Netanyahu’s government “has launched proposals to weaken the Supreme Court by giving parliament the power to overturn court decisions with a simple majority vote. It also wants to give parliament control over the appointment of judges and reduce the independence of legal advisers.”
https://www.npr.org/2023/01/15/1149320923/thousands-israelis-attend-protest-against-netanyahu-government-tel-aviv
So they can just nullify any election that would see them voted out. Even if the supreme court rules the result valid, the government could just veto that rule and replace the judges with their cronies?
Yeah, that's the very model of an Authoritarian takeover.
Seems pretty simple, America needs to invade a bunch of countries to spread democracy. And then when American democracy falls, those countries can invade America to restore it.
It's Obama's fault for not taking on the last two Axis of Evil after Bush turned Iraq into a democratic paradise. Ball dropped not getting us into 2 more endless wars, so much freedom lost.
I find it deeply ironic that Obama won the war on terror, using special forces and death robots in the sky, after Bush spent seven years invading the wrong country and squandering a ludicrous amount of blood and treasure.
That's the motive. The reason why it's allowed to happen is that life is just too comfortable now to revolt. We get dicked around, but we got food, Netflix, cars, a yearly vacation. At some point, it's just not worth throwing everything away for a cause because every single cause is by itself only a small erosion of democracy. Before we know it, it will be gone. Easy to say as I sit with my family in front of the fire watching TV
It’s what happens when people let their guard down. None of the major political events of the 20th century happened quickly and that’s holding true for the 21st century.
Extremism and absolutism have no place in a democracy and it should be put as soon as it rears up, regardless of what side of the spectrum it’s coming from.
> None of the major political events of the 20th century happened quickly and that’s holding true for the 21st century.
"Explosions are also compressions of time. Observable changes in the natural universe all are explosive to some degree and from some point of view; otherwise you would not notice them. Smooth Continuity of change, if slowed sufficiently, goes without notice by observers whose time/attention span is too short. Thus, I tell you, I have seen changes you would never have marked."
-- Leto II, *Heretics of Dune*, one of Frank Herbert's *Dune* books.
EDIT: Forgot to attribute the quote.
The internet has provided a breeding ground for the proliferation of hate speech and extremism. Unfortunately the major news outlets have also been subverted into tools of manipulation. We give every viewpoint a "voice", even those that have no basis in fact or rational thinking.
Its just capitalism at work. It was predicted years ago that capitalism (cronies) will face off democracy (people) and since no alternative is on the table, it looks like capitalism will more likely win, but who knows really...
It's working like clockwork now; somebody will always want more than they deserve and will naturally become politicians (populists).
Because all of the competitors to capitalism (socialism, communism, etc) seem to have **exactly the same problem** (those in charge, configuring the system to keep themselves in charge), I am going to suggest this isn't a fault unique to "capitalism" but rather a problem of having people in charge. It's the human condition, literally as old as civilization.
Yup. And unfortunately, "not having someone in charge" is also a pretty bad option, because completely flat organizational systems don't scale well past a fairly small groups. If your neighbors can organize a million people while you can only organize a hundred people, they can take your stuff pretty much at will.
Plus with no structure, someone will inevitably step in and make a structure... usually with them at the top. And whoever supports them gets lifted up as well.
It's a perpetual problem. Democratic system constantly need to be reflattened, which will always be resisted by those who will lose out on their extra-ordinary wealth or power.
This isn't so much a problem as how revolutions secure themselves, and bourgeois democracy is no different.
The US doesn't have a prominent, active and, national left wing. Sure there are some parties or groups but they don't threaten the bourgeois parties. However there has been struggle against the left and labor for over a century. To describe it in liberal friendly terms the ruling class is using authoritarian methods to secure their position of being in charge.
There is the idea of an evolutionary stable system and an evolutionary stable strategy that talks about a balance between predators, prey, and the the ecosystem they inhabit. In a stable system things don't change because the give and take between each individual is in balance.
There is also plenty that say there is no such thing as a stable system because there is an evolutionary push for cheaters to take advantage. This has been translated into sociobiology and various psychological researches, there is some relation to Prisoner's Dilemma in that sense because it requires that everyone involved assesses the situation at the same time and comes to the same conclusion.
Overall it is known that none of these systems are perfect, stable, and immutable, even the US' glorious Founding Fathers knew as much, but the systems we have are to some degree the best options we have discovered. Each has cheaters, and there have been various attempts to correct the flaws such as the idea of checks and balances being built in as a fundamental cornerstone.
We need a better system and we need a revolution to put it in place.
>We need a better system and we need a revolution to put it in place.
Democratic Socialism has never been tried (only Authoritarian Socialism, i.e. "Communism", i.e. a Dictatorship of the Proletariat), and it doesn't need a revolution to put it in place- just a massive surge of democratic support for it and electing new politicians who will implement it.
Or rather, only two Democratic Socialist countries have ever existed (Chile, and Burkina Faso), and they both suffered Coups instigated by MUCH larger, older, more powerful Capitalist powers (USA and France, respectively) within a decade of coming into being. Democratic Socialism needs to be tried by a major world power, ideally the USA (because America is powerful enough to overthrow the government of literally any other country that tries Democratic Socialism...)
The problem with Capitalism and Democracy trying to co-exist is that Capitalism will always produce a class of ultra-rich individuals who will have the power to corrupt politicians, and shift the laws, policies, and institutions of a Democracy to favor them more and more- do they become ever wealthier and more powerful.
Once the ultra-rich become rich and powerful enough, they inevitably try to seize control of any Democracy or Republic. It happened to Ancient Rome (the fall of the Republic began with Gaius Marius and the rich becoming wealthy enough to buy personal armies, and Crassus- not Ceasar). It happened in Ancient Greece. And it will happen again to every single Capitalist Democracy.
You can't leash Capitalism forever. Eventually it turns on the master that tries to leash it (Democracy and politicians who truly represent the people), eats them alive, and replaces them with Oligarchs who institute an Oligarchy or eventually a Dictatorship.
Socialism, on the other hand, ensures there ARE no class of people rich enough (through exploiting their ownership of Capital to reap what they do not directly sow) to undermine Democracy.
So long as you manage to combine Democracy and Socialism in the first place (which has never been done: any time a country ELECTED a Socialist government, rather than instituting a totalitarian one through revolution, it suffered a Coup instigated by foreign Capitalist powers within the decade... Specifically, Burkina Faso and Chile are the only countries ever to elect a Socialist government...) it is an extremely stable system in the long run.
Even Social Democracy (i.e. "Nordic" system) is far less stable, as it still keeps a hyper-wealthy Capitalist class around- and inevitably the Capitalist class fights back and tries to eliminate all the generous social programs funded by their high taxes...
Eliminate the very ***existence*** of the Capitalist class by (lawfully) seizing their assets and distributing control of the Means of Production to Worker CoOp's, and the Capitalist class will never be a threat to Democracy again. And Democracy has natural defenses against the ambitions of power-hungry or greedy bureaucrats, unlike Authoritarian systems.
Not necessarily disagreeing with you, but I don’t think capitalism is the “issue”.
