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

[Walmart_shopper]

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.

[America Needs R'hllor]

At least Ehud Barak has demonstrated an relatively healthy understanding of the concept of "opposition." Compared to Buji Herzog and Avi Gabbay, Barak comes across as a passionate and eminently competent genius. That obviously reflects more on the ideological poverty of the Labor Party than on Barak, but he's at least a step in the right direction. The left in Israel is so shell-shocked they seem no longer able to grasp, let alone articulate, the values of pluralism, democracy, equality, etc. So they keep pushing for cooperation with the egregious offenders of those values and preen an absurd "centrism." Halas. If Barak can at least stop that drift I'll be grateful.

In what way? Barak was by far the worst Labour leader in that respect. He didn't just join Netanyahu's government, he did it after explicitly promising not to, and ended up leaving the party just so that he could remain in it.

Yep. He has literally no appeal- he's a rich elitist who acted only for his own interests as a politician. There's no reason he should be given any leadership, he should just stay out. If Labour wants a chance at an ideological revival, it lies, imo, in people like Shaffir.

Shaffir would be my pick, too. But is there anything, when considering the last, say, five, Labor leaders that makes you think that Labor will choose her and not some excruciatingly establishment figure? Labor can be counted on to almost reflexively do the wrong thing politically.

I mean, last time, voters chose Gabbay. For better or worse, he wasn't the establishment figure, that was Peretz. Sure, I wouldn't bet on Shaffir, but if I had to guess, the winner in an open election (rather than one in the party convention) will be Shmuli or some former General.

[Walmart_shopper]

At least Ehud Barak has demonstrated an relatively healthy understanding of the concept of "opposition." Compared to Buji Herzog and Avi Gabbay, Barak comes across as a passionate and eminently competent genius. That obviously reflects more on the ideological poverty of the Labor Party than on Barak, but he's at least a step in the right direction. The left in Israel is so shell-shocked they seem no longer able to grasp, let alone articulate, the values of pluralism, democracy, equality, etc. So they keep pushing for cooperation with the egregious offenders of those values and preen an absurd "centrism." Halas. If Barak can at least stop that drift I'll be grateful.

In what way? Barak was by far the worst Labour leader in that respect. He didn't just join Netanyahu's government, he did it after explicitly promising not to, and ended up leaving the party just so that he could remain in it.

Yep. He has literally no appeal- he's a rich elitist who acted only for his own interests as a politician. There's no reason he should be given any leadership, he should just stay out. If Labour wants a chance at an ideological revival, it lies, imo, in people like Shaffir.

Shaffir would be my pick, too. But is there anything, when considering the last, say, five, Labor leaders that makes you think that Labor will choose her and not some excruciatingly establishment figure? Labor can be counted on to almost reflexively do the wrong thing politically.

I mean, last time, voters chose Gabbay. For better or worse, he wasn't the establishment figure, that was Peretz. Sure, I wouldn't bet on Shaffir, but if I had to guess, the winner in an open election (rather than one in the party convention) will be Shmuli or some former General.

Avi Gabbay was proof to me that the Labor Party has ceased to function in Israeli politics in any meaningful way.  He is literally a rich, corporate right winger who was a minister in the last Bibi government who didn't even pretend to see the light. He just saw an opening in Labor for more power and influence and understandably took that opportunity. Labor voters chose him anyway simply because he was new and not Ashkenazi. Frankly, a party that morbid should feel very lucky to have six mandates because they very likely deserve zero. I get the Barak-hatred on the left. But Labor people have no right to clutch pearls when Avi Gabbay and Amir Peretz are the best they can come up with.

[America Needs R'hllor]

At least Ehud Barak has demonstrated an relatively healthy understanding of the concept of "opposition." Compared to Buji Herzog and Avi Gabbay, Barak comes across as a passionate and eminently competent genius. That obviously reflects more on the ideological poverty of the Labor Party than on Barak, but he's at least a step in the right direction. The left in Israel is so shell-shocked they seem no longer able to grasp, let alone articulate, the values of pluralism, democracy, equality, etc. So they keep pushing for cooperation with the egregious offenders of those values and preen an absurd "centrism." Halas. If Barak can at least stop that drift I'll be grateful.

