Two Beit Shemeshes, not on speaking terms

Municipal elections are less than a week away.  For me, they can't be over soon enough.

There have not been, to the best of my knowledge, any truly scientific polls to indicate who will be crowned the Mayor of Beit Shemesh come next Wednesday.  All we know is, it's close.  And we know one other thing: whoever wins Tuesday's election, around half of the city will be jubilant and throwing street parties, and the other half utterly dejected, bitter and resentful.

The thing that has characterized this election campaign the most has been the polarization, the rift in our community, the anger, the hatred, even violence.  From both sides.  And I say that not just to seem even-handed - I've seen and heard people arguing for and against both Eli Cohen and Moshe Abutbul, with fury and venom like I have never seen in them before.  Laws of loshon hora, rechilus, motzi shem ra, nezikin - even Shemiras Shabbos - out the window!   And there is almost nobody in the "undecided" category.  I've never seen anything like this before: nearly everyone I know is vociferously and unswervingly committed to their candidate.  I have not yet had a conversation with anyone who was wavering between the two!  I've witnessed way too many heated exchanges between the two camps, and not one case of anyone changing their mind.  Perhaps the undecideds are afraid to let themselves be known, lest they be set upon by one or the other faction... but I don't know, because they're not saying, and I don't even know if they exist.

This schism in our town truly breaks my heart.  In the end, we're all going to carry on with our lives, and we're going to have to live with our friends and neighbors who voted for the other guy.

Casting my mind back 5 years ago to the previous election, it wasn't like this.  Sure, there was plenty of electoral tension, but it wasn't about Haredim versus Everybody Else.  Moshe Abutbul had plenty backing from secular and traditional parties and communities, which is why he won the election.  And Shalom Lerner was backed by the faction of UTJ that is now the "Koach" party.  When Abutbul won, sure Lerner's supporters were upset, but not so grievously that they contemplated moving out of the city.

What happened?  How is it that in the space of 5 years, our city has fractured neatly down the line: Haredim (with the notable exception of the Tov party) are solidly behind Abutbul, while everyone else is voting Cohen?  It's an important question to ask, because this in itself is probably the most burning issue concerning Beit Shemesh: the relationship between the various sectors of the population.

I was having a discussion recently with an Abutbul supporter, who was earnestly rattling off an impressive list of the achievements over the last 5 years, that benefited everyone, not just Haredim, and he was getting immensely frustrated that people just refused to see the truth of the situation.  I guess he didn't learn Stephen Covey's 5th Habit: Seek to understand, then to be understood.  Did you every ask yourself why, despite everything you've said, the city has split into two practically warring factions?  If you're going to claim that the opening of a bowling alley (a private business initiative) is to the credit of the mayor, then you're also going to have to "credit" the mayor with bringing the relationships between Haredim and Everyone Else to the nadir they are at now: where anti-Cohen ads use Holocaust imagery (implicitly calling Cohen a Nazi), and non-Haredim are openly talking about leaving the city if Abutbul is re-elected.

He answered me: it's just fear.  I wholeheartedly agree.  And I think the same is true for the other side.  The shrill tenor of this whole campaign is because both sides are driven by a wild, visceral fear that the other guy might win and destroy everything for "us" (whoever "we" might be).  But it's not a full equivalence.  The Haredi camp is afraid of Cohen, because he's unknown, is alleged to have connections with the Great Satan (Yair Lapid) and the Little Satan (Naftali Bennett), and he's threatening the benign reign of their patron Moshe Abutbul.  The non-Haredi camp is afraid of Abutbul, because he's known, and whatever explanation you may proffer, they have seen him in action for the past 5 years, and they emphatically do not want a repeat performance.  Do you really want to understand why every non-Haredi party, plus Tov, quit the coalition?  Ask them!  Do you really want to understand why almost every non-Haredi voter who voted Abutbul 5 years ago, is now dreading the prospect that he might be re-elected?  Ask them!

I am certain that Moshe Abutbul is a very good man, and he is totally dedicated to doing the best he can.  But whether intentionally or not, his tenure as mayor has been exceptionally divisive, and bred extremism and hatred between different sectors of the Jewish people.  The results are undeniable: we are a city of two factions, not on speaking terms - and that is the greatest tragedy imaginable.  The fact that this happened on his watch is a gross failure, an offence warranting dismissal.  However much he may have done on paper, whatever endorsements he may bring, whoever tells me "Daas Torah", and however much of a good, sweet and kind person he may be, I cannot vote for Moshe Abutbul.

Many of my friends and neighbors have come to me gushing with effusive praise for Eli Cohen.  He sounds like a good guy, though his marketing is appalling.  I wish I could share their enthusiasm for him, but I don't.  But I will give him my vote on Tuesday, because the only thing I am sure of is that Beit Shemesh needs a new mayor, just to give us some chance of healing.

Perhaps, like me, you are disillusioned and distressed by the tsunami of sin'as chinam that has engulfed our beautiful city, and know that it cannot be allowed to continue in this path - but for whatever reason you cannot bring yourself to vote for Eli Cohen.  I can understand that.  But then, please, don't actively lend a hand to deepening the rift in our society.  Don't vote.  Or vote with a "white slip".  Make that your protest.

And even if you do vote for Abutbul, I still love you, and I'll still be your loyal friend and neighbor.