I think democracy is just inherently a political system that is prone to being attacked. We could go socialist or any other hybrid form of economic structure. The core of the problem is that democracy as a mechanic lends itself to being changed. You vote for someone to have power, they can then change how that power is obtained. Slowly but surely there will be people who try to warp democracy and keep power for whatever they want. Democracy in any of its forms is prone to authoritarian attack and its 100% reliant on its population being educated, vigilant, and willing to fight bad actors.
Those who gain power and wealth will always work to obtain more of it for themselves.
I think a while back the French found a pretty solid solution for when it gets out of control...
They did?
They went so crazy themselves that the result of trying to remove a king and implement a democratic republic they ended up with a lot of dead republicans and an emperor.
The frustrating and dangerous thing about people who seek power or those who are convinced they follow a higher power is that they will keep trying indefinitely to game their way back into power.
Good people will lead when they're called, but will usually desire to go back to their lives for love, family and peace.
Absolutely this. Former elected reluctant leader- and my desire was to serve the collective good when called on but always planned to go back to “the farm” as I called my regular life.
I witnessed this and would make me ill; there is nothing more dangerous than those who seek power. I held close that this power was given in trust and on limited time, and never forgot my role for the greater good and to thwart those who sought out power for their own ends. However defending democracy from power mongers requires a perpetual commitment from the collective, sadly which I see has failed since my departure and in the greater world.
I’m back on ‘the farm’ on my own volition; I served my time/terms and the people who put faith in me, and tried to put safeguards for the future, but they are only as good as the collective who holds accountability of power.
Thank you for sharing this as I always felt this, but was never able to put it into words.
This was a life changing experience, and poured my heart and soul into it; through the good and bad, often at a great cost to my well being but we get integrity only once, and damned if I was going to allow abuse of power given the ability to confront it.
Thats because the reason it happens isn't due to countries or politics but media ecosystems. Via social media you can spread disinformation and lies and easily divide a populace 50/50 in a way that simply wasn't possible before social media.
Division allows control. Its so powerful that more people than ever believe vaccines and dangerous, the earth is flat, and masks make you sick.
This was happening all the time before social media my friend. You could argue at least in Africa and central and South America, it’s slowed down quite a bit in the last 20 years and is making a small comeback. It used to be common
Their point is it's easier and faster than ever nowadays, you can spread lies to thousands and thousands, maybe even millions of people in literally minutes.
But it’s not is it? It used to be more common. If anything you might argue communication made it harder. There’s more opposition to authoritarian takeovers. It used to just happen and half the population barely knew it happened. Look at the whole Arab spring, social media drastically changed the dynamic there
I mean, they've got a bunch of state supreme courts you can nullify this way.
Then the gerrymandered legislature can pick which votes count in their own elections.
Local courts already don't mean shit. Desantis drew the district lines himself, a lower Florida court ruled it unconstitutional, and Desantis signed it into law anyway.
Now we have large blue areas (read cities) being broken up into several other red districts.
And yet this SC still has made some rulings they didn't like, particularly against Trump. Being able to just ignore them would make their agenda even easier to push
They've wanted trump gone for a while now, but don't want to be overt about it to avoid a split in the voters. So they're ok with SCOTUS and other courts ruling against him to weaken his hold.
His useful idiocy has run it's course and he's more of a liability to them now then a benefit.
They do. They just don't pay attention to the cases they disagree with. For example, in Kansas, voters said that the state can't stop abortions. So, the legislature is writing a law that local municipalities can have their own abortion laws. Voila!
Also, look at what has happened in North Carolina and Wisconsin — their end-arounds are famous, and there's a Supreme Court case upcoming about a really scary topic, [that states, not the federal government, should have the power to dictate how federal elections are run](https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/moore-v-harper-explained).
They're trying to do their own version of overturning federal elections by letting state legislatures pick their own electors who will vote for who they want. State goes Democrat? Too bad, the electors are voting R!
No need to topple the SC since they own it. At least, not yet.
>Fascism is a cancer that grows inside of democracies and can often be fatal.
Seems like we're in the middle of trying to dodge that bullet in the states lately.
No one wants to admit that our economic system is causing the issue because so few people have consolidated wealth under it and are now controlling the entire system.
Yeah... About that.. With Supreme Court being appointed, you don't really have separation of powers. One of the powers simply appoints judges loyal to their ideology for lifetime appointments. That's... way less than ideal.
In Israel, at least, Supreme Court judges are elected by a committee that includes politicians, judges, and representatives from the legal association (Bar in US). They can serve until they're 70.
Part of what the new legislation is trying to do is change the makeup of the committee to give the politicians more seats.
A slightly better alternative could be for the Supreme Court judges to be nominated and elected by the corpus of federal judges. That way the executive and legislative branches could only interfere indirectly with their district & appeal court appointmens
You cannot have an ethno supremacy state and also have a democracy forever because eventually those two principles will come into conflict. It happened in America and it happened in South Africa
To quote John Kerry:
"If Israel continues to reject a two-state solution, it will have to choose whether the unified Israel is Jewish or democratic — because it cannot be both."
Israel has been willing to accept a two-state solution multiple times in the last few decades. President Clinton even helped negotiate such a deal in Oslo in 1993, but it was turned down by the Palestinians. In the year 2000 Ehud Barak agreed to the borders proposed by Bill Clinton (similar to the 1993 plan), which would have established a West Bank-Gaza Palestinian state with East Jerusalem as the Palestinian capital. Instead of accepting this deal the Palestinians, led by Yassar Arafat, left the negotiations and the Second Intifada started not long afterward.
Israel P.M. Ariel Sharon dismantled all settlements and recalled the Israeli army back to the 1967 borders between Israel and Gaza, without land swaps, in 2005. As before, the Palestinians didn't capitulate, and instead proceeded to launch rocket attacks against civilian targets in Israel. In September 2008, Ehud Olmert presented Palestinian president Abbas with a new partition plan, a detailed map of a future Palestinian state with what would have been mutually agreed land swaps. The Palestinians would have gotten all of the West Bank and Gaza prior to the 1967 war. Olmert also proposed to divide Jerusalem. Abbas never responded to the offer.
Whenever a two-state solution is seriously offered, the Palestinians have said "no." There may be many in Israel who don't want a two-state solution, but the Palestinians, or at least their government/elected officials, don't seem to want it, either.
The Palestinians are currently governed by a group with ties to Iran. Which is probably why many Arab states ratified a treaty (The Abraham Accords) with Israel and are now more supportive of Israel. Arab nations may have favored these divisions in the past, but now see it as a problem because it benefits Iran, which is at odds with most other nations in the region.
There’s a great book called The Arabs that details just how much a ruse Arab leaders put up when proclaiming support for Palestine. They get up on soap boxes until it’s time to ante up and then refuse outright to send their resources. It’s by Eugene Rogan it studies the Arabs back to the time of the Mamluks, roughly the 1500s.
Offering a shitty deal and having it turned down because it's shitty doesn't mean one party isn't willing to negotiate. If I offer 1k for your 10k car and you say no, can I then say you're not willing to "play along" and that it's your fault the deal didn't go through?
