Proponents of her case have been working to make the actual transcript of this statement available online. • They hunt down "servicemen" and send them to citizenship classes. • It's time to put a balloon in their balloon. • Opinion

Like its predecessor in 2011, the summer protests of 2020 are accompanied by a strict discourse regime: it must not be criticized. Ask Margalit Tsanani about the previous round, or spend a few minutes reading the reactions to Muki and Shai Golden. A journalist who wondered about the compromise of activist undressing, was reprimanded by her Twitter colleague: "Your job as a journalist is to report facts! Not to share grades! And not to write your moral self, if you do not understand ... you better shut up." The exclamation marks originally.

June Rickner

Do not expect parallel reprimands from journalists who invest all their "moral selves" in building historical momentum for protest as an object of national excitement. This mindset erupts with charged aggression in response to any expression of doubt, lightness and explicit criticism. Protesters became discourse policemen; They went on a hunt for "servants of the government" and sent them masterfully to citizenship classes. In the simplistic dichotomy that has taken over the rebel circles, the world is divided into two: Democrats or anti-Democrats, freedom fighters or collaborators, heroes and oppressors. In the middle. 

This is manifested not only in the violent, violent coercion of flat thought patterns, but also in ridicule, arrogance and boasting, towards protest critics. "Bare chest disgraces the bibists," or, to put it mildly, "they are afraid."

Well, that's right. They are scared. As far as the babysitters, or the Likud voters, or the supporters of the national camp are concerned, who even now believe that Netanyahu is the right man in the right place - and this, surprisingly, is still their democratic right - they are indeed afraid. They are afraid, and Twitter revolutionaries should hold their own - because they too have a democratic conscience. They exercised it by voting at the ballot box, they exercise it every day in reading reality, and they too are entitled to their day in the Balfour Revolutionary Court. 

Protest is an almost sacred right in a democratic regime, but it is also a political action, involving not only an authentic expression of anger or frustration (or hope), but also setting goals, choosing a strategy, allocating resources and striving for change in the real world. And in this real world there are also people who think differently. The axiom that has taken over the discourse should be vigorously challenged, as if any criticism of the protest is a partnership to speak of oppression or crime against democracy itself. These are nonsense.

Protest leaders and participants make it clear that they are striving for one goal: the resignation of Prime Minister Netanyahu, and declare that they are determined to do so through a "siege" on his official residence and now also on his private home. "Siege" means "constant disruption to the routine of life" of the Netanyahu family - as written in a wavy brush in "Yedioth Ahronoth". A "siege" that was clearly inspired by the demonstrations against Begin in 1983, will lead to the mental collapse of the prime minister until his retirement.

I think there is room to challenge the legitimacy of a "siege" on the prime minister's residence, but even if a psychological attrition war against an elected government is an accepted protest tactic, the prime minister's supporters still have the right to oppose. What protesters define as "hope" , Perceived by many right-wing supporters just the opposite. And perhaps it should be mentioned: this is not an extinct minority group, but a huge chunk of public opinion. It is ridiculous to expect him to remain silent in the face of what he sees as a political project to overturn the election results.

 Maybe it's time to stick a little pin in the self-importance balloon of some of Balfour's flatterers. True, you are not anarchists and certainly not disease spreaders, but on the other hand not everyone who disagrees with you deals with "oppression," and the fact that you have a sign does not mean that democracy was registered. Protest is not just a symbolic expression of anger, but a striving for change that some of the public opposes.The axiom should be challenged as if any criticism of the protest is a partner in speaking out against oppression or crime against democracy itself.