At the mass rally in Tel Aviv marking thirty years since Yitzhak Rabin’s assassination, leaders of Israel’s liberal opposition—Yair Lapid, Gadi Eisenkot, and Yair Golan—took the stage. In a surprising turn, much of Lapid’s address focused on defining what Judaism is—and what it is not. “Itamar Ben Gvir’s racism is not Judaism,” he declared. “Yigal Amir (Rabin’s assassin) is not Judaism.” Responding to claims that “when Judaism and democracy collide, Judaism comes first.”

It seems that Israel’s liberal bloc—protesting for three years against Netanyahu’s government, first over the judicial overhaul and later the Gaza war—is now launching its election campaign with a new mission: to reclaim Judaism. Having already adopted the national flag as a symbol of democratic resistance, the movement now seeks to define its own version of Jewish identity.

If “Jewish” has become contested, “Israeli” once referred to all citizens of the state—even if Arab citizens rarely felt part of that identity. “Israeliness” was shaped by the ruling Mapai party, which settled the land, founded the state, and built its institutions. It deliberately distanced itself from exilic Judaism, turning Hebrew from an ancient sacred language into a national spoken one, while cutting ties with both European and Mizrahi Jewish pasts. For decades, no one questioned anyone’s Judaism; to say “Israeli” was to say “Jewish.” That held until 1977, when Menachem Begin’s rise brought not just political upset, but a social revolution.

The old elite—the kibbutzim, the Histadrut, the universities, the judiciary—all symbols of the “old Israel”—became the enemy. In the 1981 election, Begin branded these “bleeding hearts” as adversaries and tore open the ethnic divide when he replied to entertainer Dudu Topaz’s “Chachchachim” (riffraff) speech with: “Our Mizrahi brothers were brave warriors.” Thus, he drew a sharp line between the religious, right-leaning Mizrahim and the Ashkenazi “high minded” waving red flags.

More than forty years later, Israel’s liberal camp still struggles to shed its image of elitism, condescension, and detachment from Jewish tradition. Netanyahu has done everything possible to inflame those divides. In 1997, he was caught whispering to Shas’s Rabbi Kaduri: “The left has forgotten what it means to be Jewish.” In today’s political shorthand, “left” means Israeli, while “right” means Jewish. Those who see themselves as Jews vote right; those who see themselves as Israelis vote left.

Lapid is wrong to think the fight with the right is over who is “more Jewish.” The battle is existential—about democracy itself—just as the struggle against Iran or Hamas is existential.

To erase the stigma, the left has tried everything. In 2017, hoping to win over traditional Mizrahi voters, Labor chose Avi Gabbay—a Mizrahi politician—as leader. Soon after, Gabbay too, told young party members: “The left has forgotten what it means to be Jewish.” Two years later he quit, and lately Labor merged into a new bloc, The Democrats, led by former general Yair Golan.

The “Jewish camp’s” victory in the last elections paved the way for a genuine constitutional revolution: an effort to redefine Israel not as a democracy, but rather as a religious state with democratic trimmings. The first step came with the 2018 Nation-State Law, which enshrined the country’s Jewish character at the expense of its democratic one. The current government has since launched open war on the Supreme Court—the only real check on discriminatory laws in a state without a constitution.

In practice, every institution is under siege. The army is labeled liberal, prosecutors are accused of persecuting the right and ultra-Orthodox, the media branded “the enemy of the people,” universities deemed elitist, the arts subversive, and the Shin Bet part of a “deep state.” The government insists these pillars of democracy are biased and block its “governability.” Though the right has ruled for decades, it still claims it isn’t truly in power.

Under the “Jewish” worldview, every arm of the state must serve the sovereign—the people—embodied by the coalition and its eternal leader, Benjamin Netanyahu. The right’s immediate goal is to cement control by silencing all criticism—from courts, media, and within. Its ideology rests on three pillars: Jewish settlement across the West Bank, the supremacy of religious values, and the right of ultra-Orthodox Jews to study Torah without serving in the army—on the public dime.

This is the Israel that has rules over five million Palestinians for decades, dreaming of their eventual expulsion. It is an Israel where citizens can no longer live—nor wish to—because equality, democracy, and liberty are trampled daily. Against this rupture between two irreconcilable visions, one wonders why Lapid, of all topics, chose to focus in his speech on Judaism. A secular man known for his disdain for the ultra-Orthodox, contempt for settlers, and view of Ben Gvir as a racist, Lapid sees in Netanyahu a liar, manipulator, and the spiritual instigator of Rabin’s murder.

This government has brought upon Israel its gravest disaster since founding. Yet it continues to rule, deflecting blame for the October 7 massacre onto everyone else: Rabin and Oslo, the Supreme Court, the attorney general, the IDF, the Shin Bet, protest groups, the media—everyone but itself. Lapid is wrong to think the fight with the right is over who is “more Jewish.” The battle is existential—about democracy itself—just as the struggle against Iran or Hamas is existential.

Israel’s current government has turned the country into a global pariah. Netanyahu faces potential prosecution in The Hague; Smotrich and Ben Gvir have become synonymous with ethnic cleansing; and Israelis everywhere feel the sting of isolation. And this is when Lapid chooses to lecture on Judaism? History shows such debates always serve the right. Even if Lapid wore a kippah, wrapped in tefillin, and observed all 613 commandments, his Jewishness would still be doubted.

The coming elections are a historic test. Israel needs leaders who grasp the magnitude of this moment. The ceasefire with Hamas—opposed by Ben Gvir and Smotrich—has shattered the illusion of a “Greater Israel” and the dream of annexing the West Bank. October 7 has reignited the debate over ultra-Orthodox conscription: the public now demands democracy and equality and refuses to trade them for a coalition that has brought ruin.

A vast majority of Israelis now call for an official state inquiry to expose Netanyahu’s lies and his evasion of responsibility for the massacre. What matters to those who filled the streets to defend democracy is not who is “more Jewish,” but something simpler: will Israel live by democratic principles—or sink into an empty debate over Jewishness? The opposition to Ben Gvir, Smotrich, and Netanyahu is not because they are Jews, but because they are fascists, racists, and corrupt.

The post Israeli, Jew, and What Lies Between first appeared on Da'am Party: One state - Green Economy.

On October 7, 2023, Hamas perpetrated crimes against humanity by targeting civilians, children, the elderly, women, and men in the communities surrounding the Gaza Strip. The actions of Hamas on that day resulted in a staggering toll of 1,300 fatalities, thousands injured, and some 200 hostages. However, the long-term impact of these actions is likely to be even more severe. In the long run they represent not only an assault Israelis, but also against Palestinians as they target the fabric of a future life. The DAAM Party stands for the right of both Israelis and Palestinians alike to a life of freedom and dignity in this land. DAAM opposes the Israeli military rule over the Palestinian territories occupied in 1967 and has consistently strived, sometimes in challenging conditions of isolation, for a just resolution that ensures equal rights for Palestinians.

Simultaneously, DAAM has consistently condemned the Islamic extremism that Hamas represents. We have observed with concern the domination of Hamas over the Palestinian scene and the destructive discourse that has subsequently developed within it. We have acted and hoped for the resurgence of a democratic Palestinian force that opposes this extremist ideology, grounded in hatred and which denies any possibility of a political solution and peace between the two peoples.

All Israeli governments have preferred Hamas to be the influential, ruling faction in Gaza. Despite recurring cycles of violence and the assurances of Netanyahu and other Israeli leaders, Israel has consistently acted to provide Hamas with legitimacy. It has perceived Hamas as an effective sub-contractor, ignoring the organization’s dangerous ideology and the terror it has exerted upon Gaza inhabitants themselves.

This disaster could have been prevented

DAAM opposed the 1993 Oslo Accords, arguing that they lacked any basis for establishing a lasting peace between Israel and the Palestinians. The Palestinian Authority, established within the framework of the Oslo Accords, quickly revealed itself as a corrupt entity incapable of providing the inhabitants of the West Bank and Gaza with an alternative to Israeli occupation. The Palestinian Authority acquiesced to continued settlements and rightly incurred the wrath of the Palestinian street. Hamas exploited the weaknesses of the Oslo Accords and the Palestinian Authority. It began disseminating its poisonous ideology among the Palestinians, accompanied by suit side bombings of buses and a campaign of terror against Israeli civilians. This grim reality nourished and strengthened the Israeli right. The October 1995 assassination of Yitzhak Rabin was a pivotal moment in the history of the conflict, solidifying the dominance of the Israeli far right.

In 2005, PM Ariel Sharon implemented the Disengagement Plan from Gaza. This unilateral withdrawal plan, implemented without an agreement with the Palestinians, was in essence a gift to Hamas. Sharon’s goal was to leave Gaza and thus solidify Israel’s hold on the West Bank, neutralizing any political move that would necessitate a withdrawal and dismantling of settlements there. The policy of separating Gaza from the West Bank (the “isolation principle”), was henceforth adopted by all Israeli governments. It was meant to provide security for Israelis, relying on a form of ceasefire (“hudna”) with Hamas. Thus, the terrorist organization in Gaza became a partner to Israel in managing Gaza. Even recurring cycles of violence with Hamas did not alter the perception that Hamas controlled Gaza and had to be dealt with accordingly.

On October 7th, 2023, Israel reaped the bitter fruits of this misguided and destructive policy. Now, after 18 years, the circle has closed. Israel finds itself with no choice but to reassert control over Gaza. Hamas’s barbaric attack was a strategic, military, social, and political blow that horrified Israel and transformed it entirely.

The future ground incursion into Gaza will come at an incomprehensible cost to both Israelis and Palestinians. From the Israeli side, a protracted and ruthless war, which could develop to include multiple fronts, will claim the lives of many young people, impact the economy, and destroy resources that could have been directed towards welfare and development. From the Palestinian side, there will be thousands of innocent victims and an unprecedented humanitarian crisis. Already today (October 18th), there are over half a million displaced people in the Gaza Strip, fleeing to the south in the hope of escaping the crossfire.