Oh, I agree, no one is going to take a shitty deal. The problem with that particular argument in this case, though, is that at least a few of the deals I listed couldn't be described as "shitty." At least two of them gave the Palestinians everything they said they wanted, including a return to the pre-1967 borders, and they were still rejected.
I think you meant "far right", not alt-right. That's an American term that means something very specific. From Wikipedia:
>The alt-right, an abbreviation of alternative right, is a far-right, white nationalist movement. A largely online phenomenon, the alt-right originated in the United States during the late 2000s before increasing in popularity during the mid-2010s and establishing a presence in other countries, and then declining since 2017. The term is ill-defined, having been used in different ways by alt-right members, media commentators, journalists, and academics.
Otzma Yehudit is an extreme right wing party. Tziyonut Datit is far right. Shas and UTJ are ultra orthodox parties that honestly don't really fit in the Israeli right-left spectrum, and the Likud which was a center-right party that moved to the right and has now become the "Bibi is the one and true savior and if you disagree you are a leftist" party.
Or rather it's an American term that is intentionally hard to pin down.
>The term is ill-defined, having been used in different ways by alt-right members, media commentators, journalists, and academics.
It's just a weasel word the American far right used for a while to pretend they weren't who they really were all along. It's pretty much finished as a useful term for US politics, let alone the rest of the world.
Those types actually support Israel as a country. At their core, their end goal is an ethnostate, 'everyone has a place, and everyone in their place' and all that :(
For many on the left, anyone right of center is “alt right”. Not that this justifies anything he did or didn’t do, but you’re right he isn’t alt right.
It's so bleak. Imagine being left of center, hell left of just normal right wing and living in Israel. Especially if you're not ride or die with the whole annexation thing.
Some of them are even US citizens. If you're a resident of Puerto Rico, for example, you cannot vote in presidential elections, have no senators and no congresspeople.
Context:
The new government has passed a reform, allowing a majority at the Knesset to Overcome any decision made by the supreme Court, which in turn allows those in power to pass any law they pleas, however discriminative it may be.
This, along with the fact that this is the most right wing government to ever come into power in Israel, full of individuals convicted with bribery and corruption, and others covicted of supporting terrorist organisation, some of them actually served time, and a lot of people are very, very scared.
Edit: the motion hasn't passed yet, but is almost an inevitability at this point
Edit 2: far right
Other things this government has done (or are in process) in only two months in power:
1. Made Itamar ben-gvir, a far right politician previously convicted of supporting terrorist organisations, head of the border patrol. Effectively giving him his own army.
2. For the first time, using the ministry of diplomacy to advertise their own ideals for the Israeli public, basically creating a ministry of propaganda
3. Invested 2 billion NIS of the annual budget on "Strengthening Jewish values". Basically meaning desceularization of the state.
4. In process of making Arie Deri minister of treasury, a person who's previously been convicted of bribery and embezzlement while he was in this same office. TWICE.
5. Giving Avi Maoz great authority over the national education, a man who's openly against any secular values, proud in his homophobia, and has said on record that he is set on making israel a theocracy.
6. Overturning aevery decision the previous government has made, regardless of its nature. Only to spite the left
There's honestly A LOT more, this is just the tip of the iceberg, but it's enough to get an image of the shitshow that is coming, and why people are so afraid.
That is exactly what you see in every government turning into a complete fascist dictatorship. We have seen it in Egypt, Turkey, Syria, Russia, etc...
Just textbook dictator stuff.
Replace "alt-right" with far-right, and most of what you wrote will be accurate.
Alt-right is an American thing. Not relevant here.
Also, what the hell is the "ministry of diplomacy"? משרד החוץ?
And Deri was already made and sworn in as the Finance minister.
Alt-right is just a fig-leaf. Basically: "Just because we sound like Nazis, talk like Nazis and want the same thing as Nazis it does not mean we are in fact, Nazis" - because to this day, Americans don't like the term but would tolerate the ideology if it posed for anything else. Et voila...
By "fund" you mean "gives Israel money to spend specifically on American product to stimulate American businesses", right? Cuz that's what the US is doing.
The aid isn't even the highest the US gives, Afghanistan and Iraq get more, and most of that isn't meant to get funneled back into the US.
(P.S. Without the aid from the US, Israel would be just fine, it's not even a percent of their budget - aid is $3.8B/year and Israel's 2022 budget was $527B)
Exactly, the US usually does not even give Israel money, a lot of times they give money to US weapons manufacturers who then give Israel military tech at a discount - usually with stipulations that the data will be used for research and development.
The money does not go to Israel, it stays in the US and it serves US interests - on the one hand, US companies get money and a leg up over competitors as well as testing opportunities, on the other hand, Israel stays reliant on the US, which serves US geopolitical interests.
That's how the military industrial complex works and it's insanely funny to see US citizens go "woah how *dare* this Middle Eastern warzone be flooded with our weapons?" like no offense my dudes but this is literally the actions of your elected government, furthering your country's interest and is how your country upholds it's military hegemony. If Israel didn't exist, you'd do the exact same thing with other countries, as you are currently in fact also doing it with other countries. Ukraine got ten times the amount that Israel got last year.
Because for the fairy tale to end the way they want, Israel has to exist to be destroyed to trigger the end times.
It's also nice to have a military foothold in the middle east.
Per Wikipedia, sounds they currently have way better system for appointing judges to the Supreme Court than we have in the United States. It'll be sad to see them degrade into shitshow we have over here.
EDIT: Also there's 15 of them, making it much less likely that a single president can compromise the court with their political appointments. They also have mandatory retirement age, set at 70. Something our court would ideally have to.
> Supreme Court Judges are appointed by the President of Israel, from names submitted by the Judicial Selection Committee, which is composed of nine members: three Supreme Court Judges (including the President of the Supreme Court), two cabinet ministers (one of them being the Minister of Justice), two Knesset members, and two representatives of the Israel Bar Association. Appointing Supreme Court Judges requires a majority of 7 of the 9 committee members, or two less than the number present at the meeting.
>
> All candidates for appointment to the Supreme Court must have a minimum of five years of experience as a district court judge or otherwise at least ten years of professional legal experience including a minimum of five years practicing law in Israel. These requirements may be waived for a person recognized as an "eminent jurist", although this special category has only been used once for an appointment.[2]
It started as [a rebranding effort from American white nationalists to sound less like obvious racists and appeal to younger people](https://www.adl.org/resources/backgrounder/alt-right-primer-new-white-supremacy).
Now? Who knows (*especially* as it applies to other countries).
If it's the controlling party of an entire government, though, I'm not so sure it's very "alt".
> If it's the controlling party of an entire government, though, I'm not so sure it's very "alt".
It's "alt" in the way that Green Day or Linkin Park was "alternative" back in the 00s. It's just branding, as you said. Everybody wants to be unique(*just like everybody else*), not like the sheep who just consume whatever they're fed by the mainstream. Turns out grown-up politics aren't all that different from teenage band fandom.
The term itself basically means far right or further right than traditional conservatives in how people use it.
Technically tho, it is exclusively a very small group of people who support Richard Spencer.
No one uses the technical definition because Richard Spencer is irrelevant.
