The Left argues for a liberal democracy rather than a populist democracy

27 Comments / 27 Comments

1. sufferance, I meant to say. How’s that for a malapropism? 😀

2. @Ted I agree with you. In fact, Muslims should only be tolerated, if they continue to be tolerated, on suffrage by Jews and not by right, in the Temple Mount or any where else in Eretz Israel. That’s my view. But, being a liberal who wants to emulate the U.S., I would presume that your daughter believes in the truth of the lie that there is universal freedom of religion and equality on the Temple Mount and agrees with it. So, if that is the case, does she believe it should also be applied to Jews, who are 2nd class citizens on the Temple Mount, in fact the way Jews are treated is like that of South African blacks under apartheid even if it’s not based in skin color. Liberals tend to expose their hypocrisy, and without shame, when one asks them these kinds of questions.

3. @Peloni, thank you for expressing your views. You do not understand the internal situation in Israel at all in my view. You do not understand the complex situation at play. To get a feel for it perhaps, I suggest you listen to the podcast.

   Israel must face its identity crisis to survive
   Jonathan S. Tobin

   Interview with Michael Oren talks about Israel’s problems and how to solve them.

   https://www.jns.org/

4. @Bear

   Judicial reform by itself is a current power struggle that is divisive

   Actually, judicial reform was a key topic in the election which won the Right its majority. As far as it being divisive, I don’t see this as being divisive, but the target of divisive elements within Israeli society.

   In fact, I believe that shutting down the country, calling for foreign inverters to crush the national economy while the military plots psyops to overthrow a legitimately elected govt would all be better descriptions of divisive activities than the any legislation that is being considered. Recall that none of these actions by the Left are specifically relatable to the Judicial Reform, as Barach planned these divisive activities to complete a coup against the people’s govt during the height of Covid, something which doesn’t get enough attention, IMO. In any event, the source of divisiveness should actually be seen as being due to the Left’s inability to find a legitimate path which will win them another election. Should the Right pretend that the Left are honestly reacting to any specific legislation being considered and respond accordingly, the Right would be acting in just as bad faith as the Left, while the demands of the public for reform go unfulfilled.

   The solution for this crisis is to seek a better remedy to the laws which are being broken by the Left with their acts of incivility and insurrection, not to seek to subvert the legislative agenda of the Right to the approval of the Left.

   1

5. Just a brief supplement to EVRe1’s excellent and informative post. The U/S constitution , prior to the adoption of any amendments, provided for only one branch of government, the House of Representatives, to be elected by the (white) “people.” The Senate was to be elected by the state legislatures. The President was to be elected by an electoral college, and only indirectly elected by the “people,” who could vote toelect the electors. Initially, the framers hoped that the voters in each state would electedthose individuals known to be the wisest and most learned statesmen in their state, regardless of party affiliation. In practice, however, from the earliest Federal elections, slates of electoralwere chosen strictly by party affiliation.

   Supreme Cout justices were to be nominated by the president with the “advice and consent” of the Senate, and then appointed by him, This elent in the original constitution remains unchanged to this day. Inevitably, it has led to the Supreme Court over the past 200+ years making rulings that favored thinterests of elite classes , such as businesmen and politicians, over the needs and desires of the “common people.”

   Anyway you look at it, the original U.S. constitution was not a pro-democracy document. The amendments adopted after the civil war did aim to make the country more democratic. But the elite classes have found way to sustain their disproportunate influence on government. Campaign contributions, which are little more than legalized bribes, have been the major instrument for sustaining elite control. It is relevant that the Supreme Court has overturned all legislation that seeks to limit campaign contributions.

6. Worth listening to:
   Israel must face its identity crisis to survive
   Jonathan S. Tobin

   Interview with Michael Oren talks about Israel’s problems and how to solve them.

   https://www.jns.org/

7. Judicial reform by itself is a current power struggle that is divisive and has not been worth the results. Again it is the picking the tree one does not like in the forest and focusing on it.

   Heal the whole forest and unite the country. The forest (or whole country) need a reset that can be achieved with a constitution. That is what a wise leader of the country would do. Do we have one? Can Bibi step up to plate and show wisdom?