This human tragedy will be seared into the consciousness of both peoples for many years to come. The direct culprits are Hamas and the Israeli government. As noted, the preservation of Hamas as the post-disengagement ruler in Gaza was a joint interest of Hamas and the Israeli right. Despite the perceived autonomy of Gaza under Hamas’s governance, in reality Gaza remained closed and entirely dependent on Israel. The supply of electricity and water, issuance of identity documents, the shekel as the official currency, and the import of food and fuel —key to all aspects of life in Gaza- remained in the hands of Israel. All Israeli governments, with support of the international community, played a part in creating this quagmire, which shattered in the unimaginable display of terror by Hamas on Israeli soil.

The symbiotic relationship between Israel and Hamas

In January 2006, Hamas won the elections for the Palestinian Legislative Council. Ismail Haniyeh, the leader of Hamas, became the head of the Palestinian Authority in Gaza. Instead of acting as the leader of a responsible political entity, however, the Hamas organization used its position to strengthen its military power. In June 2006, armed members of the organization abducted Gilad Shalit. In June 2007, within the chaotic reality that ensued after the abduction, the Israeli siege and continuous military pressure, Hamas militants attacked Fatah activists in Gaza and seized all institutions, employing brutal violence against their opponents.

Hamas opposed the Oslo Accords, which did not prevent it from participating in the Palestinian parliament elections that were held based on the Oslo Accords. Hamas used the Oslo Accords as a platform to take control of the Gaza Strip, hoping, eventually, to gain control over the entire Palestinian people in the West bank too.

In 2011, under pressure from the Israeli public demanding release of Gilad Shalit, the Israeli government finally relented and agreed to a prisoner exchange deal. In exchange for the release of one soldier, Gilad Shalit, more than a thousand prisoners were freed, including Yihya Sinwar, who became the leader of Hamas in Gaza and orchestrated the October 7 terrorist attack.

Thus, Hamas built its power. From an organization that held a limited number of mortars in 2007 with a maximum range of 2 kilometers, Hamas has evolved into a formidable military force, equipped with thousands of missiles capable of reaching Tel Aviv and Haifa. By constructing an underground city of tunnels in Gaza, Hamas has positioned itself as the official and exclusive representative of the Palestinian people, akin to the PLO in its time. Its leaders, based primarily abroad, are received as esteemed guests in the Arab world and in countries including Russia and Iran. The Palestinian Authority, which failed in managing the territories it received from Israel and became corrupt and disconnected from the people, failed to compete with Hamas and establish its supremacy.

The absurdity in Israel’s policy, which instead of distinguishing between residents and the leadership that took control of them, and viewing Hamas as a cynical terrorist organization that exploits the Palestinians in Gaza as pawns, allowed Hamas to rule Gaza and strengthen its military power.

Hamas’s policy was based on the premise that in case of an Israeli military attack, the ensuing humanitarian disaster would trigger global pressure globally, isolate Israel, lift the siege from Gaza, and increase Hamas’s legitimacy. This enabled the organization to continue embezzling humanitarian aid funds intended to assist Gaza residents and instead use it to produce missiles.

As a fundamentalist, deterministic organization not aimed at advancing a political solution, Hamas had no problem linking the fate of the Palestinians to Iran’s Ayatollah regime, a regime lacking any historical connection, whether religious or national, to the Palestinian people. In 2012, Hamas leaders left Damascus after condemning Assad regime’s massacre carried out against the Syrian people, the majority of whom belong to the Sunni sect, to which most of the Palestinian people also belong. This rupture plunged Hamas into a crisis in its relations with Iran, which had been providing it with patronage and support together with the murderous regime in Damascus. The crisis concluded in 2022 with a visit by Hamas leaders to Damascus and the renewal of relations with Iran.

Hamas’s attitude towards Israel presumed that Israelis are fools. First, because they are democrats, an idea that is not accepted by extremist Islam, which perceives democracy as a weakness. And second, because they are liberals, a phenomenon deemed despicable by the same perception, as it sanctifies consumerism and is disconnected from spirituality.

Indeed, in the name of that “spirituality,” Hamas agents committed a barbaric massacre against defenseless civilians. Hamas spokespeople deny the massacre and all the atrocities which have taken place. However, all atrocities committed were documented and captured in the detailed instructions received by the “Al-Nukhba” forces sent out for the Jihad war. The Arab press ignores the massacre and collaborates with Hamas in brainwashing millions around the world. The facts, however, cannot be hidden. 1,300 bodies, including 500 bodies burnt alive by the insurgents, remain unidentifiable. There are living testimonies and evidence that prove the crimes committed by Hamas operatives.

In the long run, Hamas miscalculated. The organization’s leadership overestimated its role as Israel’s subcontractor. It failed to understand that without Israel, it has no existence in the region. Perhaps it assumed that Hezbollah and Iran would come to its aid and launch the battle of Gog and Magog against Israel. The Hamas leadership’s inflated sense of security led it to conclude that by inflicting a strategic blow to Israel, it would become an independent power. It did not consider that such an action would leave Israel no choice but to annihilate the organization.

The Americans and the protest take control

Hamas’s attack found Israel amid an existential internal struggle over its character – whether it would be a democratic liberal state or an emerging dictatorship. An unprecedented protest movement stood up against a dangerous coalition of messianic, fascist right-wingers, including dangerous religious leaders and power-hungry, corrupt politicians. While we identified in the protest movement a source of hope and an opening for correcting Israel’s misguided and aggressive policies, Ismail Haniyeh and the Hamas leadership saw it as a weakness to be exploited.

The Israeli military relies on both technology and intelligence, as well as air power based on the professionalism and motivation of its pilots. The erosion in the motivation of Israel’s air force pilots, because of the government’s attempted regime change, appeared to Hamas’s leadership as a golden opportunity. Additionally, Hamas’s intelligence successfully gathered information about Israel while concealing its own plans from it. Hamas operatives knew exactly how to reach the Israel’s Gaza Strip command center thanks to an accurate map in their possession (Ronen Bergman, NYT). Hamas operatives knew everything that could be known about the communities in the vicinity, as well as the cities of Sderot and Netivot. Every group of Hamas operatives that infiltrated Israel knew exactly where they were going and what they were doing.

The Israeli army was stunned and struggled to function for 48 hours. Those who saved residents were the police and border guards, as well as other civilians who went to the battlefield themselves to rescue loved ones. The Israeli public was hit by an existential anxiety due to the army’s disappearance and the political leadership’s hollowness.

Into this governmental void entered the American administration, which acted to prevent any possibility of Israel’s collapse. The Churchillian speech of President Biden showed what leadership should look like in a place empty of leadership. He expressed unconditional support for Israel and warned those, such as Iran and Hezbollah, who wanted to exploit the situation that it would be better for them to be careful.  “DON’T” was the word he repeated twice. Biden declared that Hamas poses an existential threat to the Israeli people, thus emphasizing the justification of Israel’s defensive war.

From the moment of Biden’s election, we argued, despite many critics, that he is the sole force in the world standing against dictatorships and fascism. Once again, Biden understood that he had to intervene, as Israel’s collapse would pose a threat to democracy worldwide and to the national security of the Americans themselves. Hamas’s victory is a victory for the axis of Iran, Putin’s ally, and thus, also threatens Ukraine.

The Israeli right-wing had been flirting with Putin and refused to support Biden in the uncompromising war for Ukraine. Hamas’s attack revealed that there are now two opposing camps confronting each other: the United States, Europe, Ukraine, and Israel on one front, with Russia, Iran, Syria, and perhaps even China on the other. The American deployment of its Sixth Fleet to the Mediterranean and spreading of its defensive umbrella over Israel were intended to save Israel. It restored security to Israelis and, for the first time, a consensus was formed in Israel on the courageous leadership of Biden.

Since 2011, DAAM has closely followed events of the Arab Spring in Syria, a spring which transformed into a cruel winter. Russia and Iran came to Assad’s aid and helped him massacre the Syrian people. A huge wave of refugees was created, many of whom reached Europe. When Putin invaded Ukraine, we supported Ukraine without reservation, as those defending democracy against dictatorship. The elimination of Hamas, from Biden’s administration’s perspective, is also necessary in the face of the axis of evil comprising Russia, Iran, and their regional affiliates. Biden declared his support for Israel because this democracy is important not only for Israelis, but also for Palestinians and the possibility of the Arab Spring’s return. The forces that emerged during the Arab Spring will not be able to strengthen and change the face of the Middle East while it is ruled by fundamentalist or monarchical dictatorships. In the United States itself, a war over the soul of democracy is still being waged. The Trump camp, supported by Putin and demonstrating admiration for Hezbollah, is a threat to the American people and humanity.

Many young people in the Arab world, including prominent intellectuals, still judge reality according to the old paradigm: Russia = anti-imperialism – is on our side; the United States = aggressive imperialism – is the enemy of the people. This perception also shapes the bias in favor of Hamas and Hezbollah, defining these organizations as freedom fighters. Many supporters of the FREE PALESTINE movement fall into this trap. The fate of the Ukrainian and Syrian peoples testifies to the great lie at the core of this perception. When Israel today embraces the leadership of the United States, it is essentially departing from the path led by Netanyahu, which linked it to the axis of dictatorships.

A decisive role for protest organizations.

The second factor that saved Israel was the protest movement, which since October 7th has led the massive home front aid campaign. From the outset, the protest understood that Biden is a trustworthy ally, and therefore raised the American flag alongside the Israeli one during the demonstrations in Kaplan St. (Tel Aviv). The movement’s leadership demanded that Biden not meet with Netanyahu. The protest movement has now transformed into the backbone that holds Israeli society together. This is crucial as the alliance between Israel and the United States completely deteriorated in Netanyahu’s tenure, during which Israel behaved as an independent force, detrimental to the alliance of democratic nations.