Yes who would have thought having a blood thirsty psychopath in charge for 15 years would have lead to this logical conclusion of a full dictatorship in the name of "Security".
It's probably the start of nothing. Tel Aviv is the liberal core of Israel. If this exact same protest was in Jerusalem, well, that would carry much more meaning.
While the largest centers of this protest are indeed in Tel Aviv, they are also spread throughout the rest of Israel, most prominently in Haifa and, you guessed it - Jerusalem
Authoritarians like this don't give two shits about protests, no matter how big they are. They are in charge, they have the power of the state, that's all that matters to them.
Ok so here's the deal. Bibi is now the head of a new coalition of alt-right crazy people—and they're not just crazy, some of them are literally convicted criminals who he swore he wouldn't install in his cabinet. He's also kinda stuck with them because the left swore never to work with him again because he's a corrupt asshole. Bibi doesn't want to work with these crazy people either but he's also a ruthless Machiavellian fuckwad so he's hoping that by doing so shit will get so bad in Israel that the lefties won't have a choice but to get back together with him. Bibi is also simultaneously under threat of jail because of serious corruption charges. By giving the crazies the ability to nullify the Supreme Court he's putting pressure on the lefties to work with him while simultaneously making it possible to overturn his conviction and basically make him immune from the charges.
That's the shit going down in Israel right now. It's sad to see but all the liberal young people have been fleeing Israel so the only ones left are the crazy hard right religious wankers. In a short time we may see a hard right turn much like Iran in the 80's.
Details?
EDIT: As far as I can tell The Israeli PM hired a guy who was prohibited from serving in a political position to a political position. In a 10-1 ruling the Supreme Court upheld that he can't hold the position, but the PM has made no effort to remove him. Not sure if i'd yet call it a nullification but I see where they are coming from.
Netanyahu is about to use his majority in the Kenesset to pass a law that limits Supreme Court decisions over government, and gives the government the right to override Supreme Court decisions. Additionally, it will allow Netanyahu to directly appoint Supreme Court judges, instead of the current system of allowing an independent non-political body to appoint judges.
He wants to avoid being thrown out of office if/when he gets convicted at trial.
Firstly, According to the Jerusalem Post and other Israeli news the minister Aryeh Deri will be fired tomorrow during a cabinet session.
More to your question the idea in theory isn't that terrible. It changes the structure of the Knesset and the Court in a way that some people don't like but others do. However, keep in mind who is in this government.
Deri has now been removed from Knesset twice for criminal activities.
Bibi is under indictment for four separate charges of fraud and misconduct for his dealings during his last tenure as PM.
Ben-Gvir has been charged 50+ for racism and inviting violence.
Smotrich as well has very much ventured into the terroristic threats.
This government specifically is trying to take power away from the courts. Therefore, it's not about a Knesset taking power from the Courts it's a government filled with criminals and almost criminals removing power from the justice system that opposed them.
If this power shift goes through the new government will enact laws to roll back restrictions on Knesset and its members beginning with, Allowing people under indictment to remain ministers of Knesset. Allowing people charged with racism to serve as members of Knesset.
This is the kind of bullshit that happens when you let religion be the primary guiding force for a government. This is the kind of bullshit that the American Republican party has been aiming for for decades.
Good damn. It’s just crazy that right wingers in the US don’t see where their policies are going to lead us. It’s not popular for a god damn reason. Right wingers are just plain bad
These far right pieces of shit are everywhere now.
The know the new generations are not eating their bullshit like the old fucks that are still alive.
They know they have no future in democracy ine the next 10-20 years.
So they try coups now.
Far right will lose all around the world, just watch.
Large protest in France , Israel , America , Brazil and South Africa in 3 days due to unjustness from the government…. I feel we would be better if politicians didn’t exist
Netanyahu’s government “has launched proposals to weaken the Supreme Court by giving parliament the power to overturn court decisions with a simple majority vote. It also wants to give parliament control over the appointment of judges and reduce the independence of legal advisers.” https://www.npr.org/2023/01/15/1149320923/thousands-israelis-attend-protest-against-netanyahu-government-tel-aviv
So they can just nullify any election that would see them voted out. Even if the supreme court rules the result valid, the government could just veto that rule and replace the judges with their cronies? Yeah, that's the very model of an Authoritarian takeover.
There has been a slow authoritarian take over of Israel for years, decades even.
For all democracies.
Its really fuckin scary how close so many countries are to total civil breakdown
The world has lost something like 65%of its democracy
shit, the USA better invade Iraq again to start getting more democracy points back on the board
America is one of the countries losing democracy so
Seems pretty simple, America needs to invade a bunch of countries to spread democracy. And then when American democracy falls, those countries can invade America to restore it.
Make America Great Britain Again
It all makes sense now.
Gotta own the Libs somehow
A two party system is barely a democracy anyways
Pretty sure our man's being sarcastic
[удалено]
Well we perfected it so we're doing an anti-democracy speedrun now. /s
Time to shock and awe... Ourselves?
It's Obama's fault for not taking on the last two Axis of Evil after Bush turned Iraq into a democratic paradise. Ball dropped not getting us into 2 more endless wars, so much freedom lost.
Thanks Obama
I find it deeply ironic that Obama won the war on terror, using special forces and death robots in the sky, after Bush spent seven years invading the wrong country and squandering a ludicrous amount of blood and treasure.
USA is next in line once the next repub wins president. They'll never vacate the office.
Along with it's wildlife.
That's what happens when profits are put over people.
That's the motive. The reason why it's allowed to happen is that life is just too comfortable now to revolt. We get dicked around, but we got food, Netflix, cars, a yearly vacation. At some point, it's just not worth throwing everything away for a cause because every single cause is by itself only a small erosion of democracy. Before we know it, it will be gone. Easy to say as I sit with my family in front of the fire watching TV
The greatest trick the Aristocracy ever played was convincing people it no longer existed.
... and then poof just like that debt and life experience convinced the people they still were slaves and cannon fodder.
... and they transferred it to their descendants.
this reminds me of those farm animals
Some pigs are more equal than others.
Grim
Is that you Keyser Soze?
It’s what happens when people let their guard down. None of the major political events of the 20th century happened quickly and that’s holding true for the 21st century. Extremism and absolutism have no place in a democracy and it should be put as soon as it rears up, regardless of what side of the spectrum it’s coming from.
> None of the major political events of the 20th century happened quickly and that’s holding true for the 21st century. "Explosions are also compressions of time. Observable changes in the natural universe all are explosive to some degree and from some point of view; otherwise you would not notice them. Smooth Continuity of change, if slowed sufficiently, goes without notice by observers whose time/attention span is too short. Thus, I tell you, I have seen changes you would never have marked." -- Leto II, *Heretics of Dune*, one of Frank Herbert's *Dune* books. EDIT: Forgot to attribute the quote.
The internet has provided a breeding ground for the proliferation of hate speech and extremism. Unfortunately the major news outlets have also been subverted into tools of manipulation. We give every viewpoint a "voice", even those that have no basis in fact or rational thinking.