In what way? Barak was by far the worst Labour leader in that respect. He didn't just join Netanyahu's government, he did it after explicitly promising not to, and ended up leaving the party just so that he could remain in it.

Yep. He has literally no appeal- he's a rich elitist who acted only for his own interests as a politician. There's no reason he should be given any leadership, he should just stay out. If Labour wants a chance at an ideological revival, it lies, imo, in people like Shaffir.

Shaffir would be my pick, too. But is there anything, when considering the last, say, five, Labor leaders that makes you think that Labor will choose her and not some excruciatingly establishment figure? Labor can be counted on to almost reflexively do the wrong thing politically.

I mean, last time, voters chose Gabbay. For better or worse, he wasn't the establishment figure, that was Peretz. Sure, I wouldn't bet on Shaffir, but if I had to guess, the winner in an open election (rather than one in the party convention) will be Shmuli or some former General.

Avi Gabbay was proof to me that the Labor Party has ceased to function in Israeli politics in any meaningful way.  He is literally a rich, corporate right winger who was a minister in the last Bibi government who didn't even pretend to see the light. He just saw an opening in Labor for more power and influence and understandably took that opportunity. Labor voters chose him anyway simply because he was new and not Ashkenazi. Frankly, a party that morbid should feel very lucky to have six mandates because they very likely deserve zero. I get the Barak-hatred on the left. But Labor people have no right to clutch pearls when Avi Gabbay and Amir Peretz are the best they can come up with.

In the first round I voted for Erel Margalit, who I still believe was the best choice. In the second, I confess, I chose Gabbay. Peretz was an old face that smelled of the old Labour corruption, and I decided to take the chance. Sure, in hindsight it was easy to see he'd fail, but I can't fault Labour voters for wanting something new. That said, you're right- the party is in a very sorry state and the infighting people like Gabbay, Peretz and Yachimovich have been engaging in is stupid.

[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).

[Walmart_shopper]

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.

[xelas81]

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.

Does the one state solution includes Gaza? I maybe wrong but I don't think anyone is advocating building settlements in Gaza, so it will remain Arab.

[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.

[ilikeverin]

I feel very Atlas-old, but I don't remember having such a deluge of Israeli posters.  Thank you so much, folks! Your insights and thoughts are very revealing. Given the insanely fast-moving nature of Israeli politics, it's so hard keeping track of the people and the parties getting things done, so I appreciate your expertise.

[America Needs R'hllor]

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.

It's interesting, actually- there's an argument to be made that Labour and Meretz are the only parties currently still focusing on two states. If Meretz does that, Labour will become the only one.

[Walmart_shopper]

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.

Does the one state solution includes Gaza? I maybe wrong but I don't think anyone is advocating building settlements in Gaza, so it will remain Arab.

I think pretty much everyone is desperate for Egypt to just seize control of the place and establish some order to it. Even on the right very few want to touch the place, although I'm sure some of the settlers who were evacuated during the disengagement have nostalgia about going back. But because there are a lot of settlements in the West Bank and no settlements in Gaza it's really the West Bank that we are talking about. It's notable, though, that with Gaza there is an Arab majority between the Jordan and the sea, while without it there is a slightly larger Jewish population.

[Walmart_shopper]

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.

Bennet has talked about a confederation for a very long time and almost everyone thinks it's a joke, although on the right there are a small number who take him seriously and think it's a really creative and edgy solution. The problem is that it fails to adequately address the same questions that haunt the situation now (right of settlement, land borders, port access, right of return, constitution, etc.). It's a band-aid on a gunshot wound.

My opinion is that there are realistically three options. A democratic state. A Jewish ethno-state that hopes that its military and economic resources prevent political pressure that South Africa went through due to apartheid. Or the third option is a radical sectioning of the country between ultra-Orthodox, secular Jews, and Arabs, which is a lot like confederation but less centralized and by dividing the Jewish population it prevents Jews from having too much political control (and keeps the growing Arab population from having control over the Jewish sections). It's far-fetched, but realistically an ethno-state or a democratic one likewise seem virtually implausible without cataclysmic results.

