Israeli Voters Urged to Choose Parties Over Personalities to Preserve Democracy
The article critiques the current trend in Israeli politics where voters increasingly support individual politicians rather than parties with clear ideological platforms. It argues that a party without ideology is merely a random collection of people, akin to a choir or cycling group, lacking the foundational principles necessary to govern effectively. The author identifies himself as a member of the "Don't Know" party, reflecting widespread voter uncertainty ahead of elections in four months.
Historically, Israelis voted for parties with distinct ideologies across the political spectrum, such as Likud, Labor, and Meretz. However, over the past two decades, voting has shifted to personalities like Netanyahu, Lapid, and Bennett, turning political discourse into personal loyalty battles rather than ideological debates. The article highlights the dangers of this shift, noting that voters often do not know the full party list behind a leader or the party’s broader policy positions.
The piece also discusses exceptions, such as ultra-Orthodox parties, where voting is dictated by rabbis rather than individual choice. It recalls past examples of personality-driven parties with problematic outcomes, including Rafael Eitan’s 1992 party, which brought controversial figures into the Knesset. The author criticizes the current "Together" party led by Bennett and Lapid for lacking any clear ideology, describing it as a coalition of convenience rather than a genuine political platform.
The article stresses the importance of ideological clarity in parties, as elections are the only significant opportunity for citizens to influence Israel’s political, economic, security, and social direction. It cites the example of Yoaz Hendel’s "Reservists’ Party," which, despite his personal qualities, lacks a coherent ideological stance. The author calls on voters to prioritize party ideology over individual charisma to avoid future disappointment.
Finally, the article references the biography of Yuval Neeman, a former intelligence officer and scientist who led the "Revival" party in the 1980s. Neeman exemplified responsible opposition by supporting government actions that aligned with Israel’s sovereignty interests despite opposing other policies. The author suggests that modern parties, including ultra-Orthodox factions, could learn from Neeman’s principled approach. The piece concludes by warning that without ideological foundations, parties risk becoming ineffective and disconnected from the real needs of governing the state.
