The Political Discussion Thread

[lordofseas]

The differences are mainly on the "peace process" issues.

Netanyahu, contrary to how he has been portrayed in ever-clueless Western media, is a moderate rightwinter who is a centrist at heart, but he is also a hardcore pragmatist. He isn't opposed to Palestinian independence as a matter of principle, but he won't let Israel be suckered into a faulty agreement on bad terms the way Obama and the Europeans would have him do.

He may be that, but has certainly not acted like that, mostly because of the necessity of keeping his coalition alive. He needed to appeal to the extremes.

Bennet is pretty decent on social and economic issues, but he is a former head of the Yesha Council (settler lobby), ideologically opposed to the very idea of a Palestinian state, advocates annexation of about 60% of the West Bank and opposes more or less any action against settlers' illegal outposts. Basically, Bennet is how your media describes Netanyahu.

Except far worse. Netanyahu has been rather status quo on the State and religion. Bennett seeks to transform it into a religious democracy.

I can't wait for how the media will misinterprete these elections. A few things to be kept in mind when you read those op-eds:

1) The "peace process" was a complete non-factor in these elections. Resurgence of the Left is due to its reorientation towards primarily social and economic agenda.

And the fact there was a higher turnout. Traditionally, low turnout elections lean to the right.

2) Resurgence of the Left will have no impact on the peace process, which was killed by Abbas with generous help from Obama, and which will remain dead for the foreseeable future. Yecimovich and Lapid may occasionally talk about restarting it,, but they know it won't work. Plus they're more or less on the same page as Netanyahu on most Palestinian-related issues.

If Lapid joins the coalition, then the talks will start up, even if in name only.

3) Bennett's popularity "miracle" is not due to some kind of sudden radicalization of the Israelis; his party simply absorbed the hardliner vote that used to go to Lieberman's party before its merger with the Likud.

Yup.

4) The real surprise is the popularity of Yair Lapid. Until about a year ago he was known mostly as a celebrity journalist on TV and the son of Yosef (Tommy) Lapid, an extremely popular figure in the Israeli life and culture (Holocaust survivor, TV and radio journalist and at one point a government minister, with a gift for hilarious sarcastic quips). Lapid's main strength is that he looks good in a leather coat.

He got much of the votes Kadima would have gotten, if Kadima had not fallen apart. Labor, Hatnua, and Meretz probably got the leavings of that.

[SoulReaver]

The differences are mainly on the "peace process" issues.

Netanyahu, contrary to how he has been portrayed in ever-clueless Western media, is a moderate rightwinter who is a centrist at heart, but he is also a hardcore pragmatist. He isn't opposed to Palestinian independence as a matter of principle, but he won't let Israel be suckered into a faulty agreement on bad terms the way Obama and the Europeans would have him do.

Bennet is pretty decent on social and economic issues, but he is a former head of the Yesha Council (settler lobby), ideologically opposed to the very idea of a Palestinian state, advocates annexation of about 60% of the West Bank and opposes more or less any action against settlers' illegal outposts. Basically, Bennet is how your media describes Netanyahu.

I should've specified: I meant the differences on matters of interior policy like economy healthcare etc. not foreign policy which are (from my pov anyway) of secondary importance. is Bennett as hardline as Netanyahu when it comes to interior policy?

[Womble]

I should've specified: I meant the differences on matters of interior policy like economy healthcare etc. not foreign policy which are (from my pov anyway) of secondary importance. is Bennett as hardline as Netanyahu when it comes to interior policy?

They're very compatible when it comes to domestic policies. Bennet is a former software tycoon with American roots (his parents are from San Fransisco), so he is very much pro-free market and against over-regulation, monopolies and big unions (not trade unions as such but monstrous "umbrella unions" representing anyone and everyone under one roof). He isn't against welfare for the elderly and the disabled, but his view is that everybody else needs to be given tools for success rather than money, so he prefers investment in education and affordable housing to throwing welfare money at the jobless.

Bennett is much more conservative than Netanyahu on issues related to homosexuality though. He is opposed to legalizing gay marriage, and some of his close advisors are known to oppose the drafting of homosexuals to army service.

[Womble]

He may be that, but has certainly not acted like that, mostly because of the necessity of keeping his coalition alive. He needed to appeal to the extremes.

That's what the media would have you believe but it's not true at all. Netanyahu gave the "peace process" more chances than it ever deserved; he ceded territory to Palestinian control and even agreed, however reluctantly, to Obama's idiotic demand for construction freeze in the settlements, which is one of the major reasons why his popularity declined. But the truth is that the Palestinians never actually wanted peace, and every time any Israeli government was ready to give in to their demands, they made sure to come up with new ones. It's easy to make someone look like a rejectionist when you keep on throwing unacceptable offers at them.

Except far worse. Netanyahu has been rather status quo on the State and religion. Bennett seeks to transform it into a religious democracy.

I don't know where you get your information but this is dead wrong. Bennett is no theocrat, which is why over 40% of his voters are secular. He is, in fact, a fierce critic of the Rabbinat institution and is a founder of a movement that promotes religious-secular dialogue to work out adjustments to the status quo that would make it acceptable for all.



