Who is First?

Election campaigns are so much fun that Israel is having two within the span of four months, providing daily entertainment if you sift through the vitriol. American elections are different because the dates are defined in law, unlike Israel’s parliamentary system, but they are also so much fun that American political campaigns are very, very long. Perhaps it is better said that they never end – the permanent campaign in which winning matters much more than governance. Israel’s election campaign, while unnecessary, is also mercifully short.

For all the volatility of American politics today – the endless feuding, screaming, dysfunction, real accusations, false accusations and and occasional hilarity – it is downright tame, even stable, compared to what is going on here in Israel. Having a polarized and divided society is the fate of many democracies today, which can be a strength (no group becomes excessively powerful) or a weakness (nothing really ever gets done). But to hold two elections within a few months is bizarre, especially since the electorate hasn’t changed. The configuration of Knesset seats is also likely not to change that much, although I do suspect that Binyamin Netanyahu – who just became Israel’s longest serving prime minister in history, exceeding David Ben-Gurion’s tenure – will not be the prime minister one year from now.

What is especially unusual, and somewhat irksome, is that the right-wing religious parties have fragmented into so many different groups that they are also undermining themselves, as they did in 1992 resulting in the Oslo catastrophe. I count one, two, three, four, five and maybe six parties or maybe more parties that on some level have support of the Religious Zionist community – all reflecting what Sigmund Freud called “the narcissism of small differences.” There is the Bayit Hayehudi, the remnants of the old Mafdal; the New Right party of Naphtali Bennett, who gambled and lost when he abruptly left the party he founded to start his own. (Was it a wise move? Well, the modern philosopher, political theorist and ex-basketball player Charles Barkley once said that “the only difference between a good shot and a bad shot is whether or not it goes in.” If you shoot and miss, it’s a bad shot. Bennett shot and missed.) There’s the Zehut party, angling for a Torah state in which marijuana is legal. The Yachad party. Otzma Yehudit on the far right. The new Noam party inhabiting similar quarters. And even the Likud has a fair share of Religious Zionists in its list. And I have probably overlooked one or two equally redundant parties.

That’s a lot of parties, with nuanced differences but primarily espousing similar views, the “narcissism of small differences,” but that has and will result in cannibalizing their voting base. Bennett’s party and Feiglin’s party threw away about 5 seats, 250,000 wasted votes in April’s election. If those votes had counted, there wouldn’t have been a need to rely on Avigdor Lieberman’s party – which everyone assumed would join the right-wing coalition until he decided not to join and embarked on an anti-Torah campaign that he hopes will improve his electoral prospects. One would think that the dissipation of votes, power, and influence in the last election would engender some humility, a contraction of the parties and a willingness to work together for common goals. After all, agreement on 80-90% of the issues at hand should count for something.

What induces all these candidates and parties to run, to highlight their small differences, and then fail to work together to form a coalition? It’s old story that never ends, even if we assume that everyone is sincere.

The Gemara (Sanhedrin 102a) discusses the sad tale of Yerav’am ben Nevat who split ancient Israel into two kingdoms, reintroduced idolatry (building his own golden calves), a person who saw himself as royalty, but who also possessed tremendous spiritual potential. The Sages noted that notwithstanding that he “sinned and caused others to sin,” he was also a Torah scholar whose Torah had no defect but was completely perfect. All other scholars were before him “like shrubbery.”

And, typically of this type of talented individual, the Gemara says that, in a prophetic vision, “G-d grabbed hold of Yerav’am’s cloak (apparently in order to shake some sense into him). And G-d said, ‘repent, and I, you and King David will stroll together in Paradise.’” Together, we can perfect the world!

But then “Yerav’am asked, who goes first? And G-d said, David goes first. And Yerav’am responded, if so, I can’t. I don’t want it.” Either I go first or I don’t go at all.

Mi Barosh – who goes first? – is such a destructive syndrome. Who will lead? Who is in charge? That ailment destroys people, societies, and nations. It destroyed Korach in his time and Yerav’am in his. It makes politics so superficial and allows problems to fester and never get resolved. Yerav’am was so jealous of the Davidic dynasty hat he felt disrespected even to walk behind the true king; he had to be first.

