Equality and equality, a double-edged sword
The democratic system, for all its flaws, has proven, since the French Revolution, that it is a regime system that ultimately works for the benefit of the majority of its citizens, and therefore it is also the one that brings progress, welfare and wealth to the nations that have adopted it. The main reason for the success of democracy are the government restraint factors that reduce corruption, encourage competitiveness, creativity and a sense of freedom.
Democracy has quite a few weaknesses, but the weaknesses that most endanger its very existence are... the freedom and equality of its enemies to act against it! This is a double edged sword. It happened in the past and it will happen in the future.
Democracy has many enemies, but there are three of them that stand out in particular:
First danger - the politics of religion.
The first danger to democracy is the politics of religion (and not religious belief) characterized by religious fundamentalism.
My grandmother Leah, my mother's mother, immigrated from Persia (today's Iran) many years before the establishment of the state. She lived in Jerusalem and kept her traditional dress and makeup. When she visited us at the moshav, she accompanied us, the grandchildren, when we went to bed, with a good night blessing accompanied by the "Shema Israel" prayer.
When Grandma Leah returned to Jerusalem, I said the 'Shema Yisrael' prayer myself. I was not satisfied with the words of the original prayer (which I did not fully understand) and expanded the prayer with a personal appeal to the Creator of the world, while begging him to remove dangers from me and my loved ones.
My faith and prayer as a child had a calming effect. The ability to turn to God in prayer to keep dangers away from us is an excellent anxiety reliever. Belief in God and the ability to turn to Him in prayer help us feel that we have some kind of control over our destiny.
Religious faith is an excellent healer for the soul
Religious belief is a very positive factor contributing to peace of mind and alleviation of hardships.
Religious beliefs have different audiences, and like any community, this one also needs a leader. Religious leaders, contrary to the image they have, are not raised from the people. They are human beings and as such a lust for power, money and honor is also inherent in them. The struggles to achieve all these created the "politics of religion", and this politics is no different from the others and is also characterized by struggles, intrigues, lies, manipulations and influence on the public opinion of the believers.
The politics of religion and democracy
The politics of religion (as opposed to religious belief) cannot be born in one submission with democracy, which is based on the principle of equality and freedom for all (including freedom of religion). The politics of religion is based on exactly the opposite - on prohibitions and restriction of freedoms, as well as on inequality between people.
Is it possible to reconcile the contradiction between the democratic regime and the politics of religion?
of course not. This is why in democratic countries there is a complete separation between religion and the state.
The spiritual and mental influence that the leaders of the religious parties have on their public will cause those citizens to vote in the elections, as their spiritual leaders instruct them, and not according to the inclination of their hearts and understanding. The existence of religious parties means denying the freedom of choice of some religious citizens.
The result is the distortion of the principle in which the democratic majority determines who will manage the country, and it leads to the establishment of sectoral governments that are the complete opposite of free democracy, equal rights and a just distribution of the country's resources.
Second danger - dogmatic ideologies
The second danger to democracy is the dogmatic ideologies characterized by fanaticism and fanaticism.
An ideological-dogmatic movement is one that has one main goal in front of its eyes and its members are characterized by fanaticism and fanaticism. They act in the light of a manifesto written by the founders of the movement and due to their blind adherence to their goals, the dogmatic and the fanatics are perceived as idealists.
The manifesto, otherwise known as the written Torah of these movements, defines for the members of the group their way of life, and some of them even incorporate religious and nationalist ideas into it. The manifesto defines the main goal of the movement and outlines the ways to achieve it. Usually the goal will be defined as an 'ideal' that is above all, and its achievement will be considered worthy of personal sacrifice.
The movement will place all considerations that are not related to the movement's goal as null and void and the struggle as the only way to achieve the goal, including a war of attrition against the enemy. Death for the sake of achieving the goal will be seen as sublime.
The goal is the core of dogmatic movements and it can be: A complete Land of Israel, a complete Palestine, social justice for all, Islam for all, absolute freedom and the like.
Dogmatic thinking seals the one who holds it from listening to other values and he will examine the facts and reality according to his ideology, and not the other way around. Therefore, the existence of dogmatic movements within, or on the side of the democratic regime based on respect for others and freedom of thought and discussion, is not possible. This is because it will not be possible to hold a real discussion with people who hold dogmatic ideologies.