8. Many rhanks, Tanna, for your words of praise and encouragement. “I will study deserving” (Shakespeare)

9. @Bear
   I am all for setting up a constitutional committee in which all Israelis are represented and let them come up with a proposal. First and foremost, it should articulate a Bill of Jewish Rights and then a Bill of Rights.
   In the meantime our current government should continue with the overhaul.. I don’t want the overhaul to be held hostage to the committee.

   Bill of Jewish Rights should include;
   – the right of return for Jews amended as desired
   – the embrace of all Jewish symbols now in use.
   – the banning of all mention of the “Palestinian” narrative and all mention of the Naqba.
   – expulsion of all people convicted of terrorism after they serve their sentences.
   – the banning of Hamas and the PLO and other terrorist groups just as Saudi Arabia, Egypt and others have banned the Muslim Brotherhood.
   – criminalizing polygamy
   – cancellation of the law allowing for family reunification.
   – supporting the right of Jews to live in Jewish communities to the exclusion of others providing such communities do not exceed 5,000 people or some other appropriate number

10. @Ted read the Declaration of Independence. The idea is that it be the preamble to the Constitution. It is clear that Israel shall be a Jewish sovereign Nation State with individual civil rights for all citizens. https://www.gov.il/en/departments/general/declaration-of-establishment-state-of-israel

    By the way adding a bill of rights makes this crystal clear.

    I am for looking at the big picture in arriving at a constitution by consensus. This focus on this tree is bad in the forest does not allow one to think clearly.

11. @Sebastien
    The rights you talk of are not inalienable rights.
    I once said to my daughter that I support Israel being a liberal democracy (because I am a liberal at heart as most Jews are) providing Israel as a Jewish state is protected.

    Several types of “rights” were to be protected by the Declaration: “National and historic” rights to enable Jews to once again become masters of their own fate.

    In other words, Jewish and democratic” are not equal values. The latter should not have the ability to diminish the former. Aside from that, I am all in favour of equal rights.
    @Bear.
    What do you think the position of the left is on that issue? Remember the fight over the “Nation state law”. The left wants Israel to be a state of all its citizens. The right wants it to be the state of the Jews. The Arabs must accept this limitation of their rights.

    This position is set out in my 2005 article, “It Pays to be Jewish”and in my 2005 article “Particularism before Universalism”

12. @Ted I’d be curious to know whether your daughter believes that Jews have the same inalienable rights as Muslims to enter, pray, and use drinking fountains on the Temple Mount and the same inalienable rights to live where they please, including Judea and Samaria. If Israel were the U.S., which she claims to admire, the answer would be, “of course.” However, if she is a consistent leftist, her answer should be, “no.”

13. I can see there are strong feelings here felt by all.

    There is one problem I notice: The United States is not now and never was intended to be a “democracy.” The United States was formed as a representative republic. The founders were frightened of “democracy” because to them it meant mob rule. They were equally frightened of a powerful central government because they had just barely survived a very difficult war against a monarch and the last thing they wanted was a powerful central government.

    So they designed a representative government in which each of the 3 branches (executive, legislative, and judicial) would check the power of the other branches.

    Unfortunately, there was one flaw in the Constitution as envisaged by James Madison. Those who came together for the Constitutional Convention were all members of the colonialist elite. They were not necessarily aristocrats, although some were, but they all represented a highly educated group of men, something not available to all men of those days. The Constitutional flaw as written did not put in place safeguards against the elites of the country gaining so much power and money that they could make government officials subservient to them.

    In addition, the Progressive movement of the 1920’s, ’30’s, and ’40’s believed that government should be made up of “experts” who could, in their ‘wisdom’ guide government functioning. FDR massively expanded the government. The end result of these two flaws: one the lack of protections put in place for those who are not the elites and the progressive massive government expansion essentially led to the death of our Constitution.

    The way we know the Constitution is a dead letter is that legislation that began with the first public health legislation in the 1940’s and was added to in the 1980’s up until the present moment, has made it possible for the United States to have a biochemical weapons program and make it legal to use these bioweapons on the American people! This is evidence that the Constitution was essentially neutered by the so-called Military Industrial Complex that Eisenhower warned us about.

    So all the talk of democracy is fine, but the US was never meant to be a democracy. I notice that the people who tend to blame conservatives as a “DANGER TO DEMOCRACY!” are the same people who are destroying such democratic processes as federal elections and the functions of the FBI and Department of Justice.