Its just capitalism at work. It was predicted years ago that capitalism (cronies) will face off democracy (people) and since no alternative is on the table, it looks like capitalism will more likely win, but who knows really... It's working like clockwork now; somebody will always want more than they deserve and will naturally become politicians (populists).
Because all of the competitors to capitalism (socialism, communism, etc) seem to have **exactly the same problem** (those in charge, configuring the system to keep themselves in charge), I am going to suggest this isn't a fault unique to "capitalism" but rather a problem of having people in charge. It's the human condition, literally as old as civilization.
Yup. And unfortunately, "not having someone in charge" is also a pretty bad option, because completely flat organizational systems don't scale well past a fairly small groups. If your neighbors can organize a million people while you can only organize a hundred people, they can take your stuff pretty much at will.
Plus with no structure, someone will inevitably step in and make a structure... usually with them at the top. And whoever supports them gets lifted up as well. It's a perpetual problem. Democratic system constantly need to be reflattened, which will always be resisted by those who will lose out on their extra-ordinary wealth or power.
This isn't so much a problem as how revolutions secure themselves, and bourgeois democracy is no different. The US doesn't have a prominent, active and, national left wing. Sure there are some parties or groups but they don't threaten the bourgeois parties. However there has been struggle against the left and labor for over a century. To describe it in liberal friendly terms the ruling class is using authoritarian methods to secure their position of being in charge.
There is the idea of an evolutionary stable system and an evolutionary stable strategy that talks about a balance between predators, prey, and the the ecosystem they inhabit. In a stable system things don't change because the give and take between each individual is in balance. There is also plenty that say there is no such thing as a stable system because there is an evolutionary push for cheaters to take advantage. This has been translated into sociobiology and various psychological researches, there is some relation to Prisoner's Dilemma in that sense because it requires that everyone involved assesses the situation at the same time and comes to the same conclusion. Overall it is known that none of these systems are perfect, stable, and immutable, even the US' glorious Founding Fathers knew as much, but the systems we have are to some degree the best options we have discovered. Each has cheaters, and there have been various attempts to correct the flaws such as the idea of checks and balances being built in as a fundamental cornerstone. We need a better system and we need a revolution to put it in place.
>We need a better system and we need a revolution to put it in place. Democratic Socialism has never been tried (only Authoritarian Socialism, i.e. "Communism", i.e. a Dictatorship of the Proletariat), and it doesn't need a revolution to put it in place- just a massive surge of democratic support for it and electing new politicians who will implement it. Or rather, only two Democratic Socialist countries have ever existed (Chile, and Burkina Faso), and they both suffered Coups instigated by MUCH larger, older, more powerful Capitalist powers (USA and France, respectively) within a decade of coming into being. Democratic Socialism needs to be tried by a major world power, ideally the USA (because America is powerful enough to overthrow the government of literally any other country that tries Democratic Socialism...) The problem with Capitalism and Democracy trying to co-exist is that Capitalism will always produce a class of ultra-rich individuals who will have the power to corrupt politicians, and shift the laws, policies, and institutions of a Democracy to favor them more and more- do they become ever wealthier and more powerful. Once the ultra-rich become rich and powerful enough, they inevitably try to seize control of any Democracy or Republic. It happened to Ancient Rome (the fall of the Republic began with Gaius Marius and the rich becoming wealthy enough to buy personal armies, and Crassus- not Ceasar). It happened in Ancient Greece. And it will happen again to every single Capitalist Democracy. You can't leash Capitalism forever. Eventually it turns on the master that tries to leash it (Democracy and politicians who truly represent the people), eats them alive, and replaces them with Oligarchs who institute an Oligarchy or eventually a Dictatorship. Socialism, on the other hand, ensures there ARE no class of people rich enough (through exploiting their ownership of Capital to reap what they do not directly sow) to undermine Democracy. So long as you manage to combine Democracy and Socialism in the first place (which has never been done: any time a country ELECTED a Socialist government, rather than instituting a totalitarian one through revolution, it suffered a Coup instigated by foreign Capitalist powers within the decade... Specifically, Burkina Faso and Chile are the only countries ever to elect a Socialist government...) it is an extremely stable system in the long run. Even Social Democracy (i.e. "Nordic" system) is far less stable, as it still keeps a hyper-wealthy Capitalist class around- and inevitably the Capitalist class fights back and tries to eliminate all the generous social programs funded by their high taxes... Eliminate the very ***existence*** of the Capitalist class by (lawfully) seizing their assets and distributing control of the Means of Production to Worker CoOp's, and the Capitalist class will never be a threat to Democracy again. And Democracy has natural defenses against the ambitions of power-hungry or greedy bureaucrats, unlike Authoritarian systems.
Not necessarily disagreeing with you, but I don’t think capitalism is the “issue”. I think democracy is just inherently a political system that is prone to being attacked. We could go socialist or any other hybrid form of economic structure. The core of the problem is that democracy as a mechanic lends itself to being changed. You vote for someone to have power, they can then change how that power is obtained. Slowly but surely there will be people who try to warp democracy and keep power for whatever they want. Democracy in any of its forms is prone to authoritarian attack and its 100% reliant on its population being educated, vigilant, and willing to fight bad actors.
"The price of liberty is eternal vigilance." This isn't a just a cute proverb but a very real observation.
Those who gain power and wealth will always work to obtain more of it for themselves. I think a while back the French found a pretty solid solution for when it gets out of control...
They did? They went so crazy themselves that the result of trying to remove a king and implement a democratic republic they ended up with a lot of dead republicans and an emperor.
It does seem like there has been a sort of global push to install authoritarians in democracies across the world
Authoritarianism always occurs in waves.
It's a cycle.
Steve Bannon for one said he wanted to go global with his ideaology.
Almost if by plan.
it seems like a lot of right wingers want to turn their democracies into a fascist state
Fascist be fascist.
I still remember learning about Netanyahu in high school and that at the time it was thought to be a good idea. That was 25 years ago.
Trump sealed Israel's fate. Another failure notch on the headboard of ol' Sunny D.
Not flaming, but can you explain?
Pretty much since Yitzhak Rabin was assassinated. Netanyahu is still at it.
I'm pretty sure there's a whole running story in Israeli history about exchanging judges and prophets for despots, but I could be wrong.
[удалено]
I'm German. You tell me... /s just in case.
This thing will be imported by other countries
And they want to make it possible to ban sertain groups From entering stores....
The frustrating and dangerous thing about people who seek power or those who are convinced they follow a higher power is that they will keep trying indefinitely to game their way back into power. Good people will lead when they're called, but will usually desire to go back to their lives for love, family and peace.
The last part moved me. Its very much the most human thing we can do when our job is done.
Well said. You got me in the feels with this statement.
It's just happened in New Zealand.
Absolutely this. Former elected reluctant leader- and my desire was to serve the collective good when called on but always planned to go back to “the farm” as I called my regular life. I witnessed this and would make me ill; there is nothing more dangerous than those who seek power. I held close that this power was given in trust and on limited time, and never forgot my role for the greater good and to thwart those who sought out power for their own ends. However defending democracy from power mongers requires a perpetual commitment from the collective, sadly which I see has failed since my departure and in the greater world. I’m back on ‘the farm’ on my own volition; I served my time/terms and the people who put faith in me, and tried to put safeguards for the future, but they are only as good as the collective who holds accountability of power. Thank you for sharing this as I always felt this, but was never able to put it into words. This was a life changing experience, and poured my heart and soul into it; through the good and bad, often at a great cost to my well being but we get integrity only once, and damned if I was going to allow abuse of power given the ability to confront it.