When DAAM decided to support the protest movement, we did so because it was a movement that flew the flags of democracy and equality. The predominance of the Israeli flag in the protests was problematic in our view, as it prevented creation of a common denominator with the Arab society. Nevertheless, we understood that at its core, the protest is a democratic movement that does not exist in the Arab world.

Biden does not support Israel because he is a Zionist. The annihilation of Hamas as a terror entity is an interest of the entire democratic camp, including Europe and Israel. Israel’s past approach was that Biden does not understand what he is doing. We Israelis are tightrope walkers who know how to walk a thin line, and we will succeed in outsmarting Hamas and leveraging all sides to our advantage. We have no one to rely on but ourselves. The war initiated by Hamas on October 7th put an end to this approach. Israel realized it needs democratic allies.

DAAM’s position: Get rid of the Israeli fascist right and also of Hamas, with which it collaborated

Anyone who sees what is happening in Gaza today and says it is a human tragedy is right. One million residents have been thrown into the streets, and forced to evacuate to the southern part of the Gaza Strip. The fate of women, children, and helpless elderly people is uncertain. We oppose the extremist voices in Israel demanding revenge, those who do not distinguish between Hamas and the Palestinian people. We call for action to prevent harm to civilians to the extent possible and to ensure humanitarian corridors that will allow UN forces and others to protect the lives and peace of Gaza residents.

The big question is whether Israel can totally eliminate Hamas, given the prevailing political situation and the moral blow it has suffered. This question has yet to be settled. Another strategic question that will arise once Israel completes its military operation is who can replace Hamas and take control of Gaza. On the other hand, the Palestinians and their supporters need to honestly ask themselves whether they are in favor of a Hamas victory over Israel and whether they are actually willing to live in a state with a fundamentalist regime, like Iran, or Iraq.

We want Hamas to be defeated, but do not believe that victory can be achieved under the leadership of Netanyahu and the fascist settler group that, to our delight, has lost all public support. Israel will need to establish a government led by members of the protest movement, which has defined the parameters of a democratic state. The protest leaders and their supporters are tirelessly engaged in assisting citizens day and night, filling the void created by the government’s dysfunction, and they tell Netanyahu: If we win the war, it will be despite your leadership and not because of it.

Immediately following the end of the fighting in Gaza, a critical struggle for the removal of Netanyahu and his associates from power will unfold within Israel. We are preparing for that moment and will try to assist and promote this struggle with all our might. The victory of the democratic protest movement over the fascist forces in Israel will also open a new chapter in Arab-Jewish relations. The Palestinian arena without Hamas, will hopefully undergo a significant transformation. In the past two decades, Hamas has managed to suppress all free discourse, silencing any liberal opinion. Any collaboration with Israelis was defined as normalization. If we succeed in removing Hamas and the fascist right in Israel, all possibilities for examination of a shared peace will be opened. Therefore, this is a crucial battle on both fronts.

It is important to note that many Israeli residents living in “the Gaza envelope”, those killed and abducted, supported a political settlement with the Palestinians, including with Hamas. The idea that peace could be achieved based on siege and separation, and reconciliation with the existence of a terrorist regime just a few kilometers away from your home, collapsed on October 7. The concept of two states, of which one is a democracy, and the other is ruled by a “lawless” regime (which so called “fits the mentality” of the Palestinians), has also crumbled disastrously. We must recognize that Gaza and the West Bank are also tied to Israel, geographically and economically. We have been living for years in a one state reality, where an apartheid regime of national discrimination exists between Israelis and Palestinians. Until we are ready to live in equality with the Palestinians, in one democratic state in the geographic space between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea, this terrible bloodshed will not be resolved.

The post Position of DAAM Party: October 7th Massacre: crime against humanity! first appeared on Da'am Party: One state - Green Economy.

The headquarters of the civil resistance against the regime coup in Israel focused their weekly protest on August 28th on the rampant violence within the Arab community. During the demonstration, participants shouldered 150 symbolic coffins to represent the tragic toll of violence in Arab society. One coffin, however, was missing – the coffin of Sarit Ahmed Shakur, who was murdered by her brother solely because she was a lesbian.

The media highlighted the words of Tira Mayor Ma‘mon Abdel–Hai, who delivered the main speech at the rally that evening, and MK Ayman Odeh (from Hadash) was honored to carry a coffin all the way to Kaplan Street in Tel Aviv. By the way, as we wrote in 2015, this same Ma’mon Abdel- Hai capitulated in the face of pressure from religious elements in Tira and canceled a women’s marathon event. Neither of them, however, condemned or even mentioned the murder of Sharit Ahmed, and none of them would defend the rights of the LGBTQ community. Equality seems to be a very relative concept.

In an article published in Yedioth Ahronoth on August 28, Einav Schiff sharply criticizes Arab society and its leaders, pointing out that “liberal” Ayman Odeh “did not even know how to say Sarit’s name, and referred to her on Twitter as “the girl from Yarka.” “And if this is the behavior of Odeh,” continues Schiff, “the humanist with the tormented look, what can be said about religious public leaders such as MKs Mansur Abbas and Ahmed Tibi? Yesterday’s Ynet interviews with the mayors of Sakhnin and Tira demonstrate that it’s better to bang your head against the wall than to expect them to come out with a strong message which could save countless girls and boys.” Let’s tell the truth. Tira Mayor Ma‘mon Abdel–Hai emphasized the identity of the culprit in the tragedy of Arab society murders: the racist Minister of national security Itamar Ben Gvir, although he did complain that “whoever instated Ben Gvir to protect us, a minister who hates Arabs, does not want to protect us.”

How good to have Itamar Ben Gvir. He is an easy target and all the troubles occurring in Jewish and Arab society can be blamed on him. After all, Ben Gvir hates both Arabs and left wing “traitors” , so it’s easy to unite against him. Yet this is where the agreement between Arab leadership and the protest movement begins and ends. Democracy, equality, separation of religion and state and education for liberal values are not the bread and butter of the Arab leaders. Values on which the Arab leadership relies are the polar opposite: sanctification of “clanship,” institutionalized discrimination against women, and religion as a social pillar that determines the way of life. Tolerance and liberalism are seen as Western, materialistic values that spoil society and disintegrate it from within. To cover this dark conservatism, they throw around nationalist slogans, the Palestinian flag and point an accusing finger at the “Jews,” wherever they are.

The protest movement is currently focusing its activities on two primary issues: defending the High Court and the October 2023 municipal elections. The goal is to get as many liberal representatives into local government as possible, to encourage supporters of this camp to vote for a liberal and clean local government and not to abandon this vital arena to the ultra-Orthodox, messianic and dark right that has taken over the public space. This content that the protest movement brings to the municipal elections is, however, completely absent on the Arab street, where the elections are nothing more than a source of power and jobs for wider family members.

First and foremost are the Arab MKs, who demand democracy and accuse the protest of solely focusing on the justice system that is in any event intended only for Jews. At home, however, in the Arab villages and cities, “democracy,” the idea of individual freedom within the framework of rights and obligations, is considered heresy and is completely absent.

Democracy there is something in and of itself. “Primaries” are held within the clan. The clan council meets (only men are allowed to participate in the discussions). A doctor of one family declares his candidacy as does an attorney from another, and the clan council decides who will be elected. After each clan has “democratically” chosen its representative, negotiations begin between the clans, with the largest clan joining forces with smaller ones, and elections are held between the big clans and their smaller allies. There is no need for an election platform because there is no difference in the platform between competing clans. It doesn’t matter who wins because the situation will remain as it is.

After the elections, the wild distribution of spoils begins. The winning clan must keep its promises to its voters, and each family within it will receive the promised quota of jobs: cleaners, gardeners, social workers, teachers, school administrators and those responsible for tenders will be appointed not based on qualifications but on clan affiliation. On election night gunshots will be heard from all sides, as those who won celebrate and those who lost protest. The battle between the clans is full of fury. The losers will have to wait reluctantly for five long years in opposition. The citizens can now return to their routine, the village will continue to dis-function as usual, without leadership, without planning and with tremendous corruption.

While the protest movement is boycotting the “government destroying the third Temple”, Arab leadership is content with boycotting Itamar Ben Gvir while conducting ongoing intense negotiations with the criminal defendant Netanyahu and his affiliated group of messianic leaders, led by Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich. The Arab leadership does not differentiate between liberal Jews and racist Jews. Far-right MK Avi Maoz with mediaeval positions about women threatens this leadership less than a protest leader who sanctifies LGBTQ rights and advocates for gender equality. What is important to the Arab mayor is budgets. He must fulfill his duty “to his constituents” and without a budget there are no jobs. The protest, on the other hand, has no budgets to distribute, only values. It has a vision and a commitment to society. This is not what Arab leadership wants or expects.

If we connect the murder of Sarit Ahmed with the complete absence of democracy in Arab society; intolerance towards “the other”; disdain for the right of the individual to freely lead his/her life and the rampant corruption everywhere, we can perhaps begin to understand the phenomenon of violence in Arab society. The term crime families instead of crime organizations indicates the family manner in which Arab society is run. Make no mistake, the long arms of the crime families have penetrated into almost each and every family.

Murders have therefore become mass and occur daily. Crime is not limited to one family but has spread throughout society. There is no family that does not have a “soldier” within family mafias, and this is how the cancer spreads through the entire body. Arab society’s immune system has weakened to such an extent that its leaders have given up. The louder they shout, “where is the police,” the more the criminal organizations, which exploit this weakness, become influential.

The protest movement longs for participation of Arab members of society in the protest, because how can you fight against the phenomena of racism and Jewish supremacy without Arab participation? How is it possible to champion liberalism, human rights and equality when the demonstrators are all Jewish? The truth must be told: Currently Arab society believes that Bibi will rule forever and that even if the protest wins, it will continue to act in the racist and divisive way of Israel’s founders, such as Ben Gurion and Golda Meir. The best way to reach Arab society, therefore, is through the protest’s success in overthrowing the government and the writing of a constitution that will chisel in writing participatory democracy that includes all of its citizens.