    The real danger to our country has been the power hungry democrats who are today’s version of the Southern aristocrats who were determined to have their way with slaves even if it meant the country were destroyed.

    Similarly in Israel, the danger to your country comes not from your lack of a Constitution. It comes not from the legally elected Knesset Coalition and Prime Minister, it comes from power grabs by the Supreme Court, which has felt that its power is more important even if it leads to the destruction of the country! Similarly their cheerleaders demonstrating and trying to overthrow the government, the elites in Israel think they are somehow gifted with knowing what is best for everyone in the country, and they are determined to have their way no matter how much of the country they destroy.

    They are not for “democracy,” they are obsessed with staying in power and cannot bear to lose their power. In fact, they are the minions of the globalists who simply want to destroy Israel for the simple reason that it is a sovereign nation. And they won’t be happy until Israel is destroyed.

    1

14. The Israeli constitution must be based on halacha, as Israel is the Jewish state and its foundation must be the laws we received from Har Sinai.

    1

15. @Ted, left is very interested in negotiating a constitution.

    They have specific and a very good starting position. Similar to what I said in some cases such as a bill of rights, basic laws and using the Declaration of Independence as a starting point.

    Do not worry I know you can not stop looking at the tree you blame and I have zero chance to get you to open your mind.

    The IDI wants a constitution by consensus. They have a draft proposal it is 328 pages. They call it the Constitution by Consensus. (this how you would search on google to find it along with Israel Democracy Institute.

    Take a look at what the IDI proposed. They are interested in fixing the forest and not just a sick tree in the forest. Hopefully Bibi will demonstrate real leadership and pull the country together while creating a constitution.

16. @Bear
    The left isn’t ready to negotiate the constitution. We must do the overhaul first and then they will be ready to negotiate.

17. @Ted to solve the problems of the forest, one first needs to stop staring at one tree and blaming the one tree for all of the forest’s problems.

    Most people are not capable of doing that and just blame one tree or another. A real leader will see the overall problem of the forest and lead to solve the overall problem of the forest.

18. @ Bear
    Nobody argues against the need for a constitution.. But until such time as there is consensus on one, the government must continue to function without unlawful interference by the Court.

19. As a patriotic American, Mr. Dalgliesh’s long post is a must read. I am both ashamed and horrified to my core and at the same time proud to be living in a country where EVERYONE else in the world wants to live. How can we live with such tension.? From a previous comment, I pointed out how the evil leaders in our government have always undercover of twisted and distorted law perfected the killing, imprisonment and destroying the lives of their opposition. A close reading of Isiah 1-3 shows the same thing happening again. I wonder how this time will end?

20. In my previous post, I didn’t even get into the severe discrimination against Americans of East Asion descent, who were denied citizenship and basic human rights from the passaage of the “Chinese Exclusion Act” in 1880s to sometime after World War II. Also part of this racist syndrome was the mass imprisonment of
    the entireJapanese-Americanscommunity in the continental United States from 1941 to 1945. Even as Japanese Americans in the U,S, Army racked up a record of heroism in battle well above the call of duty.

21. Israelis are entitled to a bill of rights, checks and balances between different government branches and needs reform of its electoral system to something more stable and more direct elections in at least half the parliament (Knesset), Prime Minister.

    Prime Minister should appointment professional Ministers which will need approval from the Knesset in some fashion.

    A constitution needs to be formed, the current bi-laws should be included, a bill of rights, Declaration of Independence (would in my mind be perfect but Haredim would object as they are for control and not freedom of individual), bill of rights. Separation of powers and a fairly rigid and not easily way to amend the constitution.

    The country needs a constitution more than ever as the solution to the power struggle going on in the country.

22. Many thanks, Ted, for “rescuing” my post. Adam.

23. Is it OK now? That was a very long cmment.

24. Ted, please lrescue and publish the comment I have just posted from the electronic wilderness. I spent a lot of time and effort on it, and I think it is relevant to the current debate about democracy in Israel. My point iwas that the U.S. has never been a liberal democracy, or any kind of democracy, in practice as distinct from theory. And therefore the Israeli left’s holding up the U.S. as an example od democracy for Israel to follow is a mislrading argument.

