"These forces," I have lamented for several years, "what are they tools for?"
Ever since we spend our lives in a climate of internal war, bitter disagreement and intense political fluctuations, the question arises in full force: About what? In other words, the question is not whether the protesters or the defenders, the coalition or the opposition, are right, but mainly whether the purpose for which they are going to war is worth the enormous amounts of energy invested in it.
And here, this question is no longer relevant. As the struggle progresses, the controversy takes shape, becomes more and more organized. It must be said honestly that most Israelis no longer take an active part in it, and continue their daily routine without resorting to what he tweeted and what he tweeted, only the minority is in the midst of an active war agenda.
But the impression that arises is as if the entire population is in it. Truth? This is the main achievement of the protest organizers: the ability to manage the agenda, through the media, and to create an imaginary situation – which inevitably subordinates reality as well – of constant war. This is the current arena: a struggle for the agenda.
And it's unacceptable and it's harmful not just because of the very thing. This is harmful mainly because this situation, which is mostly eye-catching, interferes with the proper course of critical processes, whose time has come and they do not occur because of the thunder of cannons that quiets the murmur of the Muses. There has been countless talks about replacement and succession processes in the Likud that are being halted because of the incessant war, about political and social processes in the ultra-Orthodox public, and many other examples. Most of the missed opportunity, in my opinion, is directly related to the questions that the protest does address, though only indirectly.
The main process that has been halted is the necessary and critical process of dialogue between the two warring sides, but not around the false questions of whether Simcha Rothman is trying to extricate the "accused" from his trial or whether we are on the verge of a coup, nor whether the prime minister is strong or weak, blackmailed or leading. The dialogue process should revolve around the fundamental questions of the change of hegemony, the expected future change of Israel's face in a more conservative and Jewish direction, and in short: far fewer questions of 2023 and many more questions concerning Israel 2040.
Not many Israelis are interested these days in engaging in stale debates over the reform clauses. They were disturbed by this talk, and they also realized that it wasn't leading them anywhere good. More and more Israelis are abandoning their old positions of argument in favor of ordinary civil discourse detached from extremist positions, mainly because they understand the futility of the matter. On the other hand, more and more Israelis are interested in dealing with the big question, the question of the future that does not make an effort to deal with and cancel the opposing opinion, but tries to answer the question of how the two opinions can live together in the new situation that has been created and sharpened by the disputes of recent years.
That's where the bush goes, that's where it needs to go. And every demonstration and every anarchist action that perpetuates the small, unimportant and unreal contemporary conflict distances and interferes with the course of the great process, the one whose job is to arrange the lives of the next generation here, and not just the headlines of the next broadcaster.
Wrong? We'll fix it! If you find a mistake in the article, please share with us