Pretty soon the political universe returns to its natural state.
In the government of change, we received every evening photos of harmony from coalition formation events, message pages with "Brit Ahim" and "we came to work" tags on social networks.
Outwardly everything was perfect;
Only in retrospect did we get to know how much grumbling and resentment flowed between the players, and with what amateurishness the operation was conducted.
And here, the new right-wing government has not yet been established, and we have already returned to the routine of boring evening headlines about chaos in the aquarium, struggles, intrigues and conspiracies.
The return of the compressor.
And the opposition left is also back to doing what it knows best: lamenting the country that was robbed from it, and issuing apocalyptic predictions about the end of democracy.
And just as it is impossible to forget how to ride a bicycle, the left is also quickly returning to traditional working methods: a blitz of petitions and letters from senior officials, and ringing the bells of the international community.
breaking dishes
We need to dwell on the organizing principle common to these two practices, and for that we should perhaps return to the mentality that led the first "rebels" in the Israeli left, especially around the First Lebanon War.
The first refusers were the best of our sons.
salt of the earth.
Think about permanent officers like Amram Mitsana.
On the reservists from the "There is a border" movement.
Their reasoning system was of course from the field of combat ethics.
Their resistance was moral.
But beneath the moral rhetoric lay a socio-political layer as well.
These were mostly the sons of the labor movement and the working settlement, the flesh of the left, which was still under the shock of the upheaval of '77.
Apocalyptic predictions.
Lapid, photo: Gideon Markovich
There is a basis for conjecturing that with some of them, at least, such a blatant threat would not have developed in the face of the left-wing government.
However, their public opposition expressed not only a lack of trust in the new administration and a willingness to disobey a government "that is not ours", but also a self-perception that "they can't do it without us".
If our movement expands, the army and the command will collapse, and the political echelon will not be able to impose its will - then we will impose our will.
And more importantly: they will not manage on their own, because with us "quality" is concentrated.
Just as Dodo Topaz put it in his famous speech, on the eve of the 1981 elections: "The Chachachas are in the Citadel of Ze'ev. They can barely see the camels... This is where the soldiers and the commanders of the combat units are."
41 years later, in a much smaller demonstration, his ideological descendant Yair Lapid will announce: "We are not here just to pay you taxes and send our children to the army for a government that does not send its children to the army."
This social Darwinism, institutionalized following the '77 upheaval, is strong and exists: a concept according to which "they may be the majority, but we are the quality".
We have the pilots, the high-tech technicians, the senior officers;
They have the evaders and the parasites.
And what gives rise to such a perception of reality is not only a consciousness of "our choice to rule", but also a conditional acceptance of the results of the democratic game.
From here comes the discourse of the threat of retirement, diversion of investments and departure from the country.
And this is also the organizing principle behind the panicked appeal to the international community, which is reflected in the mobilization of newspapers such as the "New York Times" or the "hold me" signals irresponsibly broadcast by our embassy in Paris.
The point is not the "whistleblowing" to world public opinion;
The issue is the outstanding effort to mobilize centers of power in the world in order to exert pressure from the outside on the government and impose a policy that the Israeli voter completely rejected at the ballot box.
Here and here it is an exaggerated self-conception: the right has no less "good sons of ours", and its political skills have been proven to the disgust and anger of Obama's loyalists.
Whatever will not go by force
The legalization of the political discourse has taught us that democracy is not only tested by balances between "bad" politicians and "decent" gatekeepers.
The surge breaker panic is a smokescreen.
Because democracy is first of all based on respect for voters and their right to be convinced - or not to be convinced.
The left's methods of operation, on the other hand, are based on waving a constant ultimatum in front of the products of Israeli democracy: what you did not want at the ballot box, will be imposed on you by force.
And this is as destructive to the democratic structure in Israel as the laws of Ben Gabir and Deri.
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