Ted Belman
Is Bayit Hayehudi extremist at its core? I don’t believe that their intention to annex Area C is at all extremist though Leibler thinks so:
-
Yet if Bayit Yehudi pursues its stated annexation objectives, it may undermine a moderate nationalist government and lose an historic opportunity to restore religious Zionism as the dominant religious force in Israeli society.
[..]
After the elections, the new government will confront unprecedented pressures, from the United States, Europe and the broader global community.
Netanyahu is likely to find this phase even more daunting than his previous confrontations with President Barack Obama. He will need maximum maneuverability to maintain the diplomatic balancing act which hitherto enabled him to stand firm in relation to major issues while displaying flexibility in secondary areas. He must be able to govern without the threat of veto by extremists out of synch with the real world. [..]
Nevertheless, a government coalition dependent on support from a party committed to the formal repudiation of a two-state solution, and to the annexation of the West Bank, would be in crisis.
No responsible government could conceivably implement such policies, which would lead to disastrous international repercussions including loss of the crucial support of Congress and the American people. It would also impact on the impending Iranian nuclear crisis. [..]
Voters should appreciate that a coalition government based on a weakened Likud-Beytenu, subject to pressure from a party promoting such policies, could lead to an early collapse of a nationalist government.
This would be nightmare scenario for the national camp, which underwent a similar crisis in the past when the extreme Right disassembled a Center-Right government and paved the way for the Left to regain power. Under such circumstances, Bayit Yehudi would become as irrelevant as the failed former Mafdal.
Essentially Liebler supports Bibi’s dancing routine is is very fearful of alienating the West by rejecting its agenda for us outright. I don’t know about you, but I am tired of this game. It is not without its costs prime among them is the lost opportunity costs. We should build as is our right and should make it clear to the west that we will not make a deal on their terms nor will we wait forever for the illusionary peace.
But Liebler levels another accusation that gives me more pause:
-
These concerns are heightened by the fact that 40 percent of the Bayit Yehudi Knesset list was not elected but appointed by the central committee of Tkuma, a far-right settler party formerly a faction of Ihud Leumi.
The Tkuma constitution obligates its Knesset members to “accept rabbinical authority that shall guide the elected representatives according to Torat Israel and who shall determine the fundamental principles” and explicitly states that “ the Committee of Rabbis of the Party have the ultimate authority in determining the principal ideological direction of the Party and the order of its candidates to the Knesset.”
The Tkuma Knesset contingent will therefore be committed to implementing directives of their three Tkuma rabbis – Kiryat Arba’s Chief Rabbi Dov Lior, Rabbi Zalman Melamed and Rabbi Chaim Steiner. This is a radical departure from the approach of traditional religious Zionists who adamantly refused to defer the determination of political policies to rabbis. It mirrors the manner in which Shas and United Torah Judaism operate.
The dominant rabbi is Rabbi Lior, whose extremist proclamations, such as asserting that the mass murderer Baruch Goldstein be considered “holier than all the martyrs of the Holocaust” and that conceiving with non-Jewish sperm causes genealogical abnormalities, have shocked and alienated all but the most extreme of the religious right wing.
Following the Gaza disengagement, Rabbi Lior amended the wording of the prayer for the welfare of the state recited in synagogues under his control to eliminate a blessing for the government.
One can assume that Naftali Bennett does not endorse most of Rabbi Lior’s extremist views. Besides, Rabbi Lior declines to endorse him or Bayit Yehudi in order not to offend Michael Ben-Ari’s Otzma LeYisrael (Strong Israel), an even more extreme far-right party.
But that does not detract from the fact that a substantial number of his Knesset contingent are Tkuma members committed to implementing their rabbis’ directives.
In contrast, Rabbi Lior and his followers repudiate majority rule when it conflicts with what they determine to be the will of the Almighty.
This bothers me. I need an explanation. Whatever happenned to separation of church and state?
I do not support the idea that Rabbis should have the last word in political matters and I consider that the terms of any peace agreement is a political matter even though it involves giving up parts of Eretz Yisrael.
Shmuel HaLevi Said:
I was just confused by your description of Leibler as a Mapainik. And I can’t tell from your semi-cryptic answer whether you’re equating them in whole or in part.
@ Shy Guy:
You tell us.
I never got a free chicken before elections and extreme attempts to make us vote for them by the MAFDAL
Guess who did that? Other means were also used.