Why I'm voting Likud for city council

First up, before I even get into tachlis, I'm sure there are a bunch of people who read the title of this post and thought, "Why aren't you voting for Eli Cohen?"  For the edification of you newcomers to Israeli municipal elections, you have two votes: one is a yellow slip for mayor (Eli Cohen vs Moshe Abutbul), and one is a white slip where you vote for a party list.  Unfortunately we still don't have any directly elected ward councillors; you vote for a party and the seats on city council are divvied up according to our rather complex system of proportional representation.  So yes, it's a complete no-brainer to vote Eli Cohen for mayor, and I'm not even going to address that angle.  Rather, I'm going to tell you why I'm voting Likud (מחל) for city council.

When I joined Likud, I did so for a national agenda, in order to support Moshe Feiglin. Incidentally, thanks to the efforts of thousands of others like me, Moshe is now a member of Knesset, and doing way better than I ever expected, and the Likud of today is not the spineless Likud that bowed to Ariel Sharon's disastrous disengagement.  But that's beside the point.  My point is, that I never saw the Likud as being that important on a local government level; I thought it much more useful to have representatives on council whom I could trust, who were my neighbors and who would look out for me and my community's interests.  And who were all the Likud representatives on council, anyway?  Predominantly traditional Moroccans from Old Beit Shemesh, with not a heckuva lot in common with me, culturally speaking.  So in the past municipal elections I gave my vote to Anglo parties, so that there would at least be someone on the council representing my culture and values.

This year, however, my perspective has completely changed.  Since becoming a member of the local Likud branch council, I've come to know a lot of these old-time Likudnikim.  To be sure, there's still a big cultural gap between us, e.g. I do often need to ask them kindly not to smoke while we're having our meetings.  But the fact is, they are sincerely and completely dedicated to serving the greater community of Beit Shemesh.  Take a look at this Facebook page for a list of the Likud's achievements over the past 5 years.  And then consider that during that time, the Likud was in the Opposition.  That means it wasn't even their job to be working on these things - but they did it anyway.  And if you ask them why they did all this stuff if they weren't in the coalition, they will look at you as if you just suggested eating falafel with a knife and fork.  That's just what you do for your city!

And it's not for the glory, either.  Everything they did over the past 5 years was done on the quiet.  When Likud Knesset candidate Keti Shitrit mentioned to a group of us Likud Anglos a couple of days ago that the budget for the expansion of Road 38 was secured by Shalom Edri (the local Likud chairman), we expressed surprise, seeing as Mayor Abutbul has claimed that as one of his achievements.  "Mah pitom!  We have a letter from [Minister of Transportation] Yisrael Katz to prove that it was Shalom who convinced him to spare Road 38 from the budget cuts!"  But they never publicized it before.  They never thought to - because they didn't do it for the publicity.  So we Anglos took that letter and gave it the exposure it deserves.

OK, so all I've proved so far is that the Likudnikim are really good people who do a lot of work for the community.  But still, why vote for them when there are so many other really good people running for council - Anglos, people like us?

I agree that many of the other party lists are filled to the brim with amazing people, some of whom are good personal friends of mine.  I wish them every success, I hope they make it to council, and I am convinced that they will serve the community to the very best of their ability.

But the key phrase here is: to the very best of their ability.  If you peruse the Likud's list of achievements, you will notice that the majority of them were achieved because they had the ear of the relevant minister in the national government.  If you have a problem, and you call your friendly local councillor Shmerel from the Anglos Like Me Party, he will certainly listen and do his level best to help out.  He will bang on whatever doors he can in the municipality and try to escalate your issue to anyone who can help out.  But if your problem is, for example, that the road outside your house resembles a moonscape, and the mayor is crying about budget cuts beyond his control, then who does councillor Shmerel call?  He doesn't have the cellphone number of the Minister of Transportation - and even if he did, the Minister wouldn't recognize the caller ID and would let it go to voicemail.  Your call is very important, please leave a message, along with the 327 other people who left me messages in the past 24 hours.  Oh well, I did my hishtadlus...

When Shalom Edri or Moshe Shitrit picks up the phone to any given Likud minister, they answer within three rings.  That's why we have Road 10 today, that's why Route 38 is going to be expanded, and that's why the Orot Girls' School held strong against the extremists and their appeasers.  And why do the ministers care about some activist in some little backwater town?  Because Beit Shemesh is traditionally a Likud stronghold, and the ministers know they have to keep their support base happy.  The stronger the Likud representation is in Beit Shemesh, the greater our importance in the eyes of the Likud-led national government.

I won't say that voting Likud will give you a warm fuzzy feeling - but it's the smart vote if you're looking out for the overall good of Beit Shemesh.

So, that's why I'm voting מחל - Likud on October 22.  I hope you'll consider it, too.

The "Nice Guy" Trap

A week or two ago, I posted a comment on Facebook, tangentially hinting at my disapproval of the concept of State-recognized homosexual marriages.  And wow, did I get it in the neck from my friends!  I was not too surprised by the accusations of insensitivity and bigotry from my secular friends; after all, once you have removed God from the picture, there is no reason on Man’s earth why two consenting adults shouldn’t do whatever the heck they want together, and if the majority of the society they’re in feels it’s OK, then why not?  For that matter, consensual wife-swapping shouldn’t be a problem, either.  And why stop at adults?  Who says children who have reached puberty can’t decide for themselves what to do with their bodies?  And while we’re going down this route, let’s say some nutter gets hooked up with a consenting chimpanzee, and feels it’s a meaningful relationship, why should anyone else intrude?  It’s not as if it’s infringing on anyone else’s rights, is it?  Nothing to discuss here.