This Mi Barosh malady is harmful to marriages, to families, to shuls and communities. It is so ancient and so commonplace that one would think we would be aware of it, recognize it, and carefully scrutinize our motivations, decisions and actions. Sadly, we don’t, and even sadder, Mi Barosh is the rule, not the exception. The multiplicity of parties in Israel, and the cavalcade of candidates for the Democratic nomination for president, all reflect this fundamental human weakness. People will give up their lives, their spiritual destiny, their families, their wealth and their friends, and all for just a little honor, or a little more honor than the next guy.

Mi Barosh underwrites – and undermines – much of the political scene today, and the results could be quite unpleasant, as they were when Yerav’am maneuvered his way into the kingship of Israel and an ensuing rift in the Jewish society. And each person understands this, and each thinks that the other should therefore give way. Mi Barosh.

If we understand this on a personal level, we will have made great progress. To understand this on a national level will take a bit longer. Maybe it is happening now with a re-configuration of leaders on the right – but perhaps it will not be fully appreciated until the exalted son of David redeems Israel and the world. The sooner the better.

 

Advertisements

2 responses to “Who is First?

  1. Rabbi Steven Pruzansky said:

    “…American political campaigns are very, very long.”

    my personal response:

    You can thank Jimmy Carter for the long length
    of American Presidential campaigns.
    His own was two years long, which was
    much longer than any of his predecessors.

    ===================================
    Mr. Ross Perot
    (two-time USA Presidential candidate) said:

    “Israel is a beacon in its part of the world
    in terms of its democratic government.

    It is a role model to the others there…”

    SOURCE: Remembering Ross Perot’s
    relationship with Israel and the American Jewish
    community
    by Jackson Richman, 2019 July 10
    http://www.jns.org/remembering-ross-perots-relationship-with-israel-and-the-amreican-jewish-community/

    ===================================
    Lord Ian Livingston of England said:

    “Whilst the Israeli Defense Forces are not
    perfect, the obsession of focusing on them
    despite being the most moral and professional
    army in the Middle East is very strange.”

    SOURCE: Ten Baroness Tonge
    Pilloried at House of Lords Session She Initiated
    on Israel’s Treatment of Palestinian Children

    by Benjamin Kerstein, 2019 July 8
    http://www.algemeiner.com/2019/07/08/itiated-on-israels-treatment-of-palestinian-children/

    ===================================
    Josep Borrell Fontelles, the newly elected
    Chairman of the European Union,
    recently said in an interview in Politico:

    “Iran wants to wipe Israel out, nothing new about that.

    You have to live with it.”

    SOURCE: Lessons in the appeasement of Iran
    by Sarah N. Stern [President of the Endowment
    for Middle East Truth] 2019 July 12
    http://www.jns.org/opinion/lessons-in-the-appeasement-of-iran/

    ===================================
    Mr. Stephen M. Flatow [an attorney in New Jersey and father of Alisa Flatow, who was murdered in an Iranian-sponsored Palestinian terrorist attack in year 1995] said:

    “…Israel ended its rule over 98 percent [98%] of the Palestinian Arabs back in [year] 1995. It is the Palestinian Authority that rules them.

    The gang [of political Far-Leftists and Progressives and Socialists] knows that Israel does not rule the area.
    ……………………………..
    So why do the Progressive Networkers persist in promoting the fantasy that Israel rules over the Arabs?

    Because demonizing Israel as the occupier galvanizes their followers.
    It gives them something to be upset about…”

    SOURCE: Ten Jewish groups unite
    against Israeli democracy
    by Stephen M. Flatow
    http://www.jns.org/opinion/ten-jewish-groups-unite-against-israeli-democracy/

  2. Yossi Baumol

    The reason is simple. Israelis always go to the polls to vote on 2 non-issues: 1) Giving away land – but there is no one to give it to! Fact is Rabin & Olmert built more in Judea & Samaria than Bibi.
    2) Changing Halacha: Until the Sanhedrin is established, the unity of Halacha must be preserved, above and beyond the practical consideration of the power of Charedi parties.
    It is the dichotomy of these two imaginary factors which prevent Religious Zionist unity. Shaked & Feiglin could merge and Peretz and Ben Gvir can merge – but that’s about it. The forced unity of all of them would drive the religious left wing who hold political right wing views to Lieberman & Blue and White.