The dogmatic movements will strive to seize power in any possible way, including democratic tools.
Third danger - populism
The third danger to democracy is populism, characterized by taking over public opinion through virtual reality, lies, incitement, manipulation and concealment of the truth.
Democracy, as mentioned, is based on the restraint of governmental power through its dispersion among independent governing authorities on the one hand, and through the transparency of the actions of the government arms to the public, on the other hand.
Transparency can be achieved through public review mechanisms, journalistic investigations, independent and disinterested media channels and, of course, almost complete freedom of expression. All of these shape public opinion and influence the election results. Thus in a democracy, public opinion has great power.
the question is:
Does the shaping of public opinion have such a decisive effect on determining the identity of the government, how can democracy supervise the mechanisms of shaping public opinion and ensure that they are not controlled by vested interests striving for power, money and respect?
The answer to this question is rather bleak. In the era of mass communication on social networks and control by vested interests in electronic communication channels, there is almost no such control capability. Every time I will slander, lie and slander.
These tools fall like ripe fruit before the populists, those interested parties who strive to obtain power, money and respect. Through the use of these tools, it is easy to sway public opinion, which is the key to gaining power in a democratic way, and if it is possible to use incitement, lies, manipulation and exploitation of fears, anxieties and a short memory, then why not?
Simple messages that hit weak points
The populists make use of simple messages that hit on the weak points of many of the country's citizens and will do anything to win the elections and get the power in their hands. The moment they seize the power of the government, they will do everything to consolidate their position and be elected again and again, using forceful and manipulative methods, taking advantage of the fear, hardships, ignorance, short memory and tendency to superficiality of the general and innocent public.
In this situation, the citizen in the democratic country comes out confused. Which news to believe?
Usually, he will choose to believe information that supports calming positions, forgets anxiety, guarantees security and is simple to understand. If the news also slanders the opponent, makes him a traitor and dangerous to the country, what's the good. Most people will choose to believe a lie that fits their expectations, especially if conclusive 'proof' is presented against that lie.
What is between religion, dogmatism, populism and artificial intelligence?
If all this is not enough, then the new trouble can be used as a blow to democracy: artificial intelligence.
Artificial intelligence is an amazing technology that allows you to access information in seconds, create from nothing, offer conclusions and courses of action and what not? At the same time, it can also produce surprising visual, verbal and vocal products at your request. But to her and a thorn in her. Artificial intelligence makes it possible to create both a false 'alternative truth' and a highly convincing 'virtual reality'. If until now we could say that there is no good than 'the sight of the eyes and the sight of the ears', now that too has been taken from us.
curb the ability to spread lies
In some democratic countries, this dangerous trend has been recognized and lessons have been introduced into the education system that teach how to relate to the news that appears on the various media channels, how to examine the facts presented, how to analyze them and how to know how to distinguish between truth and lies.
In some countries, laws and regulations are being formulated aimed at curbing the ability to spread lies, incite and manipulate social networks.
The conclusion from all this is that democracies are indeed in danger. If God forbid we lose democracy in Israel, despite its shortcomings, I have no doubt that we will all miss the days when we lived in a society that advocated freedom and equality, even if they were limited. In order for this not to happen, every citizen in Israel must be aware of these dangers, strive for the truth and use their power on election day only after thorough consideration and only after careful examination of the information placed in front of us.
Who is a worthy leader?
Choosing the right leadership means choosing people who have proven to have two essential qualities: management and leadership, along with a rare ability to stay away from lying.
The right choice in a worthy leadership, especially in light of everything we have been through since the seventh of October 2023, is in our very soul!
All the best to the responder Doridi, but there is no point, they don't listen and they won't listen. You read how they answered a bird commenter in an uncivilized way.
It is clear that the right will get stronger, but there is no need to engage in politics now. I wish all our abductees would return to their families, the main thing.
