Although the method used in Israel is democratic-parliamentary, like many countries in Europe, the political discourse in Israel tries more than anything to emulate the American one.
This phenomenon is most noticeable on the right, with the most prominent symbol of this being the former Prime Minister and current chairman of the opposition, Benjamin Netanyahu.
Although the method used in Israel is democratic-parliamentary, like many countries in Europe, the political discourse in Israel tries to emulate the American. This phenomenon is especially noticeable on the right, and the most prominent symbol is Netanyahu
Beyond the fact that Netanyahu spent much of his life in the United States, it is difficult to ignore the similarities between his political development and trends on the American right:
Netanyahu of the 1990s stood out as a liberal-conservative, Reaganist, with free market reforms at his feet.
In the late 2000s, however, we saw much more neo-conservative rhetoric similar to that of George W. Bush. He saw fundamentalist Islamism as the main threat to the Western world, and advocated increased American intervention in the Middle East and other conflict zones (more on the essential ideological differences between neo-conservatism and liberal-conservatism can be read in Assaf Malach’s article in Shiloah).
His famous appearance at the UN, when he warned of the Iranian threat, was accompanied by a drawing of a red line on top of a drawing of a bomb. On board.
During the presidency of Donald Trump, there was a further development in Netanyahu’s style.
Trump’s victory was accompanied by the rise of two trends on the American and global right: the populist right, and the alternative right (alt-right).
His famous appearance at the UN, when he warned of the Iranian threat, was accompanied by a red line drawing on a bomb drawing.
Whereas before, like many Republican leaders in the US, Netanyahu acted with stateliness and restraint in criticizing him, in Trump’s time we saw Netanyahu completely different: a politician who is not afraid to clash head-on with the media and his critics, and even speak out against law enforcement agencies. : I do not see a flaw in the criticism towards the police, but when it is done by the Prime Minister during an investigation and charges against him, there is a problem with that.
Even the form of his expression was no longer as stately as it once was. For the first time, we were privileged to hear statements from him such as “Peka Peka, Shasha Shasha” (Network B), and “Na Na Na Na” in response to Yonit Levy (News 12). Like Trump’s eldest son, Netanyahu’s eldest son has begun to express himself in politics, often expressing himself in an alleged wink at Alt-Wright.
But this is not just a lazy imitation: Netanyahu has always adapted American trends to the local audience. This is how the deep state rhetoric of Trump supporters became the “first Israel” on the part of Netanyahu’s supporters, but I will address this later.
Struggle for “freedom of expression”
One of the most symbolic expressions of the stylistic correspondence between the new Israeli right and the American right was when Yair Netanyahu shared a photo from the Facebook page of Tzankash (which is currently active mainly as a telegram channel, due to its blockade on other platforms).
This is not just a lazy imitation: Netanyahu has always adapted American trends to the local audience. This is how the deep-state rhetoric of Trump supporters became “the first Israel” on the part of Netanyahu’s supporters
This style, which has sprung up in online forums like 4CHAN, is expressed in deliberate provocativeness and black-on-black humor, often deliberately racist and homophobic (sometimes ironically and self-consciously, but sometimes in abysmal seriousness), protesting against the culture of cancellation and political correctness on the American left.
One of the most embarrassing moments of depression, for example, was when then-presidential candidate Hillary Clinton declared war on “Pepe the Frog,” and won surprising backing from the Anti-Defamation League.
Hillary Clinton exposing Pepe the Frog is the death of explainers https://t.co/5sOZipzb9n pic.twitter.com/JjeYD9RtXH
— The Verge (@verge) September 15, 2016
The American left was portrayed at the time as humorless, easily dragged into a moral panic that leads to a mentality of hypersensitivity and hypersensitivity.
It’s hard to say it was unjustified: at the time there really was an extremism of the left in the US, which even caused many on the more moderate left to shun it.
As a result, for the first time in a long time, it was the American right that began to be perceived by some circles as up-to-date and liberated in relation to the left.
The American left was then portrayed as humorless, easily dragged into a moral panic leading to a mentality of hypersensitivity and censorship. At that time there really was an extremism of the left in the US
But alongside the right-wing admiration for Trump’s provocative and defiant conduct, there has also been a major impact on figures of intellectuals like Canadian Conservative-Liberal lecturer Dr. Jordan Peterson, or moderate Liberal-Democrat lecturer Dr. Brett Weinstein.
The gap between Peterson’s tolerance and self-control in the face of the outcry of many of the “social justice fighters” who demonstrated in front of him and did not let him speak (a similar story happened with Weinstein), caused many to identify with him. Even to those who define themselves as left-wing, and do not agree with his conservative views.