It appears the new protest generation has learned the lessons of the first War of Independence, and is conducting the second War of Independence. A new understanding is developing that the previous holy alliance with the ultra-Orthodox and the casting of a blind eye vis-à-vis the messianic settlers, all under the name of Jewish “brotherhood”, are what brought Israeli society to the abyss. We must understand it is not about two separate struggles but one struggle! Religious extremism is not the lot of Jews only, it also exists in Arab society. The oppression of women is shared by Jewish and Arab society alike, the struggle for LGBTQ should be common, the struggle for liberal education should be common too.

Democracy has no flag and no borders; it is a value that unites humanity as a whole. The guarantee for change in Arab society is the victory of the protest movement. Such a victory is the tectonic shift that could change the face of both Israeli and Palestinian society. It can create a completely new reality, when the values of democracy, equality, peace, and social justice unite all the inhabitants of this land between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea.

The post Local Municipal Elections, Here and There first appeared on Da'am Party: One state - Green Economy.

On the “day of disruption,” when hundreds of thousands took to the streets in protest against the planned repeal of the reasonableness clause, thousands gathered in front of the American Embassy in Tel Aviv, waving American flags alongside Israeli ones. The protesters’ demand from US President Biden is clear: “don’t give in,” and don’t invite Netanyahu to the White House as long as he doesn’t reject the anti-democratic legislation. In an interview with Fareed Zakaria two days before the demonstration, Biden spoke harshly against the Netanyahu government, defining it as “the most extreme in the history of Israel.” Biden clarified that not only the legal coup bothers him, but also the composition of the current coalition and its fascist positions.

To remove any doubt, New York Times commentator Thomas Friedman “translated” Biden’s intention. Friedman wrote that for generations, American administrations maintained special relations with Israel based on a “fiction” that Israel acts according to its acceptance of the two-state principle. On this basis, American administrations regularly vetoed any condemnation of Israel in the UN Security Council. Now, however, Israel’s right-wing government has put an end to this fiction. The appointment of Bezalel Smotrich as governor of the West Bank essentially buries the idea of two states. Smotrich intends to officially perpetuate the apartheid regime that Israeli governments set up for him in the West Bank. Thomas Friedman goes further and proposes, according to this logic, not to exempt the half million settlers from visas to the US, unless the same exemption applies to the 2.5 million Palestinians in the West Bank.

The Biden administration, whose support the protesters requested in front of the embassy, also presents them with a challenge. The administration is troubled not only by the judicial coup, but also by the fate of Israel, because it continues to control 5 million Palestinians who lack all rights or status. After all, the connection between the coup and apartheid is clear: first the High Court is eliminated, then the West Bank is annexed.

The American perspective is much broader, and stems from internal and global interests. The Biden administration is fighting for America’s soul. It stands against Trump and his fascist movement, which is an existential threat to the US and the world, no less than the messianic right is an existential threat to Israel. It is no coincidence that from the beginning of his term, Biden divided the countries of the world into two camps, the democratic versus the autocratic. If the judicial coup succeeds, Israel will belong to the autocratic camp represented today by Putin, Orban, and Xi Jinping.

Biden is surely aware of the dangers arising to any democracy following adoption of the market-based neoliberal approach. This conservative theory, the so-called “trickle-down economy,” was enthusiastically embraced by Netanyahu. Yet this economy, in the US as in Israel, has created tremendous social gaps, which have led to poverty and despair concerning democracy, and through which nationalism, racism, homophobia and fascism have penetrated. When elected president, Biden presented a new-old paradigm, returning to Roosevelt’s New Deal updated for the 21st century. The state, that same “fat” apparatus that Netanyahu loves to vilify, returns to play a central role in the economy.

Biden declared himself the best friend of organized labor. Today, instead of favoring multinational corporations, he prioritizes the middle class and the workers. He invests hundreds of billions to advance high-tech enterprises, renewable energy, public infrastructure and support for students and poor families. In this way he is changing the face of the United States. This is how the “Bidenomics” economy was born, putting an end to 40 years of “Reaganomics.” Biden’s victory over Trump was a direct result of huge protest movements that swept the US. Black Lives Matter and the women’s movement, among others, brought Biden a victory by 7 million votes over Trump, who to this day refuses to acknowledge these results.

Herein lies the great difference between the Israeli protest movement and the American. In the Biden administration, white, black, Latina, indigenous and LGBTQ persons serve side by side, in a tremendous display of tolerance and diversity. In contrast, Jewish Israel expresses a religious, national, and gender monolith. To eradicate Israeli messianism, much more is needed than halting legislation. Those who seek Biden’s support must look at and embrace the principles of Biden’s politics and their assimilation into Israeli reality.

Since the Israeli protest aims at the broadest common denominator, it ignores the above-mentioned “fiction” of an eventual two-state solution, taking care not to mention the “occupation” (a taboo word). This is perhaps the greatest victory of the messianic camp. Although the protest movement sees this camp as the root of all evil, detesting its claim that “we are all brothers,” it may be laying the foundations for dealing with the “fiction” after overthrow of the government. Yet that overthrow would also leave us with an unresolved issue: we don’t have a Biden, and we don’t have a party similar to the Democrats, which includes all the protest movements. The candidates to replace Bibi are Yair Lapid and Benny Gantz, both of whom advocate a hawkish security policy and the same neoliberal economic platform that created the enormous social gaps on which Bibi’s populism rides.

And another obstacle: when the Israeli protest movement waves the American flag, the Arab society in Israel and the Palestinians in the occupied territories remain indifferent and inactive. While the black movement in the USA supported Biden wholeheartedly and rallied for his victory, here the Palestinians and the Arabs in Israel cling to the old clichés. They view Biden as a representative of “American imperialism” that supports Israel unconditionally. This is a great historical tragedy. Not only does the Israeli protest remain without a Palestinian ally, who could influence its attitudes and shape the identity of a future state, but the Palestinians themselves are perpetuating the horrible reality in which they live. The anti-democratic and homophobic movements set the tone, and all that is left for the Palestinian intellectual is to blame the occupation, Israel, the protest, Biden, the Arab world and the rest of the world for his troubles, never himself.

The guarantee of the protest’s success is not only the infinite dedication of its members, but also the support of the American government. However, in order to turn this support into a sustainable relationship, the protest must embrace Biden’s worldview, his fight for democracy at home and abroad, his uncompromising support for Ukraine against the Russian invasion, and an economic doctrine that strengthens democracy in the United States and in the world. Biden’s victory will guarantee the victory of democracy in the United States, in the world and in Israel. A Trump victory would give Israeli fascism a huge boost, and be a fatal blow to the protest movement.

The Israeli protest movement is moving in the right direction. The very fact that it knew how to draw the dividing line between democracy and dictatorship puts it on the right track, and it flows with the direction of human history. If one day millions of Palestinians join it in a broad Jewish-Arab democratic movement, democracy will win and ensure its existence for many years.

The post Biden and Israel’s Protest Movement first appeared on Da'am Party: One state - Green Economy.

The most urgent item on the protest movement’s agenda is halting the legislative blitz, which resumed in full force after the government blew up talks with the opposition by violating understandings reached regarding last month’s Bar Association elections. If the reasonableness standard is indeed revoked, that is, denying the legislative powers from banning un-reasonable government decisions, but mainly appointments, a legislative tsunami will wash away the democratic regime in Israel, leaving not a trace.

The chaotic reality dictated by ministers Yariv Levin, Betzalel Smotrich, and Moshe Gafni wakened all the couch potatoes, and coffee shop lovers who rallied as one to defend the remaining liberal space they have hitherto enjoyed. Many of them hold foreign passports. Some already deciding that if the anti-democratic coup d’état succeeds and Israel becomes Hungary or Poland, they will emigrate. For them, this would mark the end of the Zionist enterprise. For the sake of halting the fascist coup they are prepared to take extreme measures, including causing disruptions and even refusing to serve in the military.

There is no doubt that the mass waving of Israeli flags, and singing the national anthem in rallies reveal a nostalgia for Israel in its early days, when the Declaration of Independence indicated a desire to establish a democratic and secular state supported by the family of nations. The current symbols of the state, however, are very far from what they previously symbolized, and embracing their values is incompatible with the “Bibism” that has emerged. The 2023 protest undoubtedly created an entire new camp while setting firm boundaries between it and the opposite camp. The liberal democratic camp is being formed on the fly, annulling the former consensus of Jewish brotherhood dissociating itself from the autocratic right and theocratic-messianic camp.

No more the internal deliberations and soul seeking that followed the 1995 murder of Prime Minister Rabin after the Oslo agreement. Today, members of the liberal camp view the opposing side as the embodiment of evil with whom one must not cooperate, negotiate, and certainly not compromise. In the eyes of the pro-autocratic camp such liberal radicalization poses a danger to the very existence of the Jewish state. MK Yitzhak Pindrus (United Torah) stated that the LGBTQ rights movement is more dangerous to Israel than Hezbollah, and Oved Hogi, an assistant to former Minister Katz laments: “Hitler, you killed 6 million instead of killing (former Supreme Court President) Aharon Barak.” The lines of separation have been drawn and there is no choice but to enter the frontlines of battle.

The advantages of Bibi’s coalition are clear. It controls the government; it is ideologically cohesive; relies on an articulated ideology imported directly from American conservative circles and disseminated by the many-armed octopus the Kohelet Forum think tank. It strives to establish official apartheid in the occupied Palestinian territory; actively works to control the gatekeepers and justice system; and strives to control the media, education system and academia to instill its nationalist and fascist values. While the liberal camp was living well in La La land, the aggressive right diligently enacted the “Israel as the Nation State of the Jewish People basic law”. Compared to the fans of dictatorship composing the coalition, liberal democrats are in the opposition and divided among themselves. Some strive for a compromise with the dictator, while others now realize that the past decades’ compromises served only to strengthen the fascists, encouraging them to act with all their might to establish a messianic dictatorship in Israel and apartheid in the occupied Palestinian territory.