What perplexed me more about the reactions was the fact that so many of my religiously observant friends also jumped down my throat, giving me technical arguments like, “There’s no Torah prohibition against two men living together, so what’s the problem?” or “Keeping homosexuality illegal is not going to decrease the amount of homosexuality in the world.”  And there’s me left shaking my head.  Yes, these arguments may be technically accurate.  But for Heaven’s sake – look at the big picture!  Do these people, who profess to believe in God and the laws of the Torah, actually want our society to be moving in a direction of ever-greater licentiousness and open denigration and mockery of the moral codes that they supposedly support?  What is it that drives them to criticize me for simply stating a position that is clearly and unequivocally advocated by the Torah?

Soon after that, I was drawn into argument with a dear friend of mine who is passionately pro-Israel and very active in Israel advocacy on the Internet – yet he found it necessary to condemn the Israeli government publicly for not declaring that “price tag” vandalism should be classified as terrorism.  I took him to task on that, asking him if he really felt that writing obnoxious and threatening graffiti, terrible though that is, is morally equivalent to blowing up a bus.  We got into plenty of further discussion, but he would not climb down, and to my knowledge, his public position is still unchanged.

This got me thinking even more.  What other examples can I think of, of people taking public positions that run contrary to their stated ideology?  It didn’t take me long to draw up a short list:

• People who deeply care about Israel’s future, advocating unilateral surrender of Israeli territory to a sworn enemy that has never once given any indication that it will make peace with us – and this, “for the sake of Israel’s long-term security”.  Come again?
• People who are very concerned about security and the threat of global terrorism, yet willfully refuse to identify the perpetrators or their ideology.  (Hint: begins with “I”, ends with “-slam”.)  Result: ridiculous security checks at airports that treat a 69-year old granny with the same level of suspicion as a 23 year old Middle Eastern male wearing a bulky trenchcoat in midsummer.
• People who profess a strong belief in liberalism and human rights, and will campaign vociferously for more and more social freedoms, but who are strangely silent when in their own European hometowns, even non-Muslim women feel much safer to go outside wearing headscarves.
• The reluctance of the Republican Party in the USA to put forward a presidential candidate with clear and unequivocal socially conservative positions (e.g. on gay marriage, abortion), despite the conservative views of their membership.

What is it that makes people act this self-denigrating way?

On reflection, I identified exactly the same tendency in myself.  As one who was raised in a liberal, traditional Jewish home, I still have a strong connection with the circles in which I grew up, both family and friends, and I have a deep seated desire to be liked, and not to appear in the eyes of that liberal society as a knuckle-draggin’, bible-thumpin’, goggle-eyed retrograde wacko.  I have caught myself many times, in conversations with my less religious friends and family, actively introducing topics of Jewish religious extremists, just so that I can make it clear that I’m not one of them – or equivocating about some not-so politically correct Jewish laws, trying to find some sugar-coating to make them more palatable.  Bottom line, it’s insecurity in my own position.  And this insecurity, this desire to seem like a nice guy, has led me to compromise my own integrity, such as speaking loshon hora or denigrating Jewish laws and traditions.

What's more, being ingratiating gains nothing in terms of my own goals.  When I am cringing and apologetic for my views, I project that insecurity clearly, so whoever sees it realizes that I am pliable and unconvincing.  In real terms that may mean I find myself pushed into areas of compromising my own religious observances.  It means that Israel's political concessions are pocketed, unreciprocated, and the demands for further surrenders are simply scaled up.  When a pro-Zionist is quoted as criticizing the Israeli government, the anti-Zionists will eagerly quote him to prove that "Even your own supporters think you're immoral."  And so on.

We'd love to believe otherwise, that we humans really are all friends with just a few differences between us, so we compromise in the expectation that our concessions will be appreciated and reciprocated by our "colleagues".  But the cold, hard truth is that this world is full of ideological battles.  Conservatism vs liberalism.  Socialism vs capitalism.  Religion vs secularism.  Religion vs other religion.  Nationalism vs universalism.  Statism vs libertarianism.  Moderation vs extremism.  Etcetera.  When you're in one of these battles, a gifted concession is not seen by the other side as a sign of good faith; it's a sign of insecurity and weak resolve.  If your cause means something to you, then stand up for it proudly and don't give an inch, unless it's in the framework of an explicit quid-pro-quo with your ideological adversary!  If you don't believe in it strongly enough, be prepared to lose it.  As Rav Noach Weinberg said: "If you have nothing you would die for, then you have nothing to live for." (HT to ER for providing the source)

Perhaps that’s the lesson of Pinchas: A respected prince of the Jewish people – no less than Zimri ben Salu! – gets up and publicly shows off the Midianite girl that he’s about to take back into his tent.  Some people are cheering, others are stunned, and some are sitting around crying helplessly.  Only Pinchas, outraged as he is, has the presence of mind to understand that this behavior has crossed all red lines; he takes radical and courageous action, and consequently merits God’s “Covenant of Peace”.  Wow, how paradoxical.  Here’s a guy who gets up and impales two people on one spear – seemingly a brutally violent act – and the Torah credits him with bringing peace! 

Incidentally, the law that Pinchas was relying on – קנאים פוגעים בו – delimits that only one who is genuinely a “kannai”/zealot, whose motivations are 100% pure, could do such a thing.  Not something for insecure wimps like me.

