Skip to main content

Young Israelis shift to the right?

Hope for a better future for both the Palestinians and the Israelis appear have taken a knock with an analysis that shows young Israelis have shifted to the right, with 53.9% voting for right-wing parties. But is it the full story?

Seventy per cent of Jewish Israelis define themselves as right-wing. And less than 30% support a two-state solution.   For those hoping for a generation shift that would give impetus to a peaceful solution that recognised the rights of Palestinians, it gets worse.

Forty per cent of young Jewish Israelis according to the poll would support a complete annexation of the West Bank.   The poll shows little sympathy for the Palestinians.

Those of us who had hoped for a generation shift can take some comfort from the reasons given by young Israelis for their position.   Many more would support a two-state solution if security for Israel could be guaranteed.  Security is the primary concern of voters, young and old.  Hope also lies elsewhere in their thinking.

The 'two-state' solution isn't a solution.  It isn't because it doesn't exist as a reality.   It is as if the younger Israelis really want to rip the old peace process up and start again, perhaps by establishing new principles.  Drafting new pillars for peace might enable Israeli concerns about security to be addressed.   The peace process, in any event, is dead.

One of the respondents in the poll summed it up by saying


It’s more complicated than right, left and center. I don’t think it’s possible to really define these terms.

Indeed, that is true.  The problem isn't defined by a left-right positioning, and nor is the solution.  A solution can only come from reaching across the old political divide.  And there lies real hope for the future.

It is clear from the opinions of young Israelis that they are far more socially liberal and egalitarian. What is needed is a political process that can reflect their concerns.  
















Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Ian Duncan-Smith says he wants to make those on benefits 'better people'!

By any account, the government's austerity strategy is utilitarian. It justifies its approach by the presumed potential ends. It's objective is to cut the deficit, but it has also adopted another objective which is specifically targeted. It seeks to drive people off benefits and 'back to work'.  The two together are toxic to the poorest in society. Those least able to cope are the most affected by the cuts in benefits and the loss of services. It is the coupling of these two strategic aims that make their policies ethically questionable. For, by combining the two, slashing the value of benefits to make budget savