Yesterday I came across a lovely line by Lior Engelman in the book "You Don’t Stop Love in the Middle,"
which 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 your grandchildren,
in the small middle part you’re sure you can conquer the world…
I’m now rereading Gad Taub’s The Mobile and the Immobile,
which describes the problem very well in all its sharpness,

I wonder to what extent what we’re seeing in the public opposition to the reform as it stands needs to be normalized, considering the media amplifiers that increase the intensity a hundredfold.
If there weren’t so many amplified shouts from the opponents, would you also think Rothman is throwing out the baby with the bathwater?
It seems Rothman keeps saying he’s willing to have dialogue and reach compromises, and it gives the impression that in the political arena he has no one to talk to (see the reactions to any smiles with Bibi). Apparently the shouting led by Yair Lapid will continue either way.
I have the impression that a significant part of the opposition to the reform lies in opposition to Haredi conduct and the problem that is getting worse with them, and that’s why it’s so easy to brainwash the masses with cries of the end of democracy, when hidden in the collective subconscious is a great and justified fear of the problem of their unequal share of the burden.
In other words, if Sa’ar and Lieberman were in the coalition with Likud, the whole story would look completely different.

I tried to answer you in kind, even if it took me twice as long…

May we be comforted in the rebuilding of Zion,
Have a good week,

Your description reminds me of our situation. Engelman’s description is probably universal. 🙂
I think the proposed reform is very problematic, regardless of the media, which of course inflates things and is hysterical as always. I explained this in my columns. In general, the discussion about the rules misses the essence. The question of whether we will be a democracy depends not only on laws and rules but no less on the conduct of the players and the political culture (which doesn’t exist here).
In any case, there are people on both sides who address the matter substantively, and I’m even in touch with some of them. In its current form, the reform turns us into a state with only one branch instead of three. That is a completely accurate description, with not a drop of exaggeration in it.
It’s true that now, after the protests (and in my opinion only because of them), Rothman and Levin show some willingness to talk and reach some compromises, and I assume this will increase, because in the end Likud and Bibi won’t let them lead us into the abyss (currently, in my estimation, the situation is that within the coalition itself there is an overwhelming majority against the reform, and coalition discipline is allowing two MKs to lead the entire country into the abyss).
I also completely agree that there’s no one to talk to in the opposition, because they are not serious and don’t do their homework. They aren’t willing to engage in dialogue because they have nothing to say, not because of any boycott or struggle. Those are just fig leaves. To this day we haven’t heard from Lapid or Gantz a single word about what they think should be done. Just pompous and empty declarations. Lapid is known as someone who doesn’t do his homework (how many times have they already caught him making foolish and idiotic statements that he didn’t bother to check), and Gantz is probably just an idiot.
That’s why I wrote in my columns that we need to talk with serious people outside the Knesset, and there are such people. In my view this is a tragedy, that such a high-quality public with such great specific weight (intellectually, economically, etc.) gets such miserable representation. In my opinion, that is what is currently jamming the discourse.
In any case, in my estimation there is no chance the reform will pass in its current form (already today it has undergone some moderation, and this will continue). There is no chance whatsoever of that. The military and economic protests do not allow it, and that is a good thing. It’s possible that the president will not sign the laws, and the court will strike them down, and we will enter a constitutional crisis—and everyone understands that. I assume that in this game of chicken, in the end someone will blink.
And finally, you are completely right that the reform is only a platform, and the fears are mainly about what is expected within its framework. After all, the rules in themselves don’t do anything to us. The question is what the executive branch will do within them and to what extent it will be possible to balance it. The horror coalition of Haredim and nationalists currently leading us can do whatever it wants if the reform passes, and they’ve already started doing that now. You can’t detach the framework from the content, even though in principle we are supposed to operate under Rawls’s ‘veil of ignorance.’
Goodbye,

I’ll say what bothers me about this issue.
As the Rabbi noted (and in my view quite rightly), democracy is based first and foremost on integrity and culture and developed democratic values (which, as the Rabbi noted, do not exist here).
Now, in my opinion, what we need to ask is whom we trust more on the practical level to act out of integrity and basic democratic culture: our corrupt politicians (and that’s even before getting into the current frightening coalition) or the judicial system. As of today I agree that in the current governmental structure our judicial system is too strong and that some reform is needed (though not too strong in light of the fact that in Israel there are no other checks and balances), but in practice I think our court has a fairly high degree of self-restraint and ultimately surpasses our politicians many times over in terms of integrity. Therefore I believe that even if on the theoretical level there is a need for reform, I am not sure that on the practical level it is worthwhile for us to carry it out (because our judges have integrity and I personally do not think there is excessive intervention), whereas Levin and Rothman’s extreme reform, beyond being a horror from the standpoint of democratic thought, is giving power to the arm that lacks integrity.

A horror from the standpoint of democratic thought*