But perhaps we could all use a little more Pinchas-type backbone in our lives, whatever our belief systems.  I don’t mean aggression, or being specifically not nice; I’m talking about an assertiveness that allows us to be perfectly civil and respectful, while maintaining our own integrity.  For example, with all respect to my gay friends and family (and I have plenty), I love them all dearly, but I am not going to condone their lifestyle just because liberal society says I must.  Libertarian that I am, I am not going to intrude on their private lives, as long as they keep them private.  With Shabbat observance, I have generally come to a fair status quo with my non-observant friends and family; I don’t make an issue of them violating Shabbos, and they don’t make it difficult for me to keep Shabbos.  In the same way, I won’t make an issue of anyone’s sexual orientation if they don’t.  Do not demand changes in the status quo such that I must start paying extra taxes to compensate for any benefits that might become due to “married” gay couples; I will oppose it.  Do not expect me to compromise my core beliefs by supporting any new legislation that denigrates the family unit and ultimately the moral fabric of society. 

I hope Mr Netanyahu is reading this, too.  Mr Prime Minister, please, pretty please, could you stop with this insanity of pandering to the world’s expectations that we commit national suicide by carving a chunk out of our heartland to hand over to our enemies?  Stop being so insecure!  Stop trying to be nice!  Take a leaf out of David ben Gurion’s book: stand up in front of the United Nations, wave a Bible at them and tell them that’s where they’ll find our title deeds to the land.  You’re not going to get peace by suing for peace.  You’ll only get peace by being a Pinchas.

So that’s what I take out of last week’s parsha.  Hereafter I resolve to be true to my core values, and not squirm out of taking an assertive stand, even if it is unpopular.  I hope I’ve inspired you to do the same.

Coalition Predictions Scorecard - and more

In a previous posting, Post-Election Game Theory, I laid out my predictions for how the coalition would look.  With the new government finally having been sworn in, after way more haggling than anyone expected, let's go back now and see how I did, only mentioning areas where I specifically went out on a limb.

1. Tachlis: I predicted a government composed of Likud, Yesh Atid, Bayit Yehudi and Kadima.  I was out by one: the Tzipi Livni Movement instead of Kadima.  (Or is that in addition to Kadima?  Nobody in the media seems to know - or care - whether Kadima is in or out of the coalition.  Me neither.)  
2. Labor: despite Netanyahu's sincere efforts to woo Yecimovich into the coalition, she stuck by her guns, as I predicted.
3. Bayit Yehudi: despite some very bad blood between them (apparently worse than I thought originally), Bibi finally had to bring Bennett into the government.  He really didn't want to, but like I said, the numbers just didn't work otherwise.
4. Shas: could conceivably have overcome their incompatibility issues with Yesh Atid by looking for compromises, but instead chose to dig in to their trenches, and now find themselves with no say in how the "sharing the burden" debate plays out.  Merubeh tafasta, lo tafasta - try get too much, and you end up with nothing.  I wish I had been wrong about that prediction, but I wasn't.
5. UTJ, while less strident in their rhetoric than Shas, also chose the route of conflict.  Pity, but also a clear call.
6. Tzippi Livni: this is the only one that completely blindsided me.  I was totally gobsmacked when Netanyahu cut the first deal with Livni, especially with her as lead negotiator with the Palestinians.  I think he thinks putting her into that position is going to teach her some stark lessons in reality, as in "Good luck with that!" - but frankly I'm quite afraid that she will be able to do Israel a lot of damage from that position. But given that she was included, it makes Kadima's piddly 2 mandates completely inconsequential, and therefore wasteful to include them in the coalition.

So it wasn't a 100% score, but still not too bad.  And from that position, I'm going to make a few more predictions.

1. Tzippi Livni won't last long in the government.  She can't.  Her pet issue is making a peace agreement with the Palestinians, and she will be unable to do so, for any number of reasons.  Either the Palestinians will continue to refuse flat-out to return to negotiations and continue on the unilateral track, or they will only come back to that table on condition that Israel in principle agrees to roll over and die as a precondition for restarting talks.  Livni will probably accept any preconditions they want, but she will be overruled by the rest of the coalition - or at least, I hope so.  Furthermore, with Bayit Yehudi controlling the Construction Ministry, and Moshe Yaalon as Minister of Defense, sooner or later Livni is going to proclaim that peace is just not achievable while we continue to "provoke" the Palestinians by allowing the residents of Efrat to enclose their verandas and instructing the army to actually defend themselves against Molotov cocktails rather than running away, and she will resign in a huff, doing as much damage as possible in the international arena on her way out, and try her hand (again) at Opposition politics.  I don't think we'll have to wait a year for that to happen, maybe as little as six months.  
2. The burden will be shared, and it will be done intelligently and fairly.  (Now that's going out on a limb!)  Shas and UTJ are spoiling for a fight; they will threaten that all the Haredim will go to jail rather than serve in the army; and they will be disappointed.  There will be no imprisonments, no arrests, not even skirmishes.  The government will simply enact a set of financial rules that will give attractive economic benefits to people who complete the army or other national service, not much for people who are officially exempted (e.g. new immigrants), and an extra tax on people who refuse to serve.  The Haredim will not be given the option of being public heroes and dramatically going to jail; instead they will have the much harder choice between doing national service and getting the concomitant economic benefits, or refusing and quietly going the long haul with an onerous tax burden.  Faced with this dilemma, I believe the rank and file will vote with their feet, and despite the pashkevillin that will be plastered over every vertical surface in Mea Shearim and Bnei Brak, screaming about how this is a milchemes mitzva and a chillul Hashem to do any kind of national service, a very large number of Haredim will go along with the new system.  It will certainly beat the indentured poverty into which the old system forces them.
3. The government can fall in one of two ways: either Yesh Atid falls off the Left flank, or Bayit Yehudi falls off the Right.  The only way I can think of that Yair Lapid will be sufficiently outraged as to walk out of the government would be if the government fails to implement a "sharing the burden" plan.  If he ever does quit the government, it won't hurt Bibi, because the Haredi parties will be lined up to take his place - and that might result in the undoing of said plan.  Lapid is in this coalition for the long haul, and his negotiating power is weak, because 19 mandates notwithstanding, he is replaceable.
4. Bennett, on the other hand, is less constrained by such considerations, because he truly is irreplaceable   If Bibi ventures too far Left, Bennett can threaten to bring down the government.  The Haredim will not replace them in a coalition with Lapid.  And around 75% of the Likud MKs themselves will agree with Bennett.  Unlike the 2005 Disengagement government, the vast majority of the Likud MKs are now strong ideologues who will themselves vote no-confidence in the government if Bibi tries to do a Sharon on us.  Even if Bibi tries to get Labor involved, it just can't work out.  Result: no more insane concessions to the Palestinians, and Tzippi Livni will quit the coalition (see above).  So Bennett really is sitting pretty.
5. As a result of the above considerations, absent any "black swan" events, I'm calling that this coalition will see out its full term of office.  That will be a first!

