site banner

Small-Scale Question Sunday for March 26, 2023

Do you have a dumb question that you're kind of embarrassed to ask in the main thread? Is there something you're just not sure about?

This is your opportunity to ask questions. No question too simple or too silly.

Culture war topics are accepted, and proposals for a better intro post are appreciated.

3
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

parts of his coalition are extremists

Again, word "extremist" is usually means not much more than "belongs to the party opposite to which I like, and doesn't want to come to our side". Which is pretty useless.

I think "extremist" is a perfectly reasonable description of "parts of his coalition", for example:

Bezalel Yoel Smotrich (...) is an Israeli far-right politician and lawyer who has served as the Minister of Finance since 2022. (...) Accused of inciting hatred against Arab citizens of Israel, he told Arab Israeli lawmakers in October 2021, that "it's a mistake that Ben-Gurion didn't finish the job and didn't throw you out in 1948."[5] He has called himself a "fascist homophobe",[6] and has stated that gay pride parades are "worse than bestiality".[4]

Of course everybody on the right would be "accused of inciting hatred", just as any Republican in the US is by default "racist". Of course, in this case the hatred is real and obvious, but nobody needs Smotrich to "incite" anything, the hatred existed decades before he was born, and the same Arab members to whom Smotrich addressed his - regrettable - words, has been calling the establishment of the State of Israel (in which Parliament they sit) a "catastrophe", and has been openly supporting terrorist movements for years. Smotrich is very outspoken in that he does not consider this situation to be right, but I don't think discussing this situation makes him an "extremist".

That said, Smotrich is definitely on the deep right side of Israeli political spectrum. Israeli politics is much more conservative and the religion plays much deeper role than in the US, where it plays almost none beyond token assurances of top politicians to be Christians - which nobody believes but everybody are required to pretend they do. In Israel, if somebody is religious, they are usually serious about it. Which mandates certain approach to issues like homosexuality that would not be mainstream anymore in the US. I am not passing a judgement here, I am saying that's how the politics in Israel is, so there's nothing "extreme" in a particular politician to have the same opinions many other politicians do. BTW I couldn't locate the source of the "bestiality" quote - the primary link on Wikipedia refers to the article, which links to another article, which has no such quote. He did organize an event where they were mocking gay parade by pretending to be zoophiles, but he himself said he regretted doing it and it was done when he was "young and stupid". I imagine there were other incidents like this, which provide good ground for gotchas.

His views are certainly very different from many other politicians, and he is very outspoken and direct in his approach, often even provocative. I am not nominating him for any awards here. But as far as I know, he didn't do anything extreme, at least not recently, outside of his "young and stupid" years, and the policies he supported were also supported by many others. His rhetoric has very little to do with what is happening now - the thing the Left is fighting against is not Smotrich saying provocative things. The fight is about control over the court system - and given how activist courts have become in Israel, ultimately over the country's political direction. If the Left keeps absolute control over judiciary, and the judiciary keeps eagerly intervening in the politics, there's no reason for the Right parties to exist, other than playing the diet version of the Left parties - they couldn't pass any policies or appoint any people that couldn't be removed immediately by the Leftist courts. Just recently, there has been lawsuit submitted that claimed the Prime Minister is prohibited to speak on the matter of judicial reform. Can you imagine how a society can function where the head of the government, the leader of the party winning the elections, can not even speak on important political matters, let alone make decisions? This situation is certainly abnormal.