    If you think it is too long for an argument, could you please publish it as an article? Thanks for your help in this matter.

25. TheUnited States has never been a liberal democracy in fact, as distinct from theory. For Example, most American Indians were denied the rights listed in the ten first amendments until 1924. Instead, Federal law treaed them as conquered nations, entitled only the rights of conquered nations subject ed to occupation by a conqueror. That is to say, no rights at all, The USG seized Indian property at will,The U.S. signed many treaties with Indian tribes, but never observed their terms for more than a few years at most. As soon as the United States had the military might to crush an i Indian tribe, it did so, even if this was a flagrant violation of a treaty. U,S, and state courts are even now, in 2023, are filled with petitions from Indian tribes demanding that long-broken treaties be enforced, The rarely rule in favor of these lawuits, which are often ignored, even when they are on a court’s docket, for decades.

    Most African-Americans were slaves from the day when all of the then-thirteen states signed the Constitution. until 1865, when Abraham Lincoln finally pushed through a Constitutional amendment through a very reluctant Congress. In order to secure Congressional consent, he had to promise well-paying Federal jobs to pro-slavery Congressmen in order obtain their votes. And these pro-slavery congressman did in fact receive these jobs after they “voted right.”

    In 1857, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in so many words (this is an exact quote or very close to it: In the United States a negro has no rights that a white man is bound to respect.”

    While Congress did pass a number of Constitutional amendments and other laws after the civil war that in theory gave black Americans basic civil rights, no attempts was made to enforce these laws in the for Confederate states until 1965, 97 years later! In order to enforce the right of black children to attend the school nearest them, President Eisenhower had to call up the national guard. During the Kennedy Administration, Attorney General Robert Kennedy had to personally escort black school children to school, holeding their hands, while Alabama Governmor “stood at the door” to block their entrance. Throught the south, White Citizens Councils organizes what they openly called “massive resistance ” to the civil rights legislation pushed through a reluctant Congress by President Lyndon B. Johnson. These councils vowed to protect the “purity of the white race” from ‘polution by intermarriage between whites and blacks, which
    they claimed would be an inevitable consequence they claimed would occur if the civil rights legislationwere ever enforced.

    Between 1865 and 1965, lynchings and pogrom-like riots of whites against blacks were commonplace occurances in the South, when attemps were made to organize voter registration drives in the black community.

    Whenever the U.S. has been at war with one or more foreign countries, vocal oppenents of the war were arrested and charged with crimes. Public opposition to American wars has always been banned in the u.S. There have always been many Americans thrown in jail when they dared to oppose American involvement in a war. Among those notoriously sent to Federal prison during and after World War I was a former Presidential candidate, Eugene V. Debs, who received 1 million votes for president in the 1920 election, even while he remained in jail.

    Despite the promises of freedom of assembly and freedom of speech, Congress passed laws in the 1950s specifically banning the U.S, Communist Party. All of themembers of the party’s central committee were then tried, convicted and sent to prison. They all served at least five years. Eventually the U.S. Supreme Court ruled the the law under which they were convicted served at least five years in jail.

    At present, the U.S. government is waging a campaign opersecution of the political opposition , including a former U.S. president. Imaginative reinterpretations of laws are being used to prosecute him and other leaders of the political opposition , for actions that had always been considered legal in the past. Every possiblemeans is being employed to prevent him from running for re-elrction in 2024.

    I could go on and on about the illiberal nature of American non-democracy, in practiv-ce as distinct from constitutional theory. But I am tired of the Israeli left holding up the United States as a “liberal democracy” that Israel should emulate.

26. @TedBelman
    omg! Barak is on video saying that! Treason and sedition!! Arrest him!

27. Howard wrote to me:

    Israel was intended to be a homeland for Jews. Applying the “liberal democratic” ideals of today (ie. globalism) to Israel will end its Jewish majority. Unfortunately too many Israelis want to imitate American liberals- they don’t care if there is “population replacement” as is being implemented in Western countries.
    To me this represents a complete lack of reading of our Jewish history and zero overview. Liberals lack logic ie. cause and effect does not operate in their brains. Otherwise they would sense the danger of Jews being swamped in their own homeland and the predictable awful result…meaning they could care less for the future of their children and grandchildren. Same as over here.