All told, I'm pretty optimistic about this government.  The common thread between the major coalition parties is that they're security wise, free market supporters with a non-coercive approach.  I think on the whole things are looking up for Israel.

Your thoughts?

The real reason why politicians don't want directly elected MKs

For a long time I've been struggling to understand why we persist with the Proportional Representation (PR) system here in Israel, despite its obvious weakness, in that it rewards small splinter parties, giving them disproportionate power in determining the composition of the government coalition.  It seems totally obvious that having directly elected district representatives, like in the USA and UK, would lead not only to more stable governments, but also to more responsibility on the individual MK to serve the public who elected them faithfully.

I first came to the conclusion that it was simple political cynicism: the people who would have to vote to change to directly elected MKs are the same MKs currently protected by the obscurity of party lists, so they are not held accountable for anything, and they can continue their ride on the gravy train without having to lift a finger.

But it still doesn't add up.  Even high performing politicians, and even the larger parties are still shifting and dodging and pushing direct elections off the agenda.  These are the people who stand to gain the most from direct elections!  There has to be some other reason...

And then I realized... it's actually quite obvious when you think about it, but it can't really be said out loud, as you will see.  I am going to say it out loud anyway.  The Powers That Be have plausible deniability, so I can say all the things they're likely thinking but can't say for themselves, and they will deny that this is their reasoning, even though it is.

Under the system of PR, MKs are elected according to the number of votes cast, more or less proportionately, though not exactly, because of certain kinks in the formula such as the minimum threshold and vote-sharing agreements.

If, however, we had to switch to district representatives, you would have to draw up districts.  While those districts could not practically all have the exact same number of registered voters in each, there would at least have to be approximately the same size.  Did you see the catch?  Registered voters, not votes cast.

Do you see the problem now?  I'll spell it out: the difference is in the Arab sector.  In today's Knesset, there are 11 representatives of Arab parties, including Chadash, which is actually more communist than Arab, but as part of the anti-Zionist bloc they depend heavily on Arab votes.  That's less than 10% of the Knesset.  In reality, Arabs make up roughly 20% of Israel's population - but since they typically have very low voter turnout, they are also very under-represented in the Knesset.  If, however, we had to draw up voting districts according to registered voters, without some significant gerrymandering, the Arab districts would make up closer to 20% of the Knesset.  That's enough to make any pro-Zionist think twice about switching to district representation.

And yet, I'm still in favor of making the change.  If you really do believe in democracy, then trust in the system.  There are a large number of benefits that would come about through directly elected representatives.

Firstly, having district representatives who are directly answerable to the people who elected them means they will have to work to better the lives of their constituents - including the Arab ones.  So if the MK for Umm-el-Fahm spends his tenure ranting about the evils of the Zionists and going on missions to Iran and Turkey to whip up more hatred - and doesn't do basic stuff like making sure that Umm-el-Fahm gets enough municipal budget to maintain the roads, build parks etc., then next time around his voters will kick him out.  I can even imagine Shas putting up candidates in the Arab towns, because they have a strong reputation for fighting for the lower classes.  Wouldn't that be funny?

Secondly, I'm not afraid of having more Arab MKs.  Right now, the Arab bloc is problematic, because their strident anti-Zionism precludes them from joining any coalition, which makes government building more difficult.  With directly elected MKs, though, the chances of even needing a coalition are very slim.  Immediately, all the single-issue parties like Tzippi Livni, Kadima, Otzma Leyisrael, Green Leaf etc. would be wiped out.  Parties like UTJ, whose support is very concentrated in specific areas, would only be able to win seats (albeit by huge margins) in their own strongholds, but overall, their strength would take a hit.  And the big winners would be the big parties, the ones who have a serious track record of governance.  It's quite likely that a single party - probably the Likud - would elect enough MKs to make the government all by itself.

Now, wouldn't that be a good thing?

What do you think?

Smart voting

Now that all the votes are in, let me present you with some telling statistics.  Take a look at where the so-called "right wing bloc" cast their votes.