Well, you did protests and riots and blocked roads, and what will you get out of it?? The right is only getting stronger in the meantime, Ben Gvir and Lieberman are soaring in the polls (and these are more polls of the left's polls), Meretz and Avoda crash in every poll, Lapid almost lost his party, and Gantz? Is it true that at least he got under the stretcher, but Prime Minister? come on.
Who are Yair Golan and Ehud Olmert? Both of them together will not pass the percentage of blocking, maybe actually yes, if they make connections with Odeh and Tibi's joint.
Dear Dodri.
If it's so good, then why is the coalition block of the messiahs, the racists, the ultra-Orthodox and the bibists afraid of elections? It is clear as day - what was will no longer be. The majority of Israelis, right-wing and left-wing, religious and secular, Arabs and Jews, understand what the minority of your kind does not: democracy in Israel must win, otherwise the State of Israel will disappear.
Dear Mr. Yossi, they are not afraid of elections, they say what the decent people on your side also say, that at the stage of the war and the kidnappings have not yet started, elections will only cause damage to the country.
It is possible that as early as next year when we hope that the war will be decided in our favor and the abductees will already be in their homes, there is a chance that you will hear similar voices on the right as well because as you see Ben Gabir and Lieberman will want to and probably can significantly increase their power. It's fine you call them what you call them and in the meantime their power is only increasing.
In any case, even if in your opinion the left will rise, do you think it will be quiet? think again
This nation is never calm and there will probably be protests on the other side.
In my opinion, the agreed upon solution should be regular elections every two years instead of four years. That's how no government in Israel holds more than that and after half a year riots start here or there.
It seems that the surfer wrote in a cultured and matter-of-fact manner.
Why does the author of the article send her to immigrate to Iran? Why this rudeness? You will learn on the left to argue in a civilized manner even if the voter's voice and the opinion of the majority do not seem to you.
Listening and writing a variety of opinions is also democracy.
There is nothing better than the sight of the eyes and the sound of the ears. Iran is a great example of a messianic theocracy like this, there are those here who want to destroy us... don't you think so?
As soon as you said "you are the left"...we understood everything.
States that curb the ability to spread lies, meaning that the state determines what is true and what is false, this is the Ministry of Truth from 1984. Sorry, but I'm not ready to live in such a country.
Full disclosure: I support what you call the dogmatic ideology of total freedom. I mean, for you, I am a danger to democracy. Democracy is a means and not an end. Its purpose is to ensure freedom. As far as it serves the oppression, as far as I'm concerned it has no right to exist.
Thank you for helping me clarify an important point: any ideology or goal to which the word "absolute" is added at the end is an opaque and dangerous dogmatic ideology. Absolute superior race, absolute religion, absolute truth, absolute freedom...
Only in a democratic country does the government find it difficult to lie because it has mechanisms to restrain and expose government lies and corruption. But apparently you didn't read the article to the end...but that's your absolute right of course 🙂
Democracy = demography.
In a generation or two the liberals/the left/extreme left will probably be in a negligible and non-determining minority here.
The truth is that they are already in the minority, but succeed (with much success, it must be admitted) in holding the 2 most important ropes: the media and the courts.
And on the other hand, the same processes are taking place and even more so in European countries where waves of immigration from the ID and a huge birthrate are already influencing leaders and governments in their relationship to Israel and also in internal issues. Likewise in the US these processes together with the progressive left are knocking on their door.
I wonder if those "warriors" knew how to predict the end of the road, would they still be fighting for democracy?
dear bird
The threat to the democracies in Europe, the USA and Israel is exactly the threat the two articles are talking about. Read the title again.
What is surprising, if I understood correctly, is that you are happy that this is the case. You really wish for a moment when those who believe in equal rights, freedom of speech and free choice (what you contemptuously call liberals and the left) will become a minority, and the religious fundamentalists, the dogmatists (among them the extreme left, progressives and the rest of those who believe that the sun shines for them...) and the populists will take power in a democratic way . I can shorten the way for you - immigrate to Iran. It happened there, and not only there.
What is happening in Israel is somewhat different from what is happening elsewhere. The attempted coup d'état of the current coalition, which has long since lacked a majority in the public, and its terrible failure in running the country, as reflected in the massacre of Israeli citizens by our enemies on the seventh of October and in what happened after that. All of these have awakened Israelis from all ends of the political spectrum to understand that the loss of democracy in Israel means the end of the State of Israel.