Israel is actually more like a weird melange of tribes, none of them constituting more than 20 percent of the population. Looking at it as a merely Jewish/Arab dichotomy is wrong. That's why a Meretz-Arab merger makes a lot of sense. Yesh Atid would be there, too, if it wasn't politically suicidal for them. It's not two states for two peoples because, lame bromides about Jewish unity aside, it's not two peoples. It's like four or five peoples, who share virtually nothing in common. Trying to pieces together a state out of that is immeasurable difficult. Hence why our politics are such a profound mess. It's only going to get worse.

[Former President tack50]

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.

Does the one state solution includes Gaza? I maybe wrong but I don't think anyone is advocating building settlements in Gaza, so it will remain Arab.

I think pretty much everyone is desperate for Egypt to just seize control of the place and establish some order to it. Even on the right very few want to touch the place, although I'm sure some of the settlers who were evacuated during the disengagement have nostalgia about going back. But because there are a lot of settlements in the West Bank and no settlements in Gaza it's really the West Bank that we are talking about. It's notable, though, that with Gaza there is an Arab majority between the Jordan and the sea, while without it there is a slightly larger Jewish population.

Considering this and the fact that not many want a 2 state solution now, I wonder if the end result would be a "1.5 state solution"? Where Israel and the West Bank form one state and Gaza another?

That would after all keep the large state as a Jewish majority state after all (albeit barely and I imagine it would resemble Lebanon or Bosnia to a large extent in terms of power-sharing?)

[Hnv1]

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.

Meretz’s Zionism is under debate. The party’s left wants to join the Arabs and the right wants to join Labour

[jaichind]

Apparently Meretz is considering uniting with Hadash-Taal. I think it's a great idea, but frankly I think Meretz-Labor and an Arab Joint List running separately would net more mandates than Labor and Ram-Balaad running separately and Meretz running with Hadash-Taal. I have no clue how the Arab public would react to such a union, either, but I wonder if it would actually backfire.

The Hadash part I get, but is not Ta'al an Arab nationalist party? If so why would Meretz  view Ta'al any differently from, say, United Right?

[Walmart_shopper]

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.

Meretz’s Zionism is under debate. The party’s left wants to join the Arabs and the right wants to join Labour

It's also worth noting that Meretz formally credits Arab voters with keeping the party above the threshold in April.  Meretz has had a strong relationship with the Arab public for a while. It's another reason why a union with Hadash-Taal makes sense. I'm just not sure that's the key to maximizing turnout and mandates on the left.

[warandwar]

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.

Meretz’s Zionism is under debate. The party’s left wants to join the Arabs and the right wants to join Labour

It's also worth noting that Meretz formally credits Arab voters with keeping the party above the threshold in April.  Meretz has had a strong relationship with the Arab public for a while. It's another reason why a union with Hadash-Taal makes sense. I'm just not sure that's the key to maximizing turnout and mandates on the left.

I heard that it was specifically Druze voters that they credited, was that right?

[Velasco]

Israel is actually more like a weird melange of tribes, none of them constituting more than 20 percent of the population. Looking at it as a merely Jewish/Arab dichotomy is wrong. That's why a Meretz-Arab merger makes a lot of sense. Yesh Atid would be there, too, if it wasn't politically suicidal for them. It's not two states for two peoples because, lame bromides about Jewish unity aside, it's not two peoples. It's like four or five peoples, who share virtually nothing in common. Trying to pieces together a state out of that is immeasurable difficult. Hence why our politics are such a profound mess. It's only going to get worse.

Very interesting analysis, even though the conclusion is so pesimistic (realistic?).  My impression as an outsider is that cooperation between the Israeli left (or its reminder represented by Meretz), Hadash and the Arab parties is necessary, since their goals are compatible. I raised some controversy in the older thread saying it's also necessary a revision of the Zionist dogma within the diminished ranks of the Israeli left. It's not pnly a moral thing, but a matter of strategy. In any case, leaving political debate aside (democracy is more important than ethnicity for me) and focusing on electoral strategy, cooperation may or may not imply electoral alliances or joint lists. The question is how to increase turnout between the Arabs and the progressive Jews. Sometimes separate lists are better because voters have more incentives to show up with diverse options that reflect their views. However these diverse options must be electorally viable, given the existence of a threshold and the need to optimize votes...