66,775 people voted for Otzma LeYisrael.  They failed to pass the 2% threshold, and will not even have one seat in the 19th Knesset.

345,985 people voted for Bayit Yehudi, giving them 12 seats.

331,871 people voted for Shas and 195,893 for UTJ (Gimmel).

885,054 people voted Likud-Beiteinu, giving them 31 seats and making them the largest single party, which is the only reason why the leader of the Likud right now is the presumed Prime Minister-elect.

In the Likud primaries prior to the elections, the highest ranked candidate got 47,777 votes, while the last person to make it into this Knesset got 21,843.  And in the primaries for leadership of the Likud a year ago, Binyamin Netanyahu defeated Moshe Feiglin by about 30,000 votes, according to the doctored official results (and I know first hand that the results were fixed); his actual margin of victory was probably closer to 20,000.

So, assuming you're someone who would like to see a God-fearing Jew leading the Jewish state - where do you get the most bang for your buck - or vote?  Be one of the 66,775 people who flushed their votes down the "Netz" toilet?  One of 345,985 people who might, for their trouble, earn one or two peripheral ministries? Or one of 30,000 people who, had they been Likud members, could have made Feiglin the Prime Minister today?

This truth applies no matter what your political views (assuming you're not more naturally at home with the Left - in which case, you should join Labor).  Let's say you're Haredi and want to make sure that men are free to continue studying Torah and not be drafted.  At this writing, coalition negotiations are still in progress.  As things stand now, Shas and UTJ's combined 18 seats won't be worth a ki hu zeh if they can't climb down from their trees and come to some sort of compromise with Yesh Atid about "shivyon b'netel"; Netanyahu and Lapid will simply form a government without them, and all these hugely significant issues will be decided for them.  If you want to make a difference, you should be signing up yourself, your friends and your Rabbis for the Likud.  Get Haredim into the party structures and onto the Knesset list for the 20th Knesset.  Over half a million people voted for Haredi parties in this election.  If 10% of those people had joined the Likud, you could have had several Haredi MKs lodged into the governing party, and it would have been impossible to make any changes to the status quo without your participation.  Chaval al hazman.

If you really want to make a difference to the governance of Israel, then vote smart.  It costs 64 shekels a year for one person, 96 NIS for a couple.  

Click here to sign up.

Post-election game theory

The day after elections is always the most fun.  That's when all the amateur pundits get to speculate about who will make up the next coalition.  I did that after the 2009 elections, and if I may say so myself, I thought I did pretty well.  Here's a list of the things I called right:

1. About Labor: "Ehud Barak has stated that he's expecting to be in the opposition, but I don't think he'd say no to any opportunity to be part of anyone's coalition... if he could hang on to a ministry - any ministry - by signing up for a Likud coalition, I don't think Netanyahu's diplomatic or economic agenda would faze him much. He might have more of a problem convincing his fellow MKs to come along for the ride..."  And so it was.  Barak surprised everyone else by leading Labor into a coalition with Likud, but halfway through the term, Labor split in half.
2. About Kadima: "Kadima is not equipped to be an opposition party, and my prediction is that if they are not at least part of this government, they will be destroyed in the next election by the comeback of the more ideologically motivated Labor and Meretz."  OK, according to the provisional results, they hung on to existence by their fingernails, with 2 seats.  And the votes from the army might yet push them off the edge.  But still... pretty much spot on.
3. Livni would lose out in the coalition negotiations game to Netanyahu, mostly owing to her having burned her bridges with Shas.

So, having established my credentials from past performance, I now present my analysis of the first 2013 Knesset elections.  (It's entirely possible we may be back at the polls later this year!)

Starting with the facts of seat allocations:

• Likud-Beiteinu: 31
• Yesh Atid: 19
• Labor: 15
• Bayit Yehudi (BY): 11
• Shas: 11
• UTJ: 7
• Meretz: 6
• Livni: 6
• Kadima: 2
• Arabs: 12

Everyone in the mainstream media (MSM) makes a big hoo-ha about the Left and Right blocs being evenly balanced at 60 each.  Utter nonsense, from 2 perspectives:

1. The Arab parties are not part of any bloc, inasmuch as they cannot be included in any coalition.  Even the Lefties might briefly flirt with the idea of surprising everyone and making the first ever coalition that includes the Arab parties, but they'll drop that idea as soon as they consider what will happen the first time Israel has to respond to a security threat.  If the Arab parties focused more on issues concerning the civil rights of Israeli Arabs and less on furthering the goal of destroying Israel as a Jewish state, there might have been something to talk about...
2. Shas and UTJ are not part of any bloc, either.  Economically speaking, they are much closer to Labor than Likud.  The only issue they have with the Left is the anti-religious slant of most Leftist parties.  Shelly Yecimovich, however, has been mostly conciliatory, and I thought her explicit refusal to demonize Haredim was a very dignified stand.  Theoretically, she could form an alliance with them.

So I'm not going to analyze these results in terms of "blocs", but rather interests.  Let's see where that leads us.