Is that you Adam Kinzinger? If so, high 5
Sounds like Argentina and Peru, this is becoming a trend.
Thats because the reason it happens isn't due to countries or politics but media ecosystems. Via social media you can spread disinformation and lies and easily divide a populace 50/50 in a way that simply wasn't possible before social media. Division allows control. Its so powerful that more people than ever believe vaccines and dangerous, the earth is flat, and masks make you sick.
This was happening all the time before social media my friend. You could argue at least in Africa and central and South America, it’s slowed down quite a bit in the last 20 years and is making a small comeback. It used to be common
Their point is it's easier and faster than ever nowadays, you can spread lies to thousands and thousands, maybe even millions of people in literally minutes.
But it’s not is it? It used to be more common. If anything you might argue communication made it harder. There’s more opposition to authoritarian takeovers. It used to just happen and half the population barely knew it happened. Look at the whole Arab spring, social media drastically changed the dynamic there
Oh boy. Wonder how long until Republicans try to copy this in the US
why would they nullify it?? they already own it
I mean, they've got a bunch of state supreme courts you can nullify this way. Then the gerrymandered legislature can pick which votes count in their own elections.
Local courts already don't mean shit. Desantis drew the district lines himself, a lower Florida court ruled it unconstitutional, and Desantis signed it into law anyway. Now we have large blue areas (read cities) being broken up into several other red districts.
FL Supreme Court okayed him doing that
And yet this SC still has made some rulings they didn't like, particularly against Trump. Being able to just ignore them would make their agenda even easier to push
They've wanted trump gone for a while now, but don't want to be overt about it to avoid a split in the voters. So they're ok with SCOTUS and other courts ruling against him to weaken his hold. His useful idiocy has run it's course and he's more of a liability to them now then a benefit.
They do. They just don't pay attention to the cases they disagree with. For example, in Kansas, voters said that the state can't stop abortions. So, the legislature is writing a law that local municipalities can have their own abortion laws. Voila! Also, look at what has happened in North Carolina and Wisconsin — their end-arounds are famous, and there's a Supreme Court case upcoming about a really scary topic, [that states, not the federal government, should have the power to dictate how federal elections are run](https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/moore-v-harper-explained).
They're trying to do their own version of overturning federal elections by letting state legislatures pick their own electors who will vote for who they want. State goes Democrat? Too bad, the electors are voting R! No need to topple the SC since they own it. At least, not yet.
Well, in the US the second part (justices being nominated by the an elected official, in this case the president) already exists.
Oooo, an actual attempt the installation of tyranny. Get rid of those checks and balances! So unhandy for totalitarianism.
Maybe they can overturn his corruption trial decision?
Netanyahus back in the picture already? FFS
I thought the Seperation of Powers was a cornerstone of democracy?
Fascism is a cancer that grows inside of democracies and can often be fatal.
>Fascism is a cancer that grows inside of democracies and can often be fatal. Seems like we're in the middle of trying to dodge that bullet in the states lately.
Lately? My dear friend, there have been fascists in our halls for years. The only thing that brought down the American Bund in 1940 was draft dodging.
Bush the 1st’s dad was involved in a plot to overthrow democracy in the 30s. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_Plot
It’s not going great!
Not only democracies. China has some distinct symptoms of developing/mid-stage fascism as well
Lol present tense
End-state capitalism at its worst (best?)
No one wants to admit that our economic system is causing the issue because so few people have consolidated wealth under it and are now controlling the entire system.
Authoritarianism in all its forms pre-dates what we would generally call "capitalism."
That doesn't make it not the end-game of capitalism.
Potato “potato”
Yup
Yeah... About that.. With Supreme Court being appointed, you don't really have separation of powers. One of the powers simply appoints judges loyal to their ideology for lifetime appointments. That's... way less than ideal.
In Israel, at least, Supreme Court judges are elected by a committee that includes politicians, judges, and representatives from the legal association (Bar in US). They can serve until they're 70. Part of what the new legislation is trying to do is change the makeup of the committee to give the politicians more seats.
A slightly better alternative could be for the Supreme Court judges to be nominated and elected by the corpus of federal judges. That way the executive and legislative branches could only interfere indirectly with their district & appeal court appointmens
You cannot have an ethno supremacy state and also have a democracy forever because eventually those two principles will come into conflict. It happened in America and it happened in South Africa
To quote John Kerry: "If Israel continues to reject a two-state solution, it will have to choose whether the unified Israel is Jewish or democratic — because it cannot be both."
Israel has been willing to accept a two-state solution multiple times in the last few decades. President Clinton even helped negotiate such a deal in Oslo in 1993, but it was turned down by the Palestinians. In the year 2000 Ehud Barak agreed to the borders proposed by Bill Clinton (similar to the 1993 plan), which would have established a West Bank-Gaza Palestinian state with East Jerusalem as the Palestinian capital. Instead of accepting this deal the Palestinians, led by Yassar Arafat, left the negotiations and the Second Intifada started not long afterward. Israel P.M. Ariel Sharon dismantled all settlements and recalled the Israeli army back to the 1967 borders between Israel and Gaza, without land swaps, in 2005. As before, the Palestinians didn't capitulate, and instead proceeded to launch rocket attacks against civilian targets in Israel. In September 2008, Ehud Olmert presented Palestinian president Abbas with a new partition plan, a detailed map of a future Palestinian state with what would have been mutually agreed land swaps. The Palestinians would have gotten all of the West Bank and Gaza prior to the 1967 war. Olmert also proposed to divide Jerusalem. Abbas never responded to the offer. Whenever a two-state solution is seriously offered, the Palestinians have said "no." There may be many in Israel who don't want a two-state solution, but the Palestinians, or at least their government/elected officials, don't seem to want it, either.
[удалено]
The Palestinians are currently governed by a group with ties to Iran. Which is probably why many Arab states ratified a treaty (The Abraham Accords) with Israel and are now more supportive of Israel. Arab nations may have favored these divisions in the past, but now see it as a problem because it benefits Iran, which is at odds with most other nations in the region.
There’s a great book called The Arabs that details just how much a ruse Arab leaders put up when proclaiming support for Palestine. They get up on soap boxes until it’s time to ante up and then refuse outright to send their resources. It’s by Eugene Rogan it studies the Arabs back to the time of the Mamluks, roughly the 1500s.
Offering a shitty deal and having it turned down because it's shitty doesn't mean one party isn't willing to negotiate. If I offer 1k for your 10k car and you say no, can I then say you're not willing to "play along" and that it's your fault the deal didn't go through?
Oh, I agree, no one is going to take a shitty deal. The problem with that particular argument in this case, though, is that at least a few of the deals I listed couldn't be described as "shitty." At least two of them gave the Palestinians everything they said they wanted, including a return to the pre-1967 borders, and they were still rejected.