And the fact there was a higher turnout. Traditionally, low turnout elections lean to the right.

If Lapid joins the coalition, then the talks will start up, even if in name only.

"In name only"- what use would that be?

But I doubt even that will happen. The Palestinians have no interest whatsoever in talks. If they had, the talks would've been on under Netanyahu.

Lapid is no Leftist, too. He is lumped together with the Left because of his social agenda, but the truth is that both he and Yecimovich are very much on the same page as Netanyahu on security issues. They may still, out of habit, speak in the language of the 1990-s, but they're realistic and not reckless.

P.S. Interesting fact- over 50 out of 120 seats in the new Knesset will be taken up by people who have never been MKs before.

[Womble]

Russian parliament passes a law banning "propaganda of homosexuality"

And a month ago, Russia retaliated against the US' Magnitsky bill by banning US citizens from adopting Russian orphans.

[Gatefan1976]

Russian parliament passes a law banning "propaganda of homosexuality"

And a month ago, Russia retaliated against the US' Magnitsky bill by banning US citizens from adopting Russian orphans.

Saw that awhile ago here, but it was on Yahoo.......http://news.yahoo.com/russia-moves-e...125825051.html

[DigiFluid]

Because illegal land seizures and walled ghettoes for minorities just weren't enough to draw comparisons: use of forced birth control to reduce immigrant population.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...t-8468800.html

http://www.haaretz.com/news/national...emium-1.496519

http://www.jta.org/news/article/2012...eli-birth-rate

[Womble]

Because illegal land seizures and walled ghettoes for minorities just weren't enough to draw comparisons: use of forced birth control to reduce immigrant population.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...t-8468800.html

You can compare anything to anything one you inject enough delusional fantasies into a true story of an actual wrong. "Walled ghettos for minorities"- in which universe?

It's a story as bizarre as it is grave. I have a feeling that it will grow more details over time that will force a reinterpretation- it won't turn into a good thing, obviously, but it will become more understandable. Not to the knee-jerk haters, obviously. Those never understand a thing.

Oh, and nice choice of post for the Holocaust memorial day, jerk.

[The Flyattractor]

Because illegal land seizures and walled ghettoes for minorities just weren't enough to draw comparisons: use of forced birth control to reduce immigrant population.

Technically no one in america actually owns "land/property".

And this is a interesting little story.
http://bcfoley.blogspot.com/2013/01/...-usa-with.html

[EvilSpaceAlien]

Because illegal land seizures and walled ghettoes for minorities just weren't enough to draw comparisons: use of forced birth control to reduce immigrant population.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...t-8468800.html

http://www.haaretz.com/news/national...emium-1.496519

http://www.jta.org/news/article/2012...eli-birth-rate

Seriously Israel? Eugenics? *sigh* Actual holocaust survivors must be spinning in their graves right now.

[Womble]

Seriously Israel? Eugenics? *sigh* Actual holocaust survivors must be spinning in their graves right now.

They would have, were that eugenics, but it's not. It's not even planned population control. It's a medical malpractice scoop story that was blown up into a vicious smear against Israel.

How true is it that Israel deceitfully gave Ethiopian Jews birth control injections?

[Gatefan1976]

They would have, were that eugenics, but it's not. It's not even planned population control. It's a medical malpractice scoop story that was blown up into a vicious smear against Israel.

How true is it that Israel deceitfully gave Ethiopian Jews birth control injections?

ROFLMAO!!!!
If someone else did it, it's evil, if we did it, it's misrepresentation.
Oh, and before you claim "Anti-anything", I see all systems the same way, so don't bother.

[Womble]

ROFLMAO!!!!
If someone else did it, it's evil, if we did it, it's misrepresentation.

Have you actually read the link? I'm guessing not, because that's what your reply indicates.

Note that O'Neill's source is Haaretz, a paper much loved by the anti-Israel crowd, in fact one of the sources that broke the story in the first place. The article is behind the paywall, but you can Google copies of the full text by the title.

Something else that got lost in translation: while it's true that 57% of all women prescribed Depo-Provera in Israel were Ethiopian, the total number of Depo-Provera prescriptions countrywide was just over 5000, so we're talking about under 3000 Ethiopian women receiving the drug. The Ethiopian-Jewish community in Israel numbers about 100 000.

Oh, and before you claim "Anti-anything", I see all systems the same way, so don't bother.

1) No you don't. Nobody does, why would you be the exception?

2) Don't project your knee-jerk reactions unto others.

[Col.Foley]

Is anyone else concerned that 'the Jews' should have learned their lesson from the Holocaust? And all the implications that brings to my mind?

[Womble]

Is anyone else concerned that 'the Jews' should have learned their lesson from the Holocaust? And all the implications that brings to my mind?

I know, right? How dare they not learn the lesson? What was the point of killing them by the millions if not to educate them about the virtue of compassion and forgiveness? And if the lesson wasn't learned, isn't it time to repeat the lecture?