And yet, the liberal democrats radiate admirable strength, determination, and perseverance, expressed in weekly mass demonstrations and other disobedience actions for the past six months. The protest, has so far blocked the proposed fascist legislation. Its members represent the productive, economic and security echelons, without which Israel cannot exist. The protest’s entrepreneurship, innovation, and creativity are expressed in a variety of measures and actions that succeed in arousing public opinion, thus undermining the coalition and its governance capacity while even rousing astonishment around the world.

This is the driving force of the liberal democratic camp. It is not a passing electoral phenomenon, but a movement based on grass roots activists rooted deeply within their communities, and they work within them with endless dedication. This camp has the support of the Biden administration, which refused to invite Netanyahu to Washington as long as he continues his attempts to transform Israel into Hungary. The position of the White House is a decisive and beneficial factor in the protest movement’s success.

Yet stopping the coup d’état is not a one-time act. To truly win, the liberal democratic camp must establish a regime that guarantees the rules of the democratic political game for many years to come. It can only do this by establishing a constitution or sustainable basic laws. The latter need to guarantee separation of powers on the one hand, and equality of all citizens irrespective of religion, race, gender, or sexual orientation, while abolishing the nation state law that enshrines Jewish supremacy.

To establish democracy, the protest movement must reach precisely the same public that the Israeli neoliberal economy has rendered impoverished, marginalized, and resentful. The assumption that the Israeli economy can prosper with a locomotor of 300,000 high-tech workers, while the fundamentalist right establishes its rule and influence on those who have been pushed to the margins and annexes the West Bank, is wrong. The “deal” that allowed economic prosperity for those with privileges, in exchange for their tacit consent to a dark and undemocratic regime, collapsed in the November 2022 elections.

A liberal democracy cannot exist without economic equality. This is also the lesson learned by the American Democratic Party, which since the 2020 election of Biden has led a radical deep social and economic transformation, from a market economy to a welfare economy oriented towards work and production. This is how the Democratic Party managed to beat Trump in both the presidential and midterm elections. The value of equality in Israel must also include civil equality for Arab citizens, who make up 20% of the country’s population. The problem facing the liberal democratic camp is how to “balance” its appeal to right-wing supporters of the government, who have been delegated to the margins, and the appeal to Arab citizens.

Israeli flags, the national anthem and Zionist rhetoric clearly do not welcome the Arab population, which suffers from neglect and institutionalized racism to join the fight for democracy. But that’s not the entire story since the Arab population its institutions and representatives also do not advocate for democratic and liberal values. This is clearly seen in many aspects: the strength of the Islamic movement; the structure of local governments elected according to clan calculations rather than programs; the Arab parties’ narrow nationalism and their support for dictators like Putin and Assad as well as society as a whole that refuses to condemn homophobia.

The values of liberal democracy and equality cannot exist in the long term if they are not accompanied by the value of peace. The right-wing fascist position is clear: peace with the Palestinians is impossible, so they must be defeated time and again, and an apartheid regime must be established in the occupied territories. Conversely, the democratic camp strongly opposes pogroms and the burning of Palestinian villages carried out by hilltop settler youth yet it refuses to touch the issue of peace. Liberal democrats are horrified at the thought of fascists imposing a binational state on them, vow not to send their grandchildren to guard “middle of nowhere holes” like the settlements of Kiryat Arba or Yitzhar, yet ultimately accept the thesis that currently there are no Palestinians with whom they can negotiate.

Even in this claim, admittedly, there is a hint of truth. The Palestinian society controlled by Hamas and the Palestinian Authority is very far from liberal democratic principles. The advantage of fascists is that they offer a simple, decisive idea in the form of apartheid. In contrast, the liberal democratic camp knows what it does not want but is unable to define what it does want.

When it comes to the 2 million Arab citizens of Israel the liberal democratic camp advocates full civil equality, even while Arab society and its institutions remain outside the protest. So it should when referring to the Palestinians living under occupation.  The sole answer to apartheid is democracy for all between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea. It can be said this is currently unrealistic, but there are also those who will say that the drafting of a constitution and enactment of basic laws ensuring Israel’s democratic and egalitarian nature are also unrealistic at the moment.

That is why the liberal camp, which rightly presents a future vision of democracy and equality, must also add to it a vision of peace. Not a peace based on separation according to nationality and race, but one of sharing and inclusion. A peace based on a constitution ensuring the rights of all citizens, Israelis and Palestinians. A peace grounded in an egalitarian economy, which works for the well-being of all citizens between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea. This is the only way to inscribe democracy.

The post Demonstration and its Sting first appeared on Da'am Party: One state - Green Economy.

Roni Ben Efrat (left) in Messina

A lecture by Roni Ben Efrat in SABIRMaydan, in Messina, September 28th.

Topic: The difference is between those who have rights and those who don’t: United against the system of inequalities, is there any chance to win?

Part 1: The difference is between those who have rights and those who don’t: United against the system of inequalities…

In the summer of 2011 in a series of mass demonstrations, over a million people marched in the streets of Tel Aviv. Thousands of youngsters camped on Rothschild Boulevard occupying “the” city center for three months.

Although Israel is often painted as a monolithic fortress of sweeping national consensus, that summer a new face of Israel appeared on the scene demanding “social justice”. This slogan was no doubt been influenced by the squares of Madrid and Egypt, demanding: “Eish, Hurrira, Adala Ijtima’ia!” (Bread, Freedom and Social Justice!). Yet, a fundamental difference exists between the squares of Egypt and Tel Aviv:  while the Egyptian and Tunisian youngsters called for “Isqat al Nizam” (down with the regime), the Israeli leaders of the social movement demanded that the Israeli government – right wing as it was – should bend to their demands. Their logic was: we elected you and you have to “work” for us! (instead of working for the tycoons).

The background for the huge protest movement was the major inequalities which developed in Israel in the past 25 years, as a result of its economy turning from a welfare economy, with collective responsibility (at least to its Jewish citizens) to an extreme privatized enterprise, geared to benefit a tiny elite of tycoons. This process affected of course the low classes, who reached pauperization, but affected the middle classes too, who saw themselves pushed down the social ladder with no prospects for affordable housing, or job security, now or in old age.

Yet, two issues were absent from the movement: 1. The question of inequality and poverty of the Arab citizens of Israel (over 53% are below the poverty line). 2. The question of the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza. In the Israeli context, a social movement that does not integrate these two questions will be very limited politically. It sends a clear message to the regime that it does not intend to go all the way to change it. This is in stark contrast to Egypt and Tunisia where the revolutionary forces succeeded in toppling the regimes and opening a new page in the history of the Middle East – for good or for bad. All the upheavals we are witnessing today, in Egypt, Syria and Iraq, are a result of that “big bang” of the Arab spring.

The rationalization of the young protest leaders for NOT putting upfront the issue of the occupation, not adopting the slogan “One Justice for All”, not calling Bibi to “Go Home”,  was that this direction might divide the movement. They said that Social Justice is not divided into “Right” and “Left” – everyone is suffering – and that the political debate should be pushed aside. This position was being advocated by the Labor party behind the scenes, but was adopted by all the leadership, even the more leftist parts.

The movement had a deep impact on the Israeli discourse and psyche. It was an incredible learning process. A deep distrust of the “elite” and the “power” has been scorched into the consciousness of people and is apparent until today in numerous ways. But, the avoidance of challenging the ruling power resulted in a diverted course. The elections that followed that protest in 2013 resulted in the most right wing government ever. Because the movement failed to make the connection between Social Justice and the Occupation, the extreme right-wing settler party “The Jewish Home” headed by Naftali Bennet (12 seats) could adopt the protest discourse and tag it on to its anti-Arab, and pro-settlement agenda. The protest discourse was also hijacked by Yair Lapid, of the “Yesh Atid” party, representing the politically conservative middle classes (19 seats).  The Labor party, which adopted the agenda of social justice with no political agenda, won only 15 seats. Some of the leaders of the Protest movement joined Labor and became members of Knesset. Except for very small social gains, mainly free kindergarten from age 3, the basic demands have been ignored: poverty, insecurity, and lack of housing remain prevalent.

The collapse of the peace talks, and the third war on Gaza, clearly showed that Bibi Netanyahu’s right wing agenda has to be tackled socially and politically.

Part 2: …is there any chance to win?

If the Protest movement enjoyed an over 85% consensus among Jewish Israelis the July war on Gaza, too, enjoyed an overwhelming consensus, including those parties who are supposedly for the peace process.  It was as if Israelis ignored the fact that Netanyahu had de facto killed the talks with Abu Mazen and created a deep political vacuum. It was as if all the wise pundits forgot that they themselves had forecast a new round of violence as a result of the void in the political venue.

We can conclude the discussion after the war between Right and Left in Israel like this: The Right says that the war proved that Israel has to continue the blockade on Gaza, hence also prevent the West Bank from falling] into the hands of Hamas or even more extreme forces. That’s not new of course. The new part is in the argumentation of the Left: Labor and Merez say that after the war “a window of opportunity” has opened (partly as reaction to the Arab spring) which includes Sisi and his generals in Egypt, Saudia Arabia, Jordan and Abu Mazen. So, the same Left that talked about social justice and was reluctant to stand up to the Right wing and to racism, today welcomes all those forces of darkness, which are trying to defeat the forces of democracy in their own countries.

Today the Arab world is divided between two reactionary forces: Saudia Arabia, supporting Sisi, and other Salafist radical forces in Syria and Iraq, while the Qataris support the Moslem Brotherhood and Hamas as a more moderate version of Islam. The argument between these two axes is how better to crush any democratic process in the Arab world. The same division of action appears between Fatah and Hamas, the first working with Saudi Arabia and Sisi’s Egypt, the second with Qatar.

