Our politics cuts: good or bad, with us or against us, bivouacers against Netanyahu haters. There is no middle and almost no other colors beyond black and white. Each of these prominent parties also knows how to explain how dark and fascist or unfaithful the other party is to the country. Our politics put aside the possibility of cooperation, for the sake of taxation and mutual incitement. And this is true for all parties.
Until one leader came and said - no. I'm not an antithetical to any group. Not against the Arabs, nor against the ultra-Orthodox, nor against the religious nor the secular. He offered a platform that focused on life itself, and challenged himself with predefined goals.
What is the likelihood of such a politician that Prime does not want to enter into any significant controversy from those who plague Israeli society? What are the odds of a politician not building himself on incitement? In today's Israel, it turns out to be very low.
Because instead of receiving sympathy from the various groups for his work on their behalf, which engaged the people of Israel and especially the media in its relation to Moshe Kahlon, it was precisely what he thought would build it. Each group interrupted that it was not 100 percent with it and did not fully adopt its ideology.
The right was furious that he did not stabilize for legislative initiatives to limit the Supreme Court or close the corporation. The Nissenkorn Federation. Nor were they impressed that after all, he maintained a stable economy, invested in the common public and maintained a fine balance between government investment and liberation and free competition.
But it is precisely the animosity that Kahlon has received from the "extremists on all sides" - and, not least, all the pseudo-economists who fail to agree on one worthy move - which is that Kahlon's heart was in the right place.
In the days when Lieberman smeared on Ayalon as the "Liberal protector" against the ultra-Orthodox, in which the Minister of Education is speaking out against the proud community, leading to a reaction against the entire religious Zionism, the question is asked if there is any other politics. Kahlon made mistakes: he avoided providing answers about the deficit and he did not completely curb the cost of living as he had promised.
But he ran for dozens of reforms, small and large, for the benefit of the common citizen - from opening the pension market to competition and saving for every child, for raising wages for soldiers, and for a cost-per-dwelling plan that turned thousands of young people who did not dream of apartment into home.
But beyond that, Kahlon and his party gave voice to "Israel 1.5" - Israelis living in the new neighborhoods in the periphery, who grew up in poverty and succeeded by a tremendous effort to climb to an orderly and established middle class. Residents of the new neighborhoods in Ashdod, Rishon Lezion and Netanya. It is a state public and unity that is incensed by incitement. A public that respects tradition and opposes religious coercion. A working and serving public, thirsting for social leadership, is honest and moderate.
Moshe Kahlon was here for this public, and now, after his retirement, many will find themselves politically homeless.
Ophir Tubol is a lawyer, founder of the Golden Age Movement