A few years ago, when Benny Gantz held an entire nation in a tense standstill before his dramatic entry into politics (remember when we were all waiting for "Ganz to break his silence"?), I called him an "ideological freckle" in this newspaper.
There were those who made a face, because Israel is the type of nation where it is allowed to throw almost any blasphemy at almost any politician, with the exception of chiefs of staff who enter politics. Or pilots.
But there was a reason for this: I argued that the political space is a space of dissonance, of disagreement, and thus also a space of debate, sometimes spontaneous, sometimes even aggressive and violent.
But at the very least - a debate.
We call it polemus, from the Greek word war.
It is a fact that so many expressions related to the management of the public debate are taken from the military lexicon.
We defend our opinions, fight for principles, attack the opponent's arguments, crush his claims, fortify our position, lose the argument, win the points.
And it's not bad, by the way, that we convert the energy that can erupt in a physical conflict - into an ideological conflict.
Fighting for principles and armed with arguments.
Because at the end of all the passions and shouting and hands, the great goal is to convince in order to decide, that is, to reach an operative agreement regarding the way in which we will all walk together.
Gantz in his first speech in politics, 2019. He did not say a single essential thing except "I came", photo: Yossi Zeliger
Therefore, when Benny Gantz "remained silent" before entering the political arena, and even more so when he entered it in a speech that was broadcast live to the nation, even though he did not say a single essential thing other than "I came", I thought that a warrior like him, who built his prestige and his ranks on values such as striving For touch, courage and ambition for victory - will show the same degree of fighting spirit in politics as well.
He will express a position, formulate it, be ready to defend it in the face of attacks, fight for his ideas, and who knows, hopefully, maybe even bring a new and groundbreaking concept to the table.
A leader should be identified with an idea.
I miss Drucker
As I recall, this did not happen, and for that reason I believed - and still believe - that Gantz is indeed a hero on the battlefield, but in the political field he has for three years escaped the necessity of formulating an unequivocal statement.
Basks in the consensus of his military prestige, which is not sacred in Israeli society, and avoids any active involvement in the civil debate.
He will manage the Iranian nuclear affairs "in closed rooms", vis-à-vis Lebanon they are being conducted under a security blackout, and regarding Abu Mazen he does not bother to ask anyone.
When the crisis between the Treasury and the teachers escalated, he demanded from Lapid to convene an emergency discussion, but God forbid he did not take a position: is he on the side of the Treasury, the teachers?
Nothing.
Fortunately for him, he was also exempted from holding a worldview under the auspices of the movement to eradicate bibism, whose very entry into politics drew sighs of well-being and satisfaction from the best of its citizens, and what comparisons there are to Yitzhak Rabin.
He is not some Likud refugee like Moshe Kahlon, who deserves that Reviv Drucker will sink a tooth into him and not let up until he details his positions on every issue, from the housing crisis to the Clinton outline.
It may have been the last political interview in Israel of the "you better come prepared, because you won't avoid any topic" type.
When it comes - it comes.
Gantz, as mentioned, is exempt from all this harassment, and this exemption is being expanded under the auspices of the state center movement - which has turned the debate into an obscene thing, the disagreement into a threat to social stability, and the option that "one side" will win, God forbid, and lead the country in accordance with the worldview that wins the majority - for the scenario of the complete destruction of a house.
Now everyone wants unity, because there are those who care to fuel the illusion that unity in the government is unity in the people (it didn't really prove itself in the last round, but oh well).
Even the elected chief of staff has already enlisted in the war to protect social cohesion.
Benny Gantz happily poured into this shallow water in which Israeli politics swims.
While we abhorred people who talk with their hands - but at the very least express an opinion about something - we raised a new layer of Israeli leadership, whose lack of a worldview is their leading motto.
How far gone are the days when we could conduct entire symposia on Netanyahu's Bar Ilan speech - to justify or to be angry, to believe or not to believe - but at least there was an opinion there.
A statement of direction.
Presenting a vision that does not end with "it will be good" or "we will return to statehood" or "we will unite the people", with a spoonful or two of "we will take care of security" and "we will help the weak", all in a caramel glaze of the "Israel first" type.
And again with you, the "neighborhood" culture
In colloquial Gantz, it is called "Trust me", and this is exactly what Gantz is asking us in the election slogan he launched this week: "After him".
Let it be clear in this relationship who is who.
He is a commander, and you are the soldiers.
Gideon Sa'ar the Rose, and you are the thorns.
You have to "follow him" without asking questions (because you won't get answers anyway), and trust him.
This is how the "neighbor" culture came back to us at the back door - in an exaggerated version of its predecessors.
Prime Minister Yair Lapid. Compared to Gantz, even the Yesh Atid party looks like a fresh oasis of free thought, photo: Gideon Markovitch
So I understand that in the current climate in Israel, one should be scared of Smotrich, loathe Amsalem, seep Abtisam from Ra'an and fear Aida Toma Suleiman (with each and every one of them, you can probably have a much deeper conversation than with Gantz).
But I am all the more disturbed by the methodical emptiness of the Gantz phenomenon, not only because precisely because of the lack of debate and taking a position, loud fringes are growing, but because it eliminates the basic thing that establishes our active and involved citizenship: the ability - that is, the right - to have a debate about the common issues We are people with an autonomous opinion that respects your right to be convinced, and sanctifies your right not to be convinced either.
With Gantz, all that is expected of you is to "follow him" because he is "right".
It's unpleasant to admit, but next to him even Yair Lapid's cast party looks like a fresh oasis of free thought.
And if not free, then at least thought.
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