The progressive forces in Israel are completely alienated from this discussion. The lack of a strong Arab Spring today – which could and should be an alternative to regimes such as Sisi, Assad and the other kingdoms and princedoms makes it more difficult for us to point toward a potential alternative.

Unfortunately the Arab Spring skipped over Palestine, and the most progressive demand was a call to unite Fatah and Hamas. But, what we see today is that as the war revealed the weakness of the Israeli left, it also revealed the weakness of the Palestinian side. It remains to see what remains of the current conciliation between Hamas and the PA, negotiated in Cairo.

For us, as a political force in Israel, the major obstacle to peace is the settlers and the settlements. Their existence prevents any political solution and the focus of any struggle should put that in the center.

Going back to the Arab Spring, for us it was an opening of hope because it presented a third alternative, other than the secular dictatorships (Egypt, Syria) or the fundamentalist forces of political Islam. The call for Freedom, Democracy and Social Change could be a common bridge between Arabs, Israelis and international progressive forces united by a vision of a new society, where everyone has the same rights and opportunities to live a meaningful life. This alternative is still open and waiting for forces to pick up the glove.

The post The Arab Spring and the Protest Movements in Europe first appeared on Da'am Party: One state - Green Economy.

Yair Lapid had hardly settled into his Knesset seat before the Finance Ministry declared war on the ultra-Orthodox, on the Histadrut, on the monopolies – in short, a world war. What the father Tommy began with Netanyahu in 2003, the well-disciplined son is completing ten years later, fulfilling his father’s directives. Tommy Lapid has passed away, but Netanyahu has received renewed strength to continue the process he began as finance minister in Ariel Sharon’s government. Netanyahu paid a heavy price when he lost the general elections to Ehud Olmert, but a man like Bibi doesn’t despair – especially when another Lapid arrives to restore his self-confidence.

The “open skies” agreement (increasing foreign competition in the airlines industry) was the real test. Ynet and Army Radio, Iran, Syria and Hezbollah, Avigdor Lieberman’s trial, Nochi Dankner’s tribulations – they are all troublesome and cause us to despair. But Netanyahu and Lapid are promising us a break from such things via cheap flights abroad. They also promise cheap electricity, cheap phone calls, and cheap cars. When their world war ends, everything will be cheaper. All we need to do is privatize the Israeli economy and open it up to competition, and all will be smooth and efficient.

Cheap things cost a fortune

The problem is, cheap things are expensive. Netanyahu privatized the pension funds, and workers’ payments now flow straight into Dankner’s hands. He privatized the health services, and now reasonable health care and medicines are impossible to get without some kind of “complementary” private health insurance. He privatized welfare, and the number of those living in poverty grew. He privatized the dairy concern Tnuva and the price of cottage cheese rose. He also privatized Israel’s national shipping company Zim and handed it to the Ofer brothers, and since then it’s been suffering losses. Ten years have passed, and social inequality rates in Israel are now among the highest in the western world – but Bibi and Lapid continue their self-appointed task as if nothing has changed and the Israeli public is stupid.

Cheap things cost a fortune because behind every privatization and every move to open the market to competition lies the principle of “efficiency”, which means reduction of personnel, which means unemployment. For example, in El Al, like other airlines, some 82% of expenditures are fixed costs such as fuel and ground services. The remaining 18%, the cost of wages, is where cost-cutting measures can be implemented. Competition is between those who manage to get more out of fewer workers for lower wages. Thus El Al will cut back on its workforce by one third, and – in simple terms – some 2000 workers will be sent home.

The aim is to obtain cheaper workers, and competition between workers is a cruel game. Nobody can compete with Chinese workers. China is becoming an economic superpower because it hires its workers at slave wages. In this way, entire industries have been wiped out around the globe, particularly in the US but also in Israel. And when it is impossible to “relocate” factories outside the national borders, foreign labor is imported to replace local workers. This is what has occurred in the construction industry, agriculture and homecare, under the pretext that Israelis don’t want to do this kind of work.

It is clear that the first step after privatization is dismissal of workers, and new firms make certain that their workers have no union support. Thus the minimum wage has become, in practice, the maximum. One must work in one and a half full-time positions to earn the average wage. Industrial workers labor 12-hour shifts at minimum wage just to reach NIS 8,000 a month ($2200). And to complete the picture we need to add contract labor, free-lancers, and those with “personal” contracts – all lack employment security and protection of their rights. This is the sorry situation in which some two million workers in Israel find themselves.

Who isn’t good at management?

The Finance Ministry asserts that the government isn’t good at management, so we need professionals with initiative who are willing to take risks in order to lead the economy. It also asserts that dismissing workers creates new jobs elsewhere. For example, the “open skies” agreement will lead to the dismissal of some 2000 El Al workers, but also to an increase in tourists, which will create thousands of jobs in the tourist industry. The textile industry was also wiped out by the removal of import duties, backed by the claim that this would lead to growth in the industry within a decade. But the truth is, growth benefited only a few and the vast majority does not benefit at all. Meanwhile thousands of women in the peripheral regions, in the south and in the Arab towns in particular, became unemployed.

After years of trial, it’s worth asking how the tycoons have proved they know how to manage the economy better than the state. Zim is sinking under debt and is requesting a write-off; Dankner is facing bankruptcy after taking control of an empire of some 40,000 workers; Tshuva, Leviev, Zisser, Ben Dov and others took risks with public money and refuse to pay for losses out of their own pockets. Teva, meanwhile, makes profits of billions, yet pays zero tax. But when they are nevertheless asked to pay something for the sake of the homeland they take umbrage and move to London, the favorite tax haven.

Lapid tells us there are three factors responsible for the harsh social situation: the ultra-Orthodox, the Arabs, and Alon Hassan, chairperson of the Ashdod Port workers’ committee. Yes, apparently Alon Hassan is the real villain, and Bibi and Lapid have declared war on him too. Hassan likes to eat steak, he employs his own family at the port, he earns NIS 30,000 per month, and he, it seems, is the main cause of the high cost of living. Hassan and the other large workers’ committees are public enemies, which justifies a policy of “targeted liquidation.” Hassan and his ilk must agree to streamlining, viz. privatization, the transfer of the port to some tycoon or other. He must also agree to the employment of contract workers instead of regular workers. Thus, instead of Hassan and his friends earning NIS 30,000 per month, some capitalist will pocket millions – after all, the capitalist deserves it, he took the risk at the expense of the public.

The principle is clear: all those earning NIS 30,000 must be wiped out to make jobs for those who earn NIS 5000. The profits from Ashdod Port, the Electricity Corporation, the gas and Dead Sea industries will flow into the pockets of a few individuals while the status of workers continues to decline. At least in one area workers and tycoons are equal: neither pays tax – the former because they don’t earn enough; the latter because they “earn” too much. The results are clear – the state loses revenue, public services are retrenched and privatized, poverty increases, and no social safety net remains to shore up the less fortunate.

Despite the huge social protest of summer 2011, the tycoons, settlers and their representatives in the government continue to scorn the public. The economic system is bankrupt. It is built upon lies, fraud, and the destruction of the democratic process.

Lapid’s war is not the struggle of working people but the war of the tycoons. Ishay Davidi, the tycoon preparing to take over El Al and send so many workers home, is a significant contributor to Lapid’s political party. So when Lapid breaks El Al workers and declares war against them, who is he really acting for? For the workers? Or for those who funded his path to the Knesset?

– Translated from the Hebrew by Yonatan Preminger

The post Lapid’s war against the workers first appeared on Da'am Party: One state - Green Economy.

Yacov Ben Efrat

The pundits and the politicians agree that the protest movement succeeded, resulting in big electoral wins for Yair Lapid of Yesh Atid (“There is a future”) and Naftali Bennett of the rightwing ha-Ba’it ha-Yehudi (“The Jewish Home”). These luminaries are united in their hatred of the Ultraorthodox and the Arabs and in their indifference to the workers. Both are future partners for Binyamin (Bibi) Netanyahu. It’s not at all clear that this is what Dafni Leef had in mind when she pitched her tent on Rothschild Boulevard starting the social protest of Summer 2011, but such is the gloomy outcome. Those who wanted to unite the entire people—left and right, settlers and impoverished middle-class youth—have succeeded in a big way. The protest refrained from calling on Bibi to resign in order not to be stigmatized as political, and so Bibi remains to conduct the choir.

The protest has succeeded perhaps, but the people has lost out. The Right can go on ruling, because there is no one to challenge it from the Left. Shelly Yacimovich of the Labor Party, who swept the Occupation under the rug in her futile courting of right-wing votes, has rendered herself irrelevant. The potential of a leftwing bloc capable of stopping the Right dissipated a few nights ago when its three would-be participants— Yacimovich, Lapid, and Tzipi Livni of Tnua—failed to agree on which one of them would lead. The Arab parties fought hard to keep what they had, dividing the cake among themselves. Despite the indifference of the Arab voter, they slightly increased their number of Knesset members, whose shouts will resound in parliament’s chambers. They won’t miss a chance to grab a headline heckling right-wingers Moshe Feiglin and Orit Struk, and all will be festive, no doubt.

Daam in the elections

Daam did all that was in its power to join up with other social forces, but its efforts were fruitless. The protest leaders (except Leef) preferred to wheel and deal in the Labor Party, the Greens wound up with Livni, and others avoided politics altogether. Daam campaigned, therefore, as a Jewish-Arab list headed by Asma Agbarieh-Zahalka, including social as well as union activists.

Daam brought a unique message of solidarity, class-conscious rather than nationalist, moderate rather than hot-headed, and won praise from supporters and opponents alike. Hundreds of new, enthusiastic activists joined, contributing time and money, infusing the party with the energies of the social protest. The results are disappointing precisely because they stand in utter contrast to the vast amount of goodwill that Daam won from the community—from humanists, artists, and workers, Arab and Jewish, including Russian immigrants. They are also unexpected when we consider the large and sympathetic media exposure we had (see Challenge Online Magazine on Facebook). The number of votes that Daam received—3,374—is very far from reflecting the impression it made in this election campaign.

