If the goal is to sow a feeling of helplessness and a certain degree of anxiety in the public - then yesterday's protest day was successful.
But for this, someone with integrity needs to be restored among the protest organizers, who will admit that this was indeed the intention, and that from now on they will speak from the perspective of psychological and physical pressure - and not rational arguments.
In other words: the opponents of the reform and the government may tell themselves that the government is tearing the people apart, but they insist on blocking with their bodies, together with the axes of the movement, any option for discussion.
Protest in front of the Prime Minister's House in Jerusalem // Photo: Yoni Rickner
And you have to admit that it works, at least on a psychological level.
It is almost unthinkable that protest groups will declare a day of national disruption, announce in advance where and how roads will be blocked, and keep an entire country in suspense.
People gave up working days, employers had to suffer delays, and those who went on the road put their lives on the line.
And the feeling of helplessness that accompanied the masses on this day, stems from the knowledge that it is also impossible to really deal with the phenomenon.
One can understand the dilemma: on the one hand, disrupting the fabric of life and public space will prove that the government is not in control and fails the governance test.
On the other hand, determined and decisive repression will provide an ocean of proof that Israel is being taken over by a dark dictatorship that harms citizens and crushes demonstrations with violence.
Tosha Lahud Barak.
Demonstrations in Tel Aviv, March 1, photo: IPA
But what does it actually mean that a protest opens the extreme toolbox and turns to channels of disrupting public order and inviting violent clashes with the police?
People like Yair Golan or Ron Huldai, believe that there is no other way to bring about change or prevent dik-t-to-ra.
Yair Lapid, as usual, also gleaned some superficial insight about difficult times and difficult measures.
They just forget that this principle is morally justified when it applies to marginalized and oppressed groups, social strata that have never had fair access to public opinion and decision-making centers, and therefore had to break barriers of politeness.
To compensate for the inferior position, the disadvantaged resort to vandalism, and sometimes to violence.
Demonstrators against the legal reform, photo: Yoni Rikner
But what is happening before us is unusual on any historical and sociological scale: the group of the powerful, who have the inherent advantage in the centers of decision-making, in the hotbeds of the elite, in the central establishments and especially in the channels of access to public opinion - turn to powerful channels.
This means that, in stark contrast to the internal message pages, they lost the battle for public opinion.
It is true, many in the public state in polls about opposition to the reform: but how many of them are opposed in principle to the articles of the reform itself, and how many of them are frightened by the social consequences arising from the acts of bullying by Ehud Barak and his partners?
In other words: people are frightened by the agitation that will lead to instability, much more than they are anxious by the change in the composition of the committee for the selection of judges.
The protest leaders know this, and they have no problem winning with this strategy.
But for the sake of history, the initiative to crush the democratic structure by forceful means should be written in the annals of the "protest to save democracy".
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