• Likud: This was the second consecutive electoral humiliation for Netanyahu.  In both 2009 and 2013 he started the campaign with the wind at his tail, and twice now he has led the Likud into a situation where they have won by an embarrassingly narrow margin.  He needs a very stable coalition now, because if his government collapses mid-term, the knives will be out for him in the Likud.  Moshe Feiglin is a MK now.  If Feiglin could take 33% of the Likud primary vote (before blatant cheating in the official vote count took it down to 24%) without even being a MK, Netanyahu knows he will be facing a very serious challenge next time around.  For this reason, he may be prepared to offer much more than he would otherwise have wanted to to other parties in order to get a big coalition.
• Yesh Atid: Another one-hit-wonder party takes the political scene by storm.  I give Yair Lapid a lot more credit than most other right-wing commentators; I don't think he's as rabidly anti-Haredi as his late father, and I actually do believe he has some ideals.  He's a pragmatist, not a Lefty, not a Righty, which I think makes him an obvious coalition partner for Netanyahu.  He's done the math, and knows that the Left can't form a government without Likud, and he wants to make a difference in government, so he will want to cut a deal with Bibi.  But he has some compatibility issues in the coalition.  His flagship issue was equality in bearing the burden of civic responsibility.  That puts him at direct odds with Shas and UTJ.  He has more seats than Shas and UTJ put together, so he's in a position to make serious demands.  If he's in government, it is very unlikely Shas or UTJ will be.
• Labor: Silly, silly Shelly painted herself into a corner by publicly insisting she would not join a Likud-led government.  She'll have major egg on her face if she backtracks now.  Being that she is otherwise a very sincere person who means what she says, she will be the Leader of the Opposition.
• Bayit Yehudi: Will unquestionably be in the coalition.  The math doesn't work otherwise.  With 31 Likud + 19 Yesh Atid + 11 BY, there's your majority of 61.  But too close for comfort.  And any one party could bring down the government.  Bibi needs more partners than that.
• Shas: As mentioned before, there's an incompatibility issue with Yesh Atid.  Frankly, Likud is closer to Yesh Atid, ideologically speaking, than to Shas.  The only way they will be able to get into government is by making compromises on things like army service and separation of synagogue and state.  The nature of Shas is to fight rather than compromise, so I reckon it's the opposition for them.
• UTJ: They're generally more moderate than Shas, but still, I find it hard to envision how they will be able to compromise on their core issues of keeping Haredim out of the army and the workforce.  Plus, they usually go hand in hand with Shas, so I also call them in the opposition.
• Tzipi Livni: The most delusionally egoistic politician in the country, she won't join Bibi's coalition without a huge price tag, like being named Deputy Prime Minister or something like that.  Even her piffling 6 seats won't tame her demands.  There will be talks, but they won't get anywhere.  Bibi wants more support from somewhere to shore up his government, but the cost of having her on board will be too much to tolerate.  She won't last long in the opposition, either - before the next elections she will huffily resign from the Knesset and go back into political retirement... before her next grand announcement of yet another comeback... yaaawn....
• Meretz: Too far left to consider.  Next, please.
• Kadima: At this writing, Shaul Mofaz is still not breathing any sighs of relief, because the votes from the army could yet push him back below the entry threshold for the Knesset.  But assuming he gets in, he knows his only chance of political survival will be to get some position of prominence in the coalition.  His price will be very cheap, and Bibi will take him.  Plus, he has the added benefit of being a "Center Left" party... and Lapid promised he wouldn't join the coalition without another "Center Left" party.  Houston, we have synergy.

So my final prediction is that the coalition will be Likud, Yesh Atid, Bayit Yehudi and Kadima.  Bibi may make overtures to a few others, and it's not out of the bounds of possibility that another party or two will be enticed to join, but unlikely.

Bets, please!

Pre-election analysis for rational voters

Looks like everyone else around town is blogging their thoughts on how to vote this Tuesday, so I don't see why I shouldn't either.  Hopefully this logical decision tree will help you make up your mind too!

Let's start with the big questions.  In most other democracies in the world, the barometer is, as Bill Clinton put it, "It's the economy, stupid."  In Israel, where we face permanent existential threats, this changes to: "It's the security, stupid."  Left and Right in Israel are more about your approach to Israel's geopolitical situation.  Thus the moribund Kadima, which ran very much a capitalist, free-market economy under Ehud Olmert's tenure, is considered "Left", because of its "dovish" views on security, while Shas is considered "Right", despite its practically socialist economic platform.  Or at least, it was considered Right under Eli Yishai... things look a little different now that Aryeh Deri has successfully staged his coup...

So decision 1 in the tree is this: do you believe that Israel needs to make more concessions to the Palestinians in order to make peace?  If your answer is yes, your choice is between Labor, Yesh Atid, Kadima, Tzippi Livni's Movement (aptly named), and Meretz.  I won't dwell too much here because frankly they all make me ill.  I have some grudging respect for Shelly Yecimovich as a worthy adversary, and Meretz just because they actually do have an ideology.  If you're on this side of the political fence, here's where we part ways; I won't presume to advise you anything other than that you please should vote on Wednesday.

So if, like me, you're of the opinion that the Arabs will never agree to any peace deal with Israel that deprives them of the "right" to continue attempting to destroy Israel outright, you're left with several options: Likud-Beiteinu, Bayit Yehudi (Jewish Home), Shas, UTJ (Gimmel) and Otzma L'Yisrael (Strong Israel).

Now some haredi readers might have tagged along till now, thinking, "There are more important things than security - like Torah.  It doesn't matter what security platform anyone has; the most important thing is that they are frumme Yidden who will make sure that the Torah world is well looked after."  I think the "Daas Torah" argument was very adeptly handled by Rav Slifkin - he put it much better than I ever could.  I will simply add that I have never forgiven UTJ for selling out the Jews of Gush Katif and voting for Sharon's 2005 Disengagement budget in exchange for a 290 million shekel bribe.  And it's not for me to forgive.  When they ask for (and receive) forgiveness from those 10,000 Jews for the trauma and suffering they callously caused them, then they can try and convince me that they're the party that represents Torah.  Till then, don't even talk to me.

