The queen died and in her place, immediately, the new king rose.
The process was accompanied by dozens of small rituals and acts of worship that were carried out smoothly as if without the touch of a human hand or committee.
In a country where even one ceremony out of all the royal transition events required production, organizational, budgetary preparations and so on, this is astonishing.
The conclusion is not the dull sneer towards the English and their ways, but about us.
Let us admit to ourselves that after 74 years of independence, Israel is still a country in the making.
Better to learn from the British than mock them.
It turns out that even senior state officials in Israel do not fully understand the British patent.
Charles will have to justify his existence, say the budgeters.
really?
Charles III became the crown on his head.
The Crown is British sovereignty.
It is not written in any law that the kingdom is "British and democratic".
The unity of the royal house with the territorial area of the British Isles, the British people and the official religion is the totality of sovereignty.
And it proved itself above and beyond, especially during the time of Queen Elizabeth II.
The people's elected officials and the rest of the state institutions know, even without realizing it, that there is something greater than them, more important and more sublime than them.
That is why it was easy for Prime Minister Cameron to announce at the time his resignation following the results of the Brexit referendum and go on his way while lightly whistling some kind of creation to himself.
That's why different establishments also don't think of undermining a prime minister appointed to the position by a queen or a king.
The people chose, but the king or queen, who embody the sovereignty, appointed.
It has weight.
If we compare it to the Israeli existence,
From a historical-political point of view, the era of Elizabeth's monarchy teaches about additional dimensions that a queen with a certain type of leadership can realize.
Not only did the royal house survive in the post-World War II era, but so did Britain itself.
It can be argued that without Queen Elizabeth the disintegration of the empire would not have stopped on the shores of Dover.
The monarchy was the number one surviving unifying factor in an era when British governments blundered badly in critical areas.
Recently, the great historian Andrew Roberts pointed out that Britain has something to learn from Israel.
He mentioned three areas: absolute control of immigration, namely - preventing a flood of illegal immigrants, maintaining a strong army and transitioning to an advanced technological economy, a transition that Israel has carried out with great success in the last generation.
Despite the objective data that show that Britain is also affected by social and political instability, the state of the democratic regime there is better than in Israel, the USA or France. The reason is probably that the British were satisfied with one revolution a few hundred years ago, while in Israel and the USA the ideological DNA -Political is revolutionary. It turns out that respect for tradition is needed as "conservatism" holds. Although tradition does not guarantee an attitude of holy fear and recognition of your great and sublime - values that are not "democratic", but without such an attitude democracies fall apart.
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