Many saw the rise of Trump as a sign of protest against this toxic aggression on the left. But even the success of the moderate Joe Biden, who throughout the election campaign insisted on not linking his name to these elements on the left, symbolizes this no less.
For populists, the convincing proof of the left’s mouths was the permanent blocking of Trump’s accounts by leading social networks, after he refused to condemn in time the onslaught of his supporters on Capitol Hill (a decision that at least for Twitter might soon be overturned).
The culture of cancellation instead of freedom of expression
Ironically, many of the right-wingers in Israel see themselves as partners in the same “freedom of expression fighters” on the American right. They also claim they are censored by Facebook and blocked by Twitter. In order to deal with this problem, the alternative social network “Mikey” (similar to the American networks Gab and Truth) was established, which became a home for boomerists from the boomerang generation.
Many saw the rise of Trump as a protest against the toxic aggression on the left. But even the success of the moderate Biden, who throughout the election campaign insisted on not linking his name to these elements on the left, symbolizes this no less
But Israel is not the United States. This is exactly why issues that are considered very explosive there, such as the right to bear arms, the state’s attitude to abortion, and race – do not make such big waves in the country (although each of these issues made headlines at one time or another Relatively short).
A closer look at the conduct of the right in the country will actually show a greater tendency to shut up than a struggle for freedom of expression. This is because the culture of abolition in the country works against those who hold leftist views more than right-wing views.
We have before us famous cases such as that of teacher Adam Verta, who was allegedly fired as a result of his statements condemning the IDF.
Teacher Adam Verta, whose remarks provoked storms, dismissed Ort: “I will not miss”; Sapir Sabah, the student who complained – pleased http://bit.ly/1tB27rM
Posted by החדשות – N12 on Sunday, May 25, 2014
Organized witch hunts against artists who did not enlist in the military.
Student organizations like “If You Will,” whose main occupation seems more like an attempt to silence university lecturers (and even others who criticize them).
A close examination of the conduct of the right in Israel will show a greater tendency to shut up than a struggle for freedom of expression. This is because the culture of abolition in the country works mainly against those who hold leftist views
There are even seemingly bullying organizations (certainly only seemingly) such as “The Lions of the Shadow”, which we will forever remember for their “heroic” struggle against the Palestinian deer in the biblical zoo. It was first-rate entertainment.
Eretz Israel deer are common. The context in the comments.
Posted by Zohar Sosenko on Monday, April 27, 2015
The discourse of the identities of the right
But above all, the discourse of “Second Israel” rises, which occupies a central place in the justification of the bibism of the journalist and commentator Dr. Avishai Ben-Haim and the author MK Galit Distel-Atbrian.
The “Boycott Government” and the “Chachachim Speech”!
Last week’s slander and the texts of Bennett and his “gut” friends confirm that the founding text of the “Boycott Government” is the brushstroke speech.
The idea is to train the boycott and exclude the Likudniks, the second Israel and Begin in the same party system from 1981: you shin gimels who did not serve / who do not care about IDF soldiers. pic.twitter.com/Tt1Y2R5dQ3– Avishay Ben Haim (@AvishayBenHaim) May 24, 2022
I have earlier presented this theory as a kind of adaptation of the Trumpist right-wing concept, but this comparison does not do it justice.
In reality, everything is a little more complex than that.
Although “Second Israel” also refers to elites who allegedly try to prevent the populist candidate supported by the majority of the people from ruling, this is joined by the ethnic aspect surrounding this theory (Ashkenazim versus Mizrahis) and clearly corresponds with the discourse of identities on the Western left.
In my opinion, this is a phenomenon unique to Israel, because so far I have not seen any other right-wing populist leader rely on similar rhetoric.
The closest thing to such rhetoric can perhaps only be found in the Blacksite movement, which calls for the disengagement of African-Americans from the Democratic Party, whose most prominent spokeswoman is right-wing African-American activist Candice Evans.
But unlike “Second Israel,” Evans does not claim that there is widespread support for African-Americans in Trump (because such a claim would be very far from reality), but Blames Democrats for trying toPaving the way for African-Americans to support them.
In addition, unlike “Second Israel”, Candice Evans rejects what she calls “sacrifice” among the black population in the US, and chooses to distance herself from most of the core struggles of the community, while supporters of “Second Israel” see Mizrahi major struggles as an essential part of perception Their world.
But above all, the discourse of “Second Israel”, which occupies a central place in the justification of the bibism of the journalist and commentator Dr. Avishai Ben-Haim and the author MK Galit Distel-Atbrian
Ultimately, the modern populist right in Israel is a unique hybrid between the culture of abolition and the politics of identities of the American left, and the anti-elitist right-wing populism. Where will this lead us in the future? Hard to know, and in fact – I also hope we do not have to find out.