[America Needs R'hllor]

Interesting read:

https://www.timesofisrael.com/ahead-of-jerusalem-pride-police-say-theyre-recruiting-transgender-officers/?fbclid=IwAR26sxApM63EVhLlBtqDXsUuYb6R6JZQho_17vXw2cIMo7ihgTEsc45qWws

Meanwhile, in a clear show of support for the LGBT community, police revealed that in recent months the force has recruited several transgender trainees and that one of them has already completed her course and is working her beat, Channel 12 reported.

This is important considering the police's poor treatment of violence against transgenders has been an important issue the LGBTQ community in Israel has been focusing on in recent years.

On Wednesday, police arrested a right-wing activist, Moshiko Ben Zikri, who they said disguised himself as a member of the LGBT community for two consecutive years to enter the parade, climb on the podium and protest against the event.

Ben Zikri’s lawyer, the far-right activist Itamar Ben-Gvir, said police were abusing his right to free speech and protest.

“It’s also permissible to protest against the marchers of the Pride Parade, and if they arrest someone as a preventative move — an illegal arrest — only because he planned to shout at those marchers, then something is wrong here, something is not legal. I ask myself, ‘Where are the knights of democracy and freedom of expression?'” Ben Gvir said.

Bentzi Gopstein, leader of the far-right group Lehava, said his group had received a police permit to protest near the march. Gopstein said they planned to use loudspeakers to disrupt those “bringing disaster to Israel.”

In a statement, Gopstein charged, “The purpose of the march is to dissolve the values ​​of the Jewish family and to turn Jerusalem and all of Israel into Sodom.”

He called the march “LGBT terrorism.”

Lehava opposes intermarriage and assimilation along with LGBT rights and tries to stifle any public activity by non-Jews in Israel. Lawmakers across the political spectrum have tried to designate it as a terrorist group.

Another point, though extremely unsurprising- the Kahanists are the forces of evil on literally any issue. They're pure evil and anyone supporting them should be ashamed of himself.

On a more positive note- I'm going to the Pride Parade today, hopefully it's going to be another show of power that will help spread the light against all the homophobes!

[America Needs R'hllor]

MK Stav Shaffir just announced she's running for Labour Party leader.

The party is a disaster right now- I've seen this in how poorly organized they were yesterday in the Jerusalem Pride Parade, with no one important even coming to march with us. If anyone can revive it, I think it's her.

[Walmart_shopper]

MK Stav Shaffir just announced she's running for Labour Party leader.

The party is a disaster right now- I've seen this in how poorly organized they were yesterday in the Jerusalem Pride Parade, with no one important even coming to march with us. If anyone can revive it, I think it's her.

Good news.

[Famous Mortimer]

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.

I wonder why Parrot guy didn't jump out to scream "No! No! No! You are stupid! No one in Israel thinks there is going to be one state ever! It's impossible! No one thinks this! I personally know every Israeli leftists and they are all super Zionists and would rather die than consider one state!"

[America Needs R'hllor]

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.

I wonder why Parrot guy didn't jump out to scream "No! No! No! You are stupid! No one in Israel thinks there is going to be one state ever! It's impossible! No one thinks this! I personally know every Israeli leftists and they are all super Zionists and would rather die than consider one state!"

Lmao

[Hnv1]

Former MK Nitzan Horowitz will run for Meretz leadership. He'll be the front for the Gilon\socialist camp and we'll see a merger with Labour within a month. I expect him to win with ease, so that's another party off the table

[America Needs R'hllor]

Former MK Nitzan Horowitz will run for Meretz leadership. He'll be the front for the Gilon\socialist camp and we'll see a merger with Labour within a month. I expect him to win with ease, so that's another party off the table

Interestingly though, his campaign seemed focused soley on religion and state issues. No mention of anything economic or the word socialism. I had to be told by a Meretz friend that he's a Gilon person. Also, what's the difference between him and Zandberg when it comes to a merger with Labour? She seems to support it, at least.

As for Labour- Tal Russo announced that he's leaving political life and won't run for leadership. Good riddance, he contributed nothing. Currently, Stav Shaffir is the only announced candidate, while Peretz is likely to announce officially too. I'm not sure about other contenders like Shmuli. Yair Golan, another former General who's famous for making comments comparing the extremism in Israel to the leadup in Nazi Germany is also considering. But if it's Shaffir vs Peretz, she'll almost definitely win.