I come from a family of secular Jews— more or less. My father was an atheist. My grandparents kind of went through the motions. No one else cared. I got bar mitzvah-ed to please my grandmother (and so I wouldn’t stand out as a freak in a Brooklyn neighborhood that was 99% Jewish).But one thing that did get pounded into me from the earliest days I can recall was a love of and devotion to Israel. My grandmother, who I had an extremely close relationship with, was particularly adamant about the wonderfulness of Israel. I accepted the notion without question for a long time. I even wanted to go over there and fight in one of their wars.
In the second half of my life, after having spent years living abroad and traveling the globe, my attitude towards Israel changed diametrically. For me, the idealistic, scrappy young country founded run by socialists had turned into a monstrous fascist society that no longer has any claim on my allegiance and should have no claim on America’s either. A democracy still, they’re— albeit just a slim plurality of the voters— the bad guys now. When I visited, the only place I felt even remotely comfortable in was Palestine. Israel creeped me out and I only even went because Roland dragged me there from a stay in Egypt that had lasted too many weeks.
As for Israel, any society that gives the religious fanatics— the God is on their side folks— a veto power, is doomed. And that’s not just red states here in the U.S.A.; but Israel and Iran and other theocracies even more. Can you name a theocracy that isn't a fascist entity? The ultra-religious lunatics in Israel are dragging the whole country down with them. They're out of their minds and since they don't participate in the civic life of the country, they shouldn't even be allowed to vote, let alone control the government and set a completely dysfunctional, hate-based policy agenda. Without a secular government, Israel has no chance of survival. Listen to the words of this song by Bob Dylan (sung by Kevin Hunter) carefully:
Almost everyone I know feels the same, even if many of my friends from politics are too scared to talk about it in public, pretrified of the power we have allowed AIPAC and its satellite organizations to exercise. Like Israel, AIPAC are the bad guys— and I mean really bad guys, even to the point of laundering Republican money into Democratic primaries to defeat progressives fingered by Hakeem Jeffries, their #1 Democratic ally in Congress.
Sunday, I was both surprised and gratified to read an OpEd in the NY Times by someone I assume grew in the same way I did— brainwashed by a pro-Israel family— Michael Bloomberg. I’ve never been a fan of this guy, but I admire him for having the guts— and the smarts— to write this OpEd about Israel courting disaster with it’s turn towards far right extremism. Bloomberg, like many rich Jews, has showered Israel with millions of dollars and began by reiterating his “love,” “respect” and “concern” for the country. Those characteristics, he wrote, are now leading him “to speak out against the current government’s attempt to effectively abolish the nation’s independent judiciary.”
Bloomberg wrote from the perspective of someone who still feels Israel is salvageable. I suspect he’s wrong. He’s worried— as many American Jews and Israelis are— that under Netanyahu’s fascist regime, a proposal would allow a simple majority of the Knesset to “overrule the nation’s Supreme Court and run roughshod over individual rights, including on matters such as speech and press freedoms, equal rights for minorities and voting rights. The Knesset could even go as far as to declare that the laws it passes are unreviewable by the judiciary, a move that calls to mind Richard Nixon’s infamous phrase ‘When the president does it, that means that it is not illegal.’ Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government is courting disaster by trying to claim that same power, imperiling Israel’s alliances around the world, its security in the region, its economy at home and the very democracy upon which the country was built.”
The economic damage is already being felt, as the pummeling of the shekel has showed. A broad swath of business leaders and investors have spoken out against the government’s proposal, publicly and privately. And in a disturbing sign, some people have already begun pulling money out of the country and re-evaluating their plans for future growth there. As the owner of a global company, I don’t blame them.
Companies and investors place enormous value on strong and independent judicial systems because courts help protect them— not only against crime and corruption but also government overreach. Just as important, they protect what their employees value most: individual rights and freedoms.
Companies are in a global competition for talent. So are countries. The best and brightest want to live in countries where they can be assured they will not be persecuted or discriminated against because of what they believe or whom they love. Israel’s commitment to those legal protections played a crucial role in its development as a so-called start-up nation, able to compete with Silicon Valley and other tech centers for high-skilled workers.
In fact, the extraordinary rise in Israel’s economic standing over the last generation may be Netanyahu’s greatest achievement. It’s fair to say that no prime minister has done more to transform its economy into a global powerhouse. Yet unless he changes course, Netanyahu risks throwing all that progress— and his own hard-earned legacy— away. The economic damage could make the cost being paid by the United Kingdom for Brexit look like bubkes.
But it’s not just the economy, of course. Israel’s security is based partly on a relationship with the United States built on shared values— freedom, equality, democracy— that can only be sustained by a commitment to the rule of law, including an independent judiciary capable of upholding it. If Israel retreats from that long-term commitment and moves its model of governance toward one that mirrors those of authoritarian countries, it risks weakening its ties to the United States and other free nations.
That would be a devastating loss for Israel’s security, harm prospects for a peaceful resolution of the Palestinian conflict and could even imperil the future of the Jewish homeland. It would also undermine the deep attachment millions of people around the world feel toward the country, often because of the pride our parents instilled in us not only for its Jewish character but also for its strong commitment to freedom.
In the United States, our founding fathers’ insistence on checks and balances to control the tyrannical tendencies of majorities was part of their genius. Our Constitution is not perfect— no law is— but its many checks and balances have been essential to protecting and advancing fundamental rights and maintaining national stability. It was only through those safeguards that the United States has managed to withstand extreme shocks to our democracy in recent years— including a disgraceful attempt to prevent the peaceful transfer of power— without a catastrophic fracturing.
In withstanding those shocks, the United States also has had a luxury that Israel does not: friendly neighbors on our borders. We could afford some painful national divisions without fearing that our neighbors might exploit them militarily. Israel cannot. It is in one of the world’s most dangerous neighborhoods, facing threats from Iran and others that Netanyahu rightly calls existential. The more divided it is at home, the weaker it appears to its enemies.
Countries bordered by external enemies have even greater need to seek internal compromise, and it is my fervent hope that Netanyahu will convince his coalition of the need to heed President Isaac Herzog’s plea to pull back and slow down.
Comments