Today, January 23, 2013, the day after the elections, multitudes of workers wake up to the same harsh reality that propelled Israelis into the streets in Summer 2011. The Occupation goes on, and it will deepen the rift between Jews and Arabs. Harsh economic decrees are in store. The workers and the middle class will pay the full price, while the tycoons give “haircuts,” enjoying subsidies and tax breaks. This reality will motivate the public to seek a more fundamental change.

Daam views what it accomplished in this campaign as an investment for the long term. The first lesson from the painful disappointment is to build more branch offices, to bring in more members, to deepen our labor union activity, to open more jobs for Arab women, to organize more industrial workers, truck drivers, and teachers, and to intensify our hold in the working public and on the Arab street.

Daam was created to bring about the change that reality demands. We have come in order to change the discourse between Jews and Arabs, because without that there is no Left. We’ve come to unify workers from all sectors, because without unity it is impossible to achieve labor rights. We’ve come to change the present consciousness, because otherwise there cannot be a democratic and just society. We’ve come to fight against racism and the Occupation, because we demand peace as a condition for social justice. We’ve come with a historical vision and we won’t rest until it is reality. We and the future generations deserve another kind of society, based on equality. We haven’t compromised and we won’t. We call on all who understand the election results as we do to join our ranks and bring about essential change.

The post Elections 2013: The protest movement succeeded perhaps, but the people lost out first appeared on Da'am Party: One state - Green Economy.

Shany Littman

From Haaretz Weekend Supplement (Hebrew), January 5, 2013

2645. That’s the number of votes the Daam Party received in the previous elections. But since the outbreak of social unrest, the socialist Daam party has become a hot trend in Tel Aviv. Party leader Asma Agbarieh-Zahalka explains why poverty is no less an evil than the Occupation, why she wouldn’t have sailed on the Marmara, and why there is still hope in the Middle East.

Asma Agbarieh-Zahalka is ecstatic. For the first time she sees clearly that the way to the Knesset in Jerusalem is shorter than ever. She is convinced that this time the Daam Workers Party, which she chairs, will cross the threshold, despite the fact that tens of thousands of votes stand between success and the 2645 votes received by the party in the 2009 elections. In an interview I conducted with her before the last elections four years ago, she seemed more introverted, more serious, working diligently yet without hope. But something has changed in four years, something that even she never envisioned would happen so quickly, although she had been waiting impatiently.

This change has filled her sails with a wind that she herself defines as “wild”. Today it’s hard to actually stop the flow of her words and enthusiasm, regardless of agreement or disagreement with her positions. It is impossible not to be impressed by her conviction. “In 2009,” she says, “we talked about social justice. It was our vision, but it wasn’t relevant to the public’s consciousness at the time, and this was also reflected at the polls. Yet the protest of Summer 2011 brought a change. As long as people here were not really suffering, they were not looking for solutions. But when the shock waves started in Europe and the Arab world, they arrived in Israel too. A lot of people got courage to speak out; each one’s private problem became a collective issue of social justice.

“When social ills became a political question, Daam became relevant, and for the first time we were there as a political party because we knew this was the place to build strength. Fundamental social, economic and political change requires a movement that wants it. As long as there was no movement, Daam was a fish out of water. But now it’s harvest time. In the summer of 2011 we narrowed the gap between reality and the prevailing political consciousness.”

You didn’t expect this?

“I didn’t know it would happen so fast. It’s very exciting. I’m glad to be part of it. I’m part of this and happy that I made the right investment in social justice. The role of the party that wants to lead this is to look ahead. I have a vision and it wasn’t clear to people—to talk about Jews and Arabs, about socialism, social justice. They thought I was dreaming, that all Arabs hate Jews and all Jews hate Arabs. And I know that’s not true. At a certain point, because reality is crushing you, because it empties your pockets and kills your children, you start to think. When Muhammad Boazizi set fire to himself, the flame burnt down all the barriers and walls after 40 years of deadly silence in the Arab world.

“40 years of Gaddafi, 40 years of the Assad family. For too many decades people were silent. Arabic poetry and literature deal with how this people amounts to zero. Nizar Qabbani has a poem that says, ‘We created the zero and remained zeros.’ We grew up on disappointment, on ‘Naksa’ [the ‘setback’ of the 1967 War], on defeat, on impotence. And suddenly a resurrected people demands to live. They do not want to die in violent resistance. They do not want to go to paradise. A new historical era has opened. It was natural that it would open on Rothschild as well.”

The Marmara was a mistake

There were moments when it seemed like things were going to turn into a catastrophe. On the one hand, Agbarieh-Zahalka describes feelings of elation as she walked through a crowd of demonstrators who marched in unison for a social cause. On the other hand, there were moments when bitter reality slapped her in the face. In June 2012 at Tel Aviv Museum Square, during a demonstration commemorating the first anniversary of the social protest, the rally organizers refused to allow Wafah Tayara, No. 4 on the Daam list, to mount the stage to speak, although this had been agreed upon in advance. Agbarieh-Zahalka experienced the refusal as a racist act that came from a completely unexpected place. Her outcry appears in a video clip circulated on the internet; it is a kind of spontaneous speech delivered not on stage but among the demonstrators. She recalls, “On the one hand, we have created a new group of people here, the people of the protest. That’s where I felt most at home. I felt I was in Tahrir Square. But when Wafah was prevented from speaking at the demonstration, I felt it was the end. All the time we’d been saying that Jews and Arabs could work together, and now she wasn’t allowed to speak. Then, when the video clip was shown, we were flooded with views and comments. Many people came as a result of the clip. It was the first time people had heard of us. That was the day that Daam was born in the eyes of the public, precisely because of the rejection.”

Agbarieh-Zahalka was born in Jaffa 39 years ago, the scion on her father’s side of a large family from Umm al-Fahm. During adolescence her religious faith grew and she joined the Islamic Movement. In 1995, while she was studying at Tel Aviv University’s Faculty of Humanities, the Daam party offered her a job as editor of the Arabic newspaper, “Al-Sabar.” When she got to meet the party activists, she was surprised to hear Jews speaking fluent Arabic; gradually she underwent a change, joining the party and eventually becoming its leader. In 2006 she was the only woman who headed a party for the Knesset. In 2009, she was joined in this respect by Tzipi Livni; in 2013, she stands beside Livni, Shelly Yachimovich and Zahava Galon, four women leading political parties. For Asma, however, this fact does not create solidarity or identification, just as she rejects any attempt to find similarities between herself and Hanin Zoabi, Balad MK.

“The Arab party Balad is nationalistic and bourgeois; it’s not a political party that espouses social justice. I do not compete with Hanin Zoabi. Hers is not the public I seek. I appeal to the 50% of the Arab population that is tired by the political options the Arab parties offer. Arab parties advocate a nationalist discourse, dealing only with the national question, neglecting the socioeconomic questions and the hardships suffered by the Arab public. Gaza and Tel Aviv amount to one issue. The political has to go along with the social. There is 50% poverty in the Arab street; 80% of women in the Arab sector don’t work. That is a catastrophe. Is this a people that can think about freeing Palestine? This is a people that must first free itself. And the point is not expressed by anyone.

“No political party does real work in the field, organizing the public and fighting against contracted jobs. I go to Knesset committee meetings and don’t see any Arab representatives there, even when the issues dealt with are of great concern to the Arab public, such as on-the-job safety. What is this concern for the Nakba [the Palestinian catastrophe of 1948] all day long? They forget that today in every house there is a Nakba. When a woman doesn’t have work; that’s a Nakba. A young man who works through a contractor and doesn’t get his rights is a Nakba. And without denying the importance of the Nakba, what about today’s Nakba? You have to change the reality of today; you can’t change past history.”

The fact that you and Zoabi are Arab women going against the current doesn’t seem to you like a thing that can bring your agendas closer together?

“It’s not enough to be a woman. Shelly Yachimovich is a woman too. So is Tzipi Livni. Being a woman is good, but it’s not enough. It is also not enough to be an Arab. Bashar al-Assad is an Arab too. I want to turn cultural diversity into a force, and Zoabi makes it into a wall separating people. I do not want people to vote for me because I am an Arab. That’s not the ticket I want. The question is, ‘what kind of Arab are you?’ I stand for class identity. I think that class identity is much more correct in places like Israel, which are saturated with different sectors and with an ingathering of exiles, including Arabs. What could connect and advance people, I think, is the daring to get out of sectarianism, to get out of the ghetto. And Zoabi is stuck in the ghetto, isolated and differentiating.

“Today, the issue that connects everyone is the issue of socioeconomic justice. It is the natural right of all people whoever they are. We are equal; together we can build a third way; the third way that the Arab Spring offered. Do not give in to the United States and Israel’s decrees against the Palestinians, but do not succumb either to the verbiage of the nationalist, fundamentalist opposition of which Zoabi is a part. I cannot call for death. The way of violent resistance, which Hamas walked in and which Hezbollah walks in, we see what that has led to today—to the massacre of the Syrian people. I can’t be part of it. I’ve never been a part of it, and for this reason I wasn’t relevant to the Arab public, because of this unpopular position. An Arab has to be democratic, to give people freedom of speech and the chance to work with dignity; if you do not do this, the fact that you’re an Arab doesn’t interest me.”

What do you think about Zoabi’s boarding the Marmara?

“I would not have boarded the Marmara. I do not think she’ll board the Marmara again. Beyond the issue of isolation and differentiation and representing yourself as ‘against’ and ‘anti,’ I think that to board the Marmara was to give Hamas power against Abu Mazen. I am not for Abu Mazen and not for Hamas; what I am for is that the Palestinian left should build a third way. Once you support one side against the other, the Palestinian rift deepens. And I do not think it’s in the interest of the Palestinian people to deepen the schism while it stands against Israel and against the Occupation. This strategy was wrong for Palestinians.”

