The legal system
Peace and blessings,
While wandering, I came across your attached article from 2019, (The Wallet and the Sword)
Are you still signing it or have a lot of currents passed through the neurons since then?
Good week
I completely stand behind it, and more so. But with respect to the current debates, I oppose legal reform because it upsets the balance to the other side. I wrote several columns recently on my website about this matter, and I explained there that the need for reform because of the distortions created in the relations between the authorities is almost indisputable. Only fools deny it. And this is exactly the column you linked to. But on the other hand, the solution offered by Rothman and Levin throws out the baby with the bathwater, and therefore I oppose it.
Among other things, I also wrote that the debates and disputes between various petitions that are being published these days are imaginary. Those who oppose the reform may agree with the need to reform, but they claim that it is not in this way and form (they oppose the reform, in the Ministry of Justice and not in vain). And those who support it say that although the reform is problematic, it is important to reform the relations between the authorities in Israel (they support the reform, in the Ministry of Justice and not in vain). Both sides are essentially saying the same thing and the difference is mainly in sentiment. These are not my interpretations, but rather the explicit statements of several of the signatories on both sides.
By the way, this is what demonstrates for the thousandth time the universal law of uncertainty in public debate: the smaller the distance between the parties, the more heated and extreme the debate between them. Regarding Haredi versus religious Zionism (compared to their attitude towards secularists), or religious Zionism versus Reform (compared to its attitude towards secularists). In my opinion, there is currently a consensus in Israel regarding fundamental values and the constitution that has not prevailed here for many years. I also dedicated a column to this on the website.
Goodbye,
Yesterday I came across a lovely sentence by Lior Engelman in the book “Don't Stop Loving in the Middle”
that goes something like this:
Life is like a sandwich,
In the bottom part you depend on your parents,
In the top part you take care of your parents and grandchildren,
In the middle and small part you are sure that you can conquer the world…
I am now re-reading Gadi Taub's Mobile and Stationary,
which describes the problem well in all its severity,
I wonder to what extent we observe the phenomenon of public resistance to reform as it is when normalization is required, considering the media amplifiers that increase the power 100 times,
If there weren't so many amplified shouts from opponents, would you also think that Rotman is throwing the baby out with the bathwater?
It seems that Rotman is repeating that he is ready for talks and compromises, it seems that in the political arena he has no one to talk to (see responses to the smiles with Bibi). The shouting, led by Yair Lapid, will probably continue one way or another.
I have the impression that a significant part of the opposition to reform is found in opposition to the conduct of the Haredi and the increasingly serious problem with them, which is why it is so easy to brainwash the masses with shouts of the end of democracy, when in the collective unconscious lies a great and justified concern about the problem of inequality in their burden.
In other words, if Saar and Lieberman were in a coalition with the Likud, the story would look completely different.
I tried to repay you as you deserve, even if it takes twice as long…
In the building of Zion, we will rest,
Have a good week,
Your description is reminiscent of our situation. Engelman's description is probably universal. 🙂
I think the proposed reform is very problematic, regardless of the media, which is of course inflated and hysterical as always. I explained this in my column. In general, the discussion about the rules misses the point. The question of whether we will become a democracy depends not only on laws and rules, but no less on the conduct of the players and the political culture (which does not exist here).
In any case, there are people on both sides who are objective, and I am even in contact with a few of them. In its current form, the reform turns us into a country with only one authority instead of three. This is a completely accurate description and there is not a drop of exaggeration in it.
It is true that now, after the protests (and in my opinion only because of them) there is some willingness on the part of Rothman and Levin to talk and reach some kind of compromise, and I assume that this will increase because in the end, Likud and Bibi will not let them lead us into the abyss (today, in my assessment, the situation is that the coalition itself has an overwhelming majority against the reform, and the coalition discipline allows two MKs to lead the entire country into the abyss).
I also completely agree that there is no one to talk to in the opposition, because they are not serious and do not do their homework. They are not willing to talk because they have nothing to say and not because of a boycott or any kind of struggle. These are just fig leaves. To this day, we have not heard a single word from Lapid or Gantz about what they think should be done. Only pompous and empty statements. Lapid is known for not doing his homework (he has already been caught making nonsense and idiotic statements several times without bothering to check), and Gantz is probably just an idiot.
That's why I wrote in my column that we need to talk to serious parties outside the Knesset, and there are some. In my opinion, it's a tragedy that such a high-quality public with such high specific weight (intellectually and economically, etc.) is being represented so poorly. In my opinion, this is what is stalling the discourse at the moment.
In any case, in my opinion, there is no chance that the reform will pass in its current form (it has already undergone refinements, and this will continue). There is no chance of that. The military and economic protests do not allow this, and it is a good thing. It is possible that the president will not sign the laws, and the court will invalidate them and we will find ourselves in a constitutional crisis, and everyone understands that. I assume that this "rabbit game" will end up being short-lived.
And finally, you are absolutely right that the reform is just a platform, and the concerns are mainly about what is expected within it. After all, the rules themselves do nothing for us. The question is what the executive branch will do within their framework and how much it can be balanced. The horrible coalition of ultra-Orthodox and nationalists that leads us today can do whatever it wants if the reform passes, and they have already started doing so. The framework cannot be separated from the content, even though in principle we are supposed to operate under Rawls's "veil of ignorance." Goodbye,
I will say what bothers me about the issue.
As the Rabbi noted (and in my opinion quite rightly so), democracy is founded first and foremost on integrity and a developed democratic culture and values (which, as the Rabbi noted, do not exist here).
Now, in my opinion, what needs to be asked is who do we trust more on a practical level to act from a basic democratic culture and integrity: our corrupt politicians (and this is without even getting into the current frightening coalition) or the judicial system. As of today, I agree that in the current regime structure, our judicial system is too strong and needs some reform (although not too strong given the fact that in Israel there are no additional checks and balances). However, in practice, I think that our court has quite a high level of self-restraint and ultimately surpasses our politicians in terms of integrity by tens of times. Therefore, I believe that even if reform is needed on a theoretical level, I am not sure that on a practical level it is worthwhile for us to carry it out (because our judges have integrity and I personally do not think there will be excessive intervention), while Levin and Rothman's extreme reform, beyond being an atrocity in democratic Judaism, is giving power to an arm lacking integrity.
A horror in terms of democratic thought*
Leave a Reply
Please login or Register to submit your answer