Anyway that was in the past and obviously they belong iin that past. Only Peres hangs on… regretfully even on that missing the true way. And the goons of the Histadrut with him.
The shift away from that era is all too obvious and religious currents conclusivly will move up.
Shmuel HaLevi Said:
Is there any difference between a dear old Mapainik and a dear old Mafdalnik?
Mr. Leibler is a dear old MAPAINIK who is trying to go back to controlling the State via the little red book. Histadrut book including stamped strips of dues paid papers. I still have mine. It does not work anymore, nor does my good friend Mr. Leibler’s try. He was for long pitching for Livni when she was still able to wiggle her way with Sharon and Olmert. That lasted until that was too far out even for him.
The MAPAI-MAPAM elites know their era is vanishing and will swing against anyone they perceive is likely to finally end their power apportioning privileges. The future will look much more like Mr. Bennett than Mrs. Yehimovich.
Netanyahu is not even in the running.
Track All Israeli election polls Here: http://knessetjeremy.com/
@ Ted Belman:
“The “hareidi-nationalist” stream is a stream within religious Zionism that is both very nationalistic and very strict in its Torah observance. It is known by the term “hardali,” a Hebrew acronym for hareidi-nationalist-religious. The acronym has a playful overtone because the word hardal means mustard”. http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/163885#.UOsxK2euqI4
@ Ted Belman:
I guess there is . You were specific and I was speaking in generalizations.
Specifically Members of Tekumah know the views of their Rabbis and agree with them so in most cases they will consult out of respectful deference to them. I don’t see any inherent conflict as their Rabbis views differ if at all only slightly from any other rabbi attached to the settler movement and the Land of Israel. Most are disciples of Rav Kook. Tekumah is a splinter of the old NRP and the merger is quite natural.
I couldn’t locate the specific Tekumah platform you metioned but here is the National Union Platform and there shouldn’t be much if any difference
Tkuma s a very small contingent of Bayit ha-Yehudi. In the outgoing Knesset they had about 1 of the 4 seats in their coalition (National union party of Israel) I haven’t seen the specific platform but who cares. Read the Likud Platform. It negates any territorial transfers. Tekumah faction may in fact be over representative in the Bayit-Yehudi party list but for unity price was paid. I expect Eldad and Ben Ari to confederate with the Bayit-Yehudi after the elections. Platforms may be a necessary political fact but after the elections each party files them in file 13.
I reject the idea of post Zionist having representation or influence in the Government.
All of the Arab Parties.
I’ll even go further and say that anyone not paying taxes or serving in some national capacity like the IDF or some form of national service should be denied the vote.
Can’t or shouldn’t be done? Neither can you deny the Haredim representation and once they elect their reps their influence is only proportional to what the dominant parties allow them either the Likud or Labor till now. in 20 years they will be the majority and we will be at their pleasure not the reverse. We have 15 years to try to assimilate them into society and keeping them out is not the way. The Haredim participate in Government to protect the interests of the sector they represent and as a group do not want too much national responsibility, but there are signs of change. Now that the haredim have tens of thousands living over the green line it might be interesting to see if they have hardened their positions on Land for Peace?
@ yamit82:
The particular paragraph that concerns me is:
yamit82 Said:
Thewre is a conflict between these two statements.
On the one hand many Hareidi rabbis don’t recognize Israel ( you can expand on this) yet they want to exercise influence over decisions of the state.
They should not be able to tie the hands of the elected representatives. They can influence them but not have undue influence.
In Judaism there is no such animal as separation of Church and State. This goes to the implicit contradiction between Judaism and Democracy. If you want democracy then chose democracy but never confuse one with the other and attribute democracy to Judaism it’s not. No real Torah observant Jew can obey any law or edict in contradiction of Halacha. Secular rule is only possible in a State like Israels as long as that rule and rulers do not cross certain red lines: if not there is always a danger of civil war.
I don’t support the idea of leftist and anti Zionists imposing their views through culture, academia and laws I don’t agree with. I don’t agree with them having the last word by weight of the influence and institutional power. I don’t agree that Obama, Bush or Clinton having the last word here. Rabbis don’t dictate they advise based on their understanding of Halacha. The individual is free to do as they please. They can even change rabbis if they disagree strongly enough.
IMO our problem here is not the undue influence of the rabbis in the political sphere but in every sphere. At least their varied opinions are Jewish opinions based on Jewish sources and not foreign influences.
Leibler (note spelling) is an extremely complacent Jew.