraway places nobody ever will visit. Here you feel war. War in Gaza likely means missiles in Tel Aviv and a northern front with Hezbollah lobbing rockets at Haifa. To think that Netanyahu (allegedly) tried to bring that upon the country because he wanted to brandish his security credentials before an election is, uh, there are no words. The man is unfathomably dangerous not only to Israel but to the whole world.

How would you evaluate Israel's civil-military relations in general given the amount of, er, generals that end up running as political entrepreneurs (usually based on their security credentials). Is it still independent or are there various political factions within the military itself that translate into support for certain parties?

[Zinneke]

Ben Caspit reports this morning that last week Netanyahu convened the security cabinet BEFORE consulting military officials because he wanted to launch a war in Gaza without the consultation amd  likely opposition of the military brass that could (and apparently did) prevent a war for votes.

It's perhaps hard for especially Americans to grasp what war looks and feels like here, because the US is always fighting in faraway places nobody ever will visit. Here you feel war. War in Gaza likely means missiles in Tel Aviv and a northern front with Hezbollah lobbing rockets at Haifa. To think that Netanyahu (allegedly) tried to bring that upon the country because he wanted to brandish his security credentials before an election is, uh, there are no words. The man is unfathomably dangerous not only to Israel but to the whole world.

How would you evaluate Israel's civil-military relations in general given the amount of, er, generals that end up running as political entrepreneurs (usually based on their security credentials). Is it still independent or are there various political factions within the military itself that translate into support for certain parties?

The military leadership is an untouchable in Israel. Everyone loves and respects them except for the fringes. Because they are viewed as prudent, cautious, fair, etc. Thst sterling reputation is probably not totally deserved, but it is what it is. It also has a reputation for being broadly center left. Recently there has been an infusion of religious, messianist officers in the IDF, but they tend to hold lower ranking positions.

Would you say this is the initial political brand Gantz ran on?

[Zinneke]

https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/to-make-sure-pm-isnt-embarrassed-arabs-and-leftists-must-vote-in-droves/

Mickey Gitzin, a longtime left-wing activist and now head of the New Israel Fund’s Israel office, urges leftists and Arabs to vote, if only to avoid any embarrassment for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who has spent the day warning of an Arab and leftist run on the polls.

“To prevent the embarrassing situation where we discover, God forbid, that the prime minister is lying, dear Arabs and leftists, please vote in droves. This isn’t an endorsement of any side, only a real concern for the integrity of the institution of the prime minister.”

[Zinneke]

Why is it a stupid idea? The sooner Gantz can prove Netanyahu has no shot at forming the government, the sooner Gantz has a realistic shot at forming a unity government with a non-Netanyahu Likud.

Yes, I assume this is the aim. The problem? It requires putting his trust in Lieberman. Not good!

Liberman can join a Netanyahu-led minority government with the Haredim supporting it from the outside. Bibi gets his immunity bill, Liberman pushes more gently on secular issues, and the Haredim don't have to feel like they compromised on key issues. Everyone knows that this "crisis" is solely due to the corrupt and dictatorial Netanyahu seeking immunity for his serious crimes. On that issue Liberman likely does not care either way, and if Bibi wants immunity badly enough he will find a way to get it. He may even agree to resign once he gets immunity as a sweetener to any deal with Liberman.

How would he be able to so brazenly get away with this? Its insane.