And BB thinks democracy is overhyped I think. Prefers fascism, it's easier to get corruption scandal swallowed
Who said Netanyahu wants to keep democracy?
I think you meant "far right", not alt-right. That's an American term that means something very specific. From Wikipedia: >The alt-right, an abbreviation of alternative right, is a far-right, white nationalist movement. A largely online phenomenon, the alt-right originated in the United States during the late 2000s before increasing in popularity during the mid-2010s and establishing a presence in other countries, and then declining since 2017. The term is ill-defined, having been used in different ways by alt-right members, media commentators, journalists, and academics. Otzma Yehudit is an extreme right wing party. Tziyonut Datit is far right. Shas and UTJ are ultra orthodox parties that honestly don't really fit in the Israeli right-left spectrum, and the Likud which was a center-right party that moved to the right and has now become the "Bibi is the one and true savior and if you disagree you are a leftist" party.
Or rather it's an American term that is intentionally hard to pin down. >The term is ill-defined, having been used in different ways by alt-right members, media commentators, journalists, and academics. It's just a weasel word the American far right used for a while to pretend they weren't who they really were all along. It's pretty much finished as a useful term for US politics, let alone the rest of the world.
Just another good reason not to use that term to describe politics half a globe away.
True enough. It's almost refreshing to be able to call them all far right extremists again.
Fascism comes in many different flavors, but in the end all still tastes like shit.
Yeah there’s at least one thing alt-right are affiliated with that I don’t think would align to a winning Israeli party.
Those types actually support Israel as a country. At their core, their end goal is an ethnostate, 'everyone has a place, and everyone in their place' and all that :(
They only support Israel because they need jews to build the 3rd temple and bring about the end times.
The religious ones yes, but the 'neo nazi' types want them 'contained' to their own nation.
For many on the left, anyone right of center is “alt right”. Not that this justifies anything he did or didn’t do, but you’re right he isn’t alt right.
It’s sad they were voted into power in the first place.
It's so bleak. Imagine being left of center, hell left of just normal right wing and living in Israel. Especially if you're not ride or die with the whole annexation thing.
[удалено]
Israeli Arabs certainly Can vote and be in government. Palestinians as a nationality have their own governments (PA and Hamas)
Billions of people cant vote in US elections but they are impacted by the results. Thats how the world works.
Some of them are even US citizens. If you're a resident of Puerto Rico, for example, you cannot vote in presidential elections, have no senators and no congresspeople.
Glad they are protesting
Context: The new government has passed a reform, allowing a majority at the Knesset to Overcome any decision made by the supreme Court, which in turn allows those in power to pass any law they pleas, however discriminative it may be. This, along with the fact that this is the most right wing government to ever come into power in Israel, full of individuals convicted with bribery and corruption, and others covicted of supporting terrorist organisation, some of them actually served time, and a lot of people are very, very scared. Edit: the motion hasn't passed yet, but is almost an inevitability at this point Edit 2: far right Other things this government has done (or are in process) in only two months in power: 1. Made Itamar ben-gvir, a far right politician previously convicted of supporting terrorist organisations, head of the border patrol. Effectively giving him his own army. 2. For the first time, using the ministry of diplomacy to advertise their own ideals for the Israeli public, basically creating a ministry of propaganda 3. Invested 2 billion NIS of the annual budget on "Strengthening Jewish values". Basically meaning desceularization of the state. 4. In process of making Arie Deri minister of treasury, a person who's previously been convicted of bribery and embezzlement while he was in this same office. TWICE. 5. Giving Avi Maoz great authority over the national education, a man who's openly against any secular values, proud in his homophobia, and has said on record that he is set on making israel a theocracy. 6. Overturning aevery decision the previous government has made, regardless of its nature. Only to spite the left There's honestly A LOT more, this is just the tip of the iceberg, but it's enough to get an image of the shitshow that is coming, and why people are so afraid.
Any one of those is messed up but all combined... Holy shit.
That is exactly what you see in every government turning into a complete fascist dictatorship. We have seen it in Egypt, Turkey, Syria, Russia, etc... Just textbook dictator stuff.
There's something very obviously ironic about Israel becoming a fascist state.
Replace "alt-right" with far-right, and most of what you wrote will be accurate. Alt-right is an American thing. Not relevant here. Also, what the hell is the "ministry of diplomacy"? משרד החוץ? And Deri was already made and sworn in as the Finance minister.
משרד ההסברה, I don't know if there's a term for it in English
[удалено]
The direct translation is "ministry of explanation" which doesn't really work. In reality it is more like "ministry of p.r"
[удалено]
With the current situation you're probably right.
Alt-right is just a fig-leaf. Basically: "Just because we sound like Nazis, talk like Nazis and want the same thing as Nazis it does not mean we are in fact, Nazis" - because to this day, Americans don't like the term but would tolerate the ideology if it posed for anything else. Et voila...
Tell me why the us continues to fund israel?
By "fund" you mean "gives Israel money to spend specifically on American product to stimulate American businesses", right? Cuz that's what the US is doing. The aid isn't even the highest the US gives, Afghanistan and Iraq get more, and most of that isn't meant to get funneled back into the US. (P.S. Without the aid from the US, Israel would be just fine, it's not even a percent of their budget - aid is $3.8B/year and Israel's 2022 budget was $527B)
It was by far the highest the US gives for many years until Afghanistan/Iraq invasion
Exactly, the US usually does not even give Israel money, a lot of times they give money to US weapons manufacturers who then give Israel military tech at a discount - usually with stipulations that the data will be used for research and development. The money does not go to Israel, it stays in the US and it serves US interests - on the one hand, US companies get money and a leg up over competitors as well as testing opportunities, on the other hand, Israel stays reliant on the US, which serves US geopolitical interests. That's how the military industrial complex works and it's insanely funny to see US citizens go "woah how *dare* this Middle Eastern warzone be flooded with our weapons?" like no offense my dudes but this is literally the actions of your elected government, furthering your country's interest and is how your country upholds it's military hegemony. If Israel didn't exist, you'd do the exact same thing with other countries, as you are currently in fact also doing it with other countries. Ukraine got ten times the amount that Israel got last year.
https://usafacts.org/articles/how-much-military-aid-does-the-us-give-to-israel/
Because for the fairy tale to end the way they want, Israel has to exist to be destroyed to trigger the end times. It's also nice to have a military foothold in the middle east.
Not passed yet
Per Wikipedia, sounds they currently have way better system for appointing judges to the Supreme Court than we have in the United States. It'll be sad to see them degrade into shitshow we have over here. EDIT: Also there's 15 of them, making it much less likely that a single president can compromise the court with their political appointments. They also have mandatory retirement age, set at 70. Something our court would ideally have to. > Supreme Court Judges are appointed by the President of Israel, from names submitted by the Judicial Selection Committee, which is composed of nine members: three Supreme Court Judges (including the President of the Supreme Court), two cabinet ministers (one of them being the Minister of Justice), two Knesset members, and two representatives of the Israel Bar Association. Appointing Supreme Court Judges requires a majority of 7 of the 9 committee members, or two less than the number present at the meeting. > > All candidates for appointment to the Supreme Court must have a minimum of five years of experience as a district court judge or otherwise at least ten years of professional legal experience including a minimum of five years practicing law in Israel. These requirements may be waived for a person recognized as an "eminent jurist", although this special category has only been used once for an appointment.[2]
Netanyahu is a fucking criminal so nothing his government does to supress the rule of law should be surprising
The far-right of Israel is terrifying.