Hanin Zoabi’s response: “I do not want to address these things. They are no different from the things said against me by the right and by the Zionist left. The only significant contribution of Ms. Asma Agbarieh is burning about 3000 votes in each election and it certainly does not help the Arab public and does not benefit the poor in general.”

Reality will win

You say that there is readiness to accept your ideas in relation to class consciousness, but what about racism on both sides? Do you think that today Jews or Arabs are ready to vote for an Arab-Jewish party?

“I probably will not be Prime Minister. Not all of the public will vote for me. As for the public that insists on racism—I’ll wait for them. I will continue to believe, just as I believed that the time of social justice would arrive, that understanding would ripen, so I believe that the time will come when people will outgrow racism. I also believe that some will follow racism to the end, to fascism. I’m not naive. But racism is a form of false consciousness in which you think you have privileges as a Jew in Israel, but actually you don’t. Today this country is a state of the rich, not a Jewish state. To whoever understands this and experiences it in his their pockets, in his their refrigerator, in the cost of living, in the their ability to make ends meet, to whoever has experienced it in everyday life, I suggest that they stop blaming his the situation on the Arab, but rather blame the policy that is made in their name as a Jew, and that they should simply change the diskette.

“I know that the whole country will not vote Daam. It also presents a challenge to the Jewish public to vote for an Arab woman, although we are an Arab-Jewish party, not just Arab, and it is a challenge to Arab society to vote for a party headed by a woman. Every day we have discussion groups all over the country. I’ve met with Russians and Mizrahis. In all these meetings I’ve found that our message is received like water on dry ground. People can’t get enough. It’s a golden opportunity, and I’m going with it to the Arab street, which has not budged, which did not take part in the protests. I tell them, look at how the Jewish community accepts us. Look how they accept an Arab woman who tells them to their face how to deal with the Occupation, with racism and the economics of privatization. They are shocked, because Arabs have long since stopped talking with Jews and Jews with Arabs.”

You really think you can make them think otherwise?

“It’s not me that will succeed. Reality will.”

At least wouldn’t it be better to change the name to something that didn’t sound like an Arab political party?

“Balad is Hebrew – the National Democratic Alliance. Hadash is a word in Hebrew. Did it help anyone? Most of their voters are Arabs. Daam started out in the Arab sector with the position that the Occupation must end. That was in the years when we did not experience the power of privatization and globalization. Two decades have passed since then and the reality in Israel has changed dramatically. Daam found that it also meets the needs of a growing segment of the Jewish public. We changed from a party on the nationalist side of the political map to a party on the socialist, class side. We have not changed the name and I think it is right because the Arab name is a type of connection, a link; it is a uniting factor. It connects with leftist movements in Arab countries, and it also reminds Israelis that there are Arabs who face a political issue and that there is an existential problem. The name is like a litmus test to the Jewish people who come and say, ‘I want to connect with the Arabs, to leave the ghetto, to connect with the Palestinians.’ The word is an acronym for the original name in Arabic, which means support and solidarity. Originally the name was ‘Organization for Democratic Action.’ The name is a challenge we do not want to conceal. We live in the Middle East.”

It seems that you have no separation between politics and your personal life.

Agbarieh-Zahalka laughs. “Yes, someone pays a price, my son Adam and my spouse Musa. But there’s nothing I can do about it. At the age of 22, I decided that I would not live well while people around me were sinking. I could have, but I chose not to. One cannot survive without the people around one. So I am drawn to this matter. My child will not grow up in a society that exploits its workers and destroys the people within it. That’s not why I brought him into the world. I accept the fact that I brought him into a world where I would prepare a normal environment for him to live in. I’m not doing it for me, but for him.

“There’s no political career here. Of course I am a mother who hugs her child. I do not feed him Marxism. I play with him in the playground. We even ate at McDonald’s. Right now it does not happen a lot, because of the elections, but Musa makes up for it. I see him three hours a day at best, and I tell him that Mom is going to talk to people who care about giving toys to all the children. He said he wants some too, and I promised him he would get them.”

– Translated from the Hebrew by Barbara Rosenstein

The post A new left arrives in Israel first appeared on Da'am Party: One state - Green Economy.

One might think that these elections are meaningless. The results are ostensibly known in advance, like a repeat broadcast of a soccer match. There’s a feeling of defeatism in the air, and people relate to the rightwing as they might to the weather: one can talk about it, but it can’t be changed. It’s hard to believe that just a year and half ago, summer 2011, citizens occupied the streets, new ideas blossomed, politicians appeared despicable and defeated, and Tel Aviv’s youth burst out of their indifference and made their opinions known, without giving a damn for the opinions of the “adults” who had disappointed them so.

But appearances can be deceptive. Something new has been created in these elections, something vigorous, dynamic, youthful and energetic which bears the spirit of that summer of protest: Daam’s election campaign. This campaign began even then, during the social protests, in the Red Bloc that marched in the mass demonstrations. It was then that all those leading this wonderful campaign for change first met. It was a spontaneous coming together of slogans and people, Jews and Arabs, blue collar workers and white collar workers, who yelled a jumble of slogans in Hebrew and Arabic and thus stood out from the marching masses.

“The people demand social justice” – this slogan connected the protesters in Israel with the millions in Egypt and around the world, because they were sick of the destructive capitalism that had taken over their societies. The enthusiasm of Tel Aviv’s youth stemmed from their understanding that they were making history, that walls of separation were crumbling, that we were joining the rest of the world. The youth of Cairo were similar to the youth of Madrid, and in Tel Aviv the Zionist decree that “the people shall dwell alone” was shattered. Cairo built up faith in change, and Tel Aviv brought back hope.

A year passed, and when Dafni Leef tried to reignite the miracle of revolt, she came up against a well-prepared establishment ready to silence and buy off any murmur of protest. The press was no longer supportive and her comrades in arms looked less like young rebels and more like slick politicians. It seemed that all hope was lost, that the Tel Aviv Spring was no more than a prelude to a cold winter.

But the Red Bloc refused to roll up its flags. Just as in Egypt it was impossible to bring back Mubarak, the youth had come to understand their power, and the idea of dictatorship had been defeated, so too in Tel Aviv: the protest raised new awareness and new paths, and opened the way to a political sphere that had not yet formed into a new social force.

The elections as accelerator

Thus the current run-up to elections is accelerating an unavoidable process. Those who met during that hot revolutionary summer and marched spontaneously together found themselves facing a new challenge: how to express their desires, how to cope with the same corrupt system against which they had rebelled. In this way they discovered the enormous potential of the ideas behind the Red Bloc. Disappointment in the existing parties, both among Jews and Arabs, created a rare opportunity to think towards something new. The nationalist-isolationist slogans in the Arab street were revealed as hollow, unable to lift the Arab population out of its chronic poverty. On the Jewish side, suspicion gave way to association based on a very broad common denominator, expressed in the demand for one justice for all.

Unlike during the protest, this coming together is not taking place in the streets and public squares, but in the virtual space of social networks which also underlay the Arab revolutions and continue to play an important role in the struggle against Assad in Syria. This new sphere enables connections to be made that would have been impossible in the past. The Facebook page of the Daam Workers Party brings Russian, Arabic and Hebrew speakers together and offers a platform upon which Jews and Arabs can communicate. The messages are so clear and simple that they can be passed from language to language with a harmony so sorely lacking in the real world. This is living proof that Jews and Arabs, and workers of all backgrounds, can live and argue together and wage a joint struggle against the common enemy: the regime which abandoned its citizens for the sake of the wealthy.

Daam’s Facebook page has succeeded where the protest movement failed. It has managed to link the center to the periphery, intellectuals to industrial workers, teachers to truckers. Their willingness to associate themselves with Daam is not to be taken for granted. The mutual suspicion which divides Jews and Arabs, Ashkenazim and Mizrahim, Russian speakers and Amharic speakers, has always prevented solidarity. But years of work and education, of joint struggle and the establishment of workers committees, whether successful or defeated, created a basic confidence in Daam and in its members who are active on the ground every day.

From virtual strength to electoral strength

Daam’s great challenge is to transform virtual strength to electoral strength. So far, we have managed to shift the protest onto the virtual plane and turn the party platform into texts, graphics and video clips which expose the party’s positions to thousands. We opened an arena for the exchange of views in various languages, and for lively, democratic political debate. A new force is taking shape and bursting into the public sphere, and the continuous joining of new members shows that this force is meeting a need which was created by the changing reality. The rush towards Daam is not merely a trend, but a movement based on growing social awareness, among both Jews and Arabs. As this campaign grows stronger, the creation of a representative force in the Knesset becomes increasingly feasible.

Daam has walked this path for many years. The ideas have remained the same ideas, but reality has changed and enabled these ideas to flourish. Revolutionary ideas thrive in a revolutionary movement, and such a movement is created when the existing system collapses and social consciousness rejects established norms. The basic view that the state belongs to its citizens cracked when the regime “married” capital and public resources were handed over as the dowry. As socioeconomic disparities gaped, revolutionary consciousness began to awaken. Thus workers come together regardless of nation, language or origin, to take back their right to determine their own fate. In the face of war they demand peace, in the face of racism they demand fraternity, in the face of exploitation they demand the right to earn a living in dignity, and in the face of inequality they demand social justice for all.

There is a sense that we face a historic moment. The atmosphere is electric, and the intensity of the election campaign reflects incessant change. The energies released in the summer of 2011 have doubled in strength, and the objective appears closer than ever. We stuck with the principle, we struggled for it for years and earned the confidence of the workers as we acted together against poverty and daily exploitation. We believe there are many thousands who want to preserve and develop the energies released that summer. In this election campaign, we are motivated by a revolutionary fervor which will bring us into the Knesset. We have set ourselves a target, and our public responsibility compels us to continue until this target is achieved. Because as the fascist right grows stronger, Israel is faced with a stark choice: the choice between change or ruin.

– Translated from the Hebrew by Yonatan Preminger

The post Riding the wave to the Knesset: The Daam campaign first appeared on Da'am Party: One state - Green Economy.