The majority of Israelis, leftists and rightists, Arabs and Jews, religious and secular, understood this and today the dividing line is not between left and right but between those who want a democratic state here and those who want a halachic, racist and corrupt state here, and are sure that such a state will be able to exist on the sword for years.
Unlike Hungary, Poland and Turkey, Israel is surrounded by enemies and will disappear from the map if it is not a democratic, free, progressive country with a brave and honest leadership.
What is good about history is that we know the results of processes in which democracy lost itself in knowing, in favor of the kind of regimes you wish for.
Happy holiday.
and the IDF
I could treat the claims seriously, if you hadn't indicated in advance the factors that in your eyes threaten democracy (all this without reference to the question of when conditions exist that can be used to define a country as democratic). Implicitly labeling the Likud as dangerous populism, the religious right as hypnotists and the ultra-Orthodox as depriving members of their community of freedom of choice, and completely ignoring the fact that such phenomena can and do occur even in districts that are not on the secular/religious/orthodox right, is in itself populist writing in an apparently 'scholarly' guise, which is nothing more than political propaganda to pat the 'good and enlightened' on the back in their own eyes (and the events in the elite Uni' in the USA will prove). Enlightened is terrible letters and cabinet letters. This is how the French Revolution began, developed and ended.
Dear Rafi.
Thank you for your response because your words are an excellent example of dogmatic thinking, thus you give validity to the arguments in the article.
I suggest you go back and read the text carefully because the examples in the article refer to dogmatic movements as well as "...social justice for all,...absolute freedom..." and it has already been said that "on the head of the thief the hat burns".
And as for the contempt you have for the word "enlightened" (which was not mentioned in the article) and the play of letters you do with the letters of this word in order to prove the validity of your arguments... this too has some argumentative reinforcement that the article.
Happy holiday.
Yossi Shalom
I read your article and I must say that it is populist. There is no trace of objectivity in it and those with eyes in their head see where you want to lead. It is possible that some of the reasons you described here exist, but they are only 3 out of many reasons that pose a danger to democracy. You started with the alibi of your late grandmother, who was a righteous and God-fearing woman, and you talked about the continuation even after you said "Hear Israel". This whole beautiful (really beautiful) story was a prelude to the attack on religion (as politics). In a democracy there are different and diverse opinions and people (citizens the state) are grouped under parties that represent (in their opinion) their beliefs, their desires and the vision they aspire to. Why should religious parties not have representation? Secondly - democracy is the rule of the people and in the modern regime it is built from a majority of coalitions for the purpose of a common platform and implementation in their common denominator This creates a majority that, once he gets to form a government, he is obliged to promote the issues that this majority believes in. You did not bother to say a word about the weakness of democracy in front of the enemies. You, according to the article, do not believe in democracy.
hello Roni.
I hope you will agree with me that the existence of democracy depends on the ability of every citizen to freely consider in which people he entrusts his life, his destiny and his future. As soon as this judgment goes wrong, distorted or biased, for any number of reasons, the result can be disastrous for the democratic state and its citizens. This is the reason, for example, that the right to choose is granted to adults over the age of eighteen.
From this it is easy to understand why in democratic countries there is a ban on the establishment of anti-democratic parties, those who believe that the democratic system must disappear from the world. Religious parties that do not advocate freedom of choice and equal rights are obviously such parties.
And regarding the weaknesses of democracies in the face of enemies: Paul Guetta, the other way around. In most wars, since democracies were established, they were the ones who won just defensive wars. The State of Israel won only because it was just and democratic and if we lose that, we will disappear from the world.
By the way, the UN resolution on the establishment of a Jewish state alongside a Palestinian state conditioned their establishment on the basis of a democratic regime. The leadership of Israel at the time obeyed this condition, while the Palestinian leadership did not. We know where we are and where they are today.
I believe you read the article, but from your response it can be concluded that you are very far from understanding the essence of democracy and its critical contribution to the rise of the State of Israel and its success. You are in good company, but in today's Israel, it appears that you are becoming a minority with God's help.
Happy holiday.