Shas?  If you had to poll secular Israelis for which political party turns them off Judaism the most, I reckon Shas would coast home, even before UTJ rounded the final bend.  Aside from their socialist economics and the new Leftist inclination under new management - for crying out loud, they have a convicted embezzler at the top, who still shamelessly claims he's the victim of a Sephardophobic conspiracy!  You believe the conspiracy theories?  Then Shas is for you.

Now we're down to the wire.  3 parties left, all very security minded, all opposed to making stupid concessions to the Arabs that will only further undermine our position.  But wait?  Didn't Netanyahu, in his last term, do exactly that?  Building freezes, outpost evacuations, internationally declared support for the "two state solution"?

My gut wants to punish Netanyahu, and vote for one of the other two right-wing parties.  But let's take a step back and consider the implications.

I love Aryeh Eldad and Michael Ben-Ari, just for the fact that they are so proud of their ideological stand.  You won't find them zigzagging about conscientious objection or our rights to all of Eretz Yisrael.  They are colorful and entertaining - but they are totally irrelevant to the overall political process.  Even if they got 10 seats in the Knesset they would be irrelevant, in the same way as the 11-12 Arab MKs are also irrelevant.  They will never be included in any coalition, and will never have any effect on government policy.  All they can do is make a noise from the sidelines.  Not that that noise is without value; it's good to have a fiery opposition, if just to raise public consciousness.  But you can get better bang for your buck as far as voting is concerned.

Naftali Bennett and Bayit Yehudi are really the phenomenon of the election.  From a combined 5 seats in the outgoing Knesset (BY plus half the National Union), they are looking at somewhere between double and triple that in the coming election.  I have tremendous respect for them, they have a strong, high-quality list of candidates (special mention for Jeremy Gimpel), and they are very likely to form part of the new coalition, which means they can influence government policy.  Or can they?

Well, not really, when it comes down to the wire.  If you recall, before the Disengagement, Sharon had a coalition including Mafdal (BY's predecessor).  When Mafdal voted against Disengagement, Sharon simply fired them and re-formed his coalition with the Left.

The fact is, BY may be part of the coalition, but they will always be dispensable if they ever get too uppity.  So Netanyahu will throw them a few bones to keep them happy, but they do not have critical leverage.

Now let's look again at the Likud-Beiteinu list.  Back in 2005, when the Likud split over the Disengagement, there was only a handful of Likud MKs who stood strong and voted against the Disengagement the whole way.  Today, things look very different.  In the top 21 of the Likud list, only 3 candidates have declared support for the two-state solution - Netanyahu himself, Hanegbi and Shama-Hacohen.  The rest of the list is filled with people of the calibre of Feiglin, Danon, Hotovely, Levin, Elkin, etc.  Aside from them, Saar, Erdan, Chaim Katz and Gamliel were all among the "Likud rebels" who voted against disengagement.  Also, very significantly for those of us in Beit Shemesh, Keti Sheetrit is in the long-shot position 38.  It would be really good for our city to get our first ever MK.  The Yisrael Beiteinu part is also very ideologically strong, including people like Yair Shamir and Uzi Landau.  The Likud of today cannot do another disengagement - because the prime minister would literally be left on his own.  Bayit Yehudi is dispensible, but the Likud is not.  The prime minister has to caucus with these people every week, and he cannot do anything without having his own team on board.

And it's not even the case that a vote for Likud is equivalent to a vote for Bayit Yehudi.  The smaller the Likud is, the less stable the coalition will be, and the more likely Netanyahu will have to rely on the Left to build his coalition.  Let's take a hypothetical best-case scenario where Likud-Beiteinu gets 61 seats by itself, and doesn't need any other party to join the coalition.  In such a case, there would be no need to buy off smaller, sectoral-interest parties, no ministers-without-portfolio, no need for pork mutton-barrel politics.  Imagine that!  You could have a government that is focused only on things that matter, rather than having to keep soothing the egos and budget needs of disgruntled nochschleppers.

The opposite scenario is too horrible for words.  Imagine Likud with 30 seats, BY with 15, Labor with 19, Yesh Atid with 12, Shas with 11, UTJ with 6, Livni with anything.  Now Likud has to pull in at least two other parties just to break 61.  In order to neutralize the threat of any one party being able to bring down the coalition, you would need 61 plus the number of seats of the next biggest coalition partner.  We'll need so many joke ministries it's frightening: a "Minister for Administrative Affairs", a "Deputy Minister in the Prime Minister's Office" and 3 Ministers Without Portfolio.  Every one of these coalition partners is going to be constantly whining about the amount of budget they get allocated to their pet cause, and since no two of them will be able to agree on anything of significance, it'll be another 4 years of being stuck in the same rut.  Sound familiar?  Yes, that's exactly the scenario we have today.

When you vote for a splinter party, you are voting for bloated government, inefficiency and corruption.

So I'm voting Likud.  They have governed this country excellently for the last four years, and they will do even better, the more they are free of the whines and demands of coalition partners.  The Likud has a party list I'm proud of, and I think they are the best people on offer to be running the government on Israel.

I hope you will do the same!