The Limited Times

Now you can see non-English news...

Hypocritical campaign: Shaked and Handel change parties like shoes and blame the Likud for the instability Israel today

2022-08-18T21:36:19.527Z


It's funny that two of the people who sign a political structure that since its inception has wobbled, bowed, tilted, teetered, trembled, and then collapsed, claim in the current elections that they found the formula for political stability - unity • In their new campaign they blame Netanyahu for the political crisis • But while they exchange lists at a pace Dizzying, actually the Likud voters remained consistent in their choices • By insisting on political unity, they reinforce the perception that the national camp is not fit to govern alone


There are moments when you have to stop guessing the tactical considerations of contestants and campaigns, and pay attention to the content, even when it is scarce.

I mean the messages that come out of the creator of "The Zionist Spirit", the new political venture of Shaked and Handel.

Their prominent message now is "a stable unity government", and the continuation can be guessed on your own, because it is expected like an automatic correction of typos: "that you will pull Israel out of the mud".

And for the details: "Bahiat Bibi", defies their announcer with sticky playfulness in a video that popped up on my cell phone.

"What stable government are you talking about? The 61 government with Ben Gabir and Smotrich will not last," he states.

So what is the miracle formula for stability anyway?

"We will not give them 61", their billboard promises, with on the sides the mutilated portraits of the two polarized wings - the Netanyahu, Ben Gabir and Smotrich group on the right, and the Lapid, Gantz and Tibi group on the left.

And in the middle: "Israel chooses unity."

The arrogance of Shaked and Handel: they preach stability and change parties like shoes, photo: Gideon Markovich

New party, old message

It's funny, almost macabre, that two central engineers, who sign a political structure that since its inception has wobbled, bowed, tilted, teetered, trembled, and then collapsed - have the audacity to now sell us the winning formula for political stability.

The inventors of the political facsimile system want to build the next coalition for us.

Not only do they sign off on the engineering plans for the fiasco - they also formulated its architectural ethos.

Handel was a prominent player in the personal boycott group against Netanyahu, Shaked brought his main political opponent into Balfour.

Even then it was for stability;

Just to avoid fifth elections.

Now they promise stability, once again, and this time - a surprise - from a new party, with a Dandesh slogan and a renovated logo - founded on the ruins of a previous list and together with the exile of another party.

How much audacity, if I may, embodied in this pretense to market themselves as Mr. and Mrs. Stability, after two years in which they changed political hostels at the rate of backpackers in India.

The voter fool: what stability exactly is reflected through this frantic instant politics, where those actors who guarantee stability, move and fly without stopping, like restless flies: set up, break up, found, dismantle, join, retire, pass, return, throw away, fumble, connect , merge, touch, and are ejected again - and then a street horn whispers to us that they have stability in a bottle to sell us.

The arrogance of Shaked and Handel: they preach stability and change parties like shoes, photo: Yonatan Shaul

And the surprising thing is the opposition: all this vibrating buzzing is swirling like an asteroid belt around a party that has not fallen below 30 mandates in four election cycles, with one chairman, with a cohesive bloc around it and with an electoral share that remains, well - stable and solid.

"Bahiat Bibi", they say to the only wing that throughout the history of the "flounder" they themselves created - stood in one place and maintained a stoic consistency within a system that never stopped running around its own tail.  

We did not choose the government

And something should also be said about this unity, which was imposed on us like a mold.

It is true that in a situation of distinct political equality - a compromise between blocs can pull the cart out of the mud.

But this is not the current situation, on the contrary.

Pastoral unity did not save the last government from glorious disintegration, and frankly, neither did its predecessor.

But the more significant point is the insight that regularly permeates the messages of Shaked and Handel - and it started long before they got under a common stretcher: they always blink first, and unnecessarily.

The change government not only gave the left and the "only-not-Bibi" bloc an unprecedented moral victory, in the form of Netanyahu's removal from Balfour and the expulsion of the Likud to the opposition.

She also provided him, by virtue of the urgent need to justify her surrealist "compositions", a new political narrative, according to which political unity is a goal in itself, which will bring a balm to the divided and fractured Israeli society.

Bennett - responsible for the view that the right wing is not fit to govern alone, photo: Oren Ben Hakon

Naftali ran on the narrative of destruction and division throughout his year in office, then turned up the volume by a few decibels, in a desperate and last attempt to save his political tower of Pisa from collapse.

It didn't help, but the trickle-down message gained enough traction: not only were more Israelis convinced that they were living in a conflicted society, that a fratricidal war was on the horizon, and that, just to be safe, one should adopt a suspicious attitude towards "the other side".

The serious thing is the entrenchment of the idea, according to which the national camp does not deserve to rule alone.

Here, in my opinion, lies the great injustice that Bennett and Shaked inflicted on the national camp and the Israeli right - and it is seven times greater than the personal and vindictive boycott led by Sa'ar, Elkin and Handel against Netanyahu.

Shaked and Bennett, each of whom claimed to one day lead the Israeli right, systematically instilled the notion that the right does not deserve to rule alone.

that even with a solid electoral priority and a distinct cognitive advantage in public opinion - we need to bring "redemption" to the people in the form of a political connection with the left.

The government of change was constantly marketed to us as some kind of move to bridge rifts, as a cure for a serious social crisis created by the National Camp government led by the Likud.

In their actions and choices, they confirmed the false thesis that there is something sick, or polluting, or dangerous to the integrity of society, if the right rules without the involvement, or supervision, of the left.

This concept is based on an artificial identity between unity in society and unity in politics, and on the perception of the party system as one that is supposed, through its connections, to nurse social rifts.

After all, if unity in society is not possible without unity in politics - the practical meaning is that there is no legitimacy for right-wing government.

This is actually what Shaked is saying to the Israeli public as a whole, and to the Israeli right in particular: not to the government of our choice.

Really in need.

were we wrong

We will fix it!

If you found an error in the article, we would appreciate it if you shared it with us

Source: israelhayom

All news articles on 2022-08-18

You may like

News/Politics 2024-02-02T13:10:31.392Z

Trends 24h

News/Politics 2024-03-28T06:04:53.137Z
News/Politics 2024-03-28T05:25:00.011Z

Latest

© Communities 2019 - Privacy

The information on this site is from external sources that are not under our control.
The inclusion of any links does not necessarily imply a recommendation or endorse the views expressed within them.