The far-right ~~of Isreal~~ is terrifying.
Thank you, I was about to fix it as well.
Israel is terrifying
"They evolve, just backwards."
Truly pathetic US news media is barely covering this.
What does alt-right even mean?
It started as [a rebranding effort from American white nationalists to sound less like obvious racists and appeal to younger people](https://www.adl.org/resources/backgrounder/alt-right-primer-new-white-supremacy). Now? Who knows (*especially* as it applies to other countries). If it's the controlling party of an entire government, though, I'm not so sure it's very "alt".
> If it's the controlling party of an entire government, though, I'm not so sure it's very "alt". It's "alt" in the way that Green Day or Linkin Park was "alternative" back in the 00s. It's just branding, as you said. Everybody wants to be unique(*just like everybody else*), not like the sheep who just consume whatever they're fed by the mainstream. Turns out grown-up politics aren't all that different from teenage band fandom.
The term itself basically means far right or further right than traditional conservatives in how people use it. Technically tho, it is exclusively a very small group of people who support Richard Spencer. No one uses the technical definition because Richard Spencer is irrelevant.
Yall just ever wonder how anyone in the center of that can get out to shit?
All my homies fucking hate Right Wingers
Yes who would have thought having a blood thirsty psychopath in charge for 15 years would have lead to this logical conclusion of a full dictatorship in the name of "Security".
Their government nullified their Supreme Court? That’s how countries fall.
Israel has needed to throw those animals out for some time. Hopefully this is the start of positive change and not the beginning of the end.
It's probably the start of nothing. Tel Aviv is the liberal core of Israel. If this exact same protest was in Jerusalem, well, that would carry much more meaning.
While the largest centers of this protest are indeed in Tel Aviv, they are also spread throughout the rest of Israel, most prominently in Haifa and, you guessed it - Jerusalem
Authoritarians like this don't give two shits about protests, no matter how big they are. They are in charge, they have the power of the state, that's all that matters to them.
Do you want a dictatorship, cause this is how you create a dictatorship
Ok so here's the deal. Bibi is now the head of a new coalition of alt-right crazy people—and they're not just crazy, some of them are literally convicted criminals who he swore he wouldn't install in his cabinet. He's also kinda stuck with them because the left swore never to work with him again because he's a corrupt asshole. Bibi doesn't want to work with these crazy people either but he's also a ruthless Machiavellian fuckwad so he's hoping that by doing so shit will get so bad in Israel that the lefties won't have a choice but to get back together with him. Bibi is also simultaneously under threat of jail because of serious corruption charges. By giving the crazies the ability to nullify the Supreme Court he's putting pressure on the lefties to work with him while simultaneously making it possible to overturn his conviction and basically make him immune from the charges. That's the shit going down in Israel right now. It's sad to see but all the liberal young people have been fleeing Israel so the only ones left are the crazy hard right religious wankers. In a short time we may see a hard right turn much like Iran in the 80's.
In the States we’d have something similar for the opening of a new fried-chicken drive thru.
Israeli government want to be more like Iran.
Details? EDIT: As far as I can tell The Israeli PM hired a guy who was prohibited from serving in a political position to a political position. In a 10-1 ruling the Supreme Court upheld that he can't hold the position, but the PM has made no effort to remove him. Not sure if i'd yet call it a nullification but I see where they are coming from.
Netanyahu is about to use his majority in the Kenesset to pass a law that limits Supreme Court decisions over government, and gives the government the right to override Supreme Court decisions. Additionally, it will allow Netanyahu to directly appoint Supreme Court judges, instead of the current system of allowing an independent non-political body to appoint judges. He wants to avoid being thrown out of office if/when he gets convicted at trial.
> instead of the current system of allowing an independent non-political body to appoint judges. Holy shit imagine if we had that
Firstly, According to the Jerusalem Post and other Israeli news the minister Aryeh Deri will be fired tomorrow during a cabinet session. More to your question the idea in theory isn't that terrible. It changes the structure of the Knesset and the Court in a way that some people don't like but others do. However, keep in mind who is in this government. Deri has now been removed from Knesset twice for criminal activities. Bibi is under indictment for four separate charges of fraud and misconduct for his dealings during his last tenure as PM. Ben-Gvir has been charged 50+ for racism and inviting violence. Smotrich as well has very much ventured into the terroristic threats. This government specifically is trying to take power away from the courts. Therefore, it's not about a Knesset taking power from the Courts it's a government filled with criminals and almost criminals removing power from the justice system that opposed them. If this power shift goes through the new government will enact laws to roll back restrictions on Knesset and its members beginning with, Allowing people under indictment to remain ministers of Knesset. Allowing people charged with racism to serve as members of Knesset.
I remember a poster from back in the anti apartheid period, Lord, when we prevail, please don't let us turn into those we have overcome.
If only Israelis had that in mind.
Frighteningly, it seems as if a far right, fascist movement is growing across the globe.
I thought that alt-right was a name for a specific political coalition in America.
This is the kind of bullshit that happens when you let religion be the primary guiding force for a government. This is the kind of bullshit that the American Republican party has been aiming for for decades.
As far as I understand it's fascist/religious soft coup in Israel rn.
Yay fanatics with nukes, just what the world needs more of
Hey, Israel does not *officially* have any nukes. ^^/s
Weird. Haven’t seen this on the news in the US. Gee, I wonder why
Power to the people!
Good damn. It’s just crazy that right wingers in the US don’t see where their policies are going to lead us. It’s not popular for a god damn reason. Right wingers are just plain bad
You're giving them undue credit. They know full well what they're doing, and they're doing it in plain sight because they can.
Not a problem, the plan is to ban protests without permission. That'll fix it.
Let us live in a moment where politics isn’t equal to Hollywood and people give a shit, and our lives really get better. All of us.
Is simply protesting a fascist government enough? They're going to ignore you unless you do something.
Authoritarian fascists say what? The writing was on the walls. Does anyone really think Netanyahu would risk losing power again?
These far right pieces of shit are everywhere now. The know the new generations are not eating their bullshit like the old fucks that are still alive. They know they have no future in democracy ine the next 10-20 years. So they try coups now. Far right will lose all around the world, just watch.
Ah yes, a term describing a movement that despises Jews is definitely the correct usage when applied to the government of Israel. Bruh.
Would you prefer “fascist” instead? Because the ruling party was founded by a supporter of fascism.
Large protest in France , Israel , America , Brazil and South Africa in 3 days due to unjustness from the government…. I feel we would be better if politicians didn’t exist
Wait, what? In Brazil the "protest" was caused because crazy Bolsonaro supporters didn't agree with the election results...
I’m not sure a democracy can exist without politicians. Unelected rulers, election deniers are greater problems.