This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Haredi parties got 13 seats out of 120, down from 18 four years ago. Israeli media suggests that this is about Shas (the Sephardic Haredi party, but also the only party specifically dedicated to protecting Sephardi and Mizrahi interests) losing non-Haredi Sephardim to Likud as the war in Gaza makes the Haredi draft-dodging issue more salient. Religious Zionist parties also got 13 (down 1, possibly because a joint list broke up) - the vast majority of religious Zionist in Israel are Modern Orthodox in their faith, and the vast majority of Modern Orthodox Jews are religious Zionist in their politics. In addition, a lot of religious Zionists voted for Likud, and some for Together - a right-liberal joint list combining Naftali Bennet's otherwise right-liberal religious Zionist party and Yair Lapid's secular right-liberal party.
In terms of long-term trends, MO Jews also have high birth rates (though not quite as high as Haredim) and are also benefitting from religious-Zionism motivated immigration of (mostly MO) diaspora Jews. The MO/RZ bloc is therefore growing about as fast as the Haredi bloc. The question is whether the MO/RZ bloc remains allied with the Haredim against secular Jews (which is what Netanyahu has built his career on), or whether they ally with the secular right to strengthen Israel by eliminating Haredi parasitism (which is what Bennet wants). If the Netanyahu coalition holds together, then I expect the most economically productive secular Ashkenazim to feel increasingly unwelcome until they start moving to America, while the Haredim eat Israel from the inside.
The real question would then be 'does this process play out before netanyahu dies of natural causes?' It's kinda obvious he isn't going anywhere.
The basic logic of a religious-right coalition built around Likud is going to survive Netanyahu as long as the religious Zionist parties are willing to work with the Haredim.
Although I agree with you that if Netanyahu was eaten by a landshark tomorrow, we would see the rapid formation of an all-Zionist "unity" coalition (i.e. no Arabs, left or Haredi) with his successor as Likud leader becoming PM (possibly with an agreement to rotate with Eisenkot), and most Jewish Israelis would breathe a sigh of relief. There are 80 MKs to work with and you need 61, so I suspect the incoming PM is looking to cut rather than recruit partners.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
This seems to be a well thought out and reasonable analysis, my main objection is the same Yogi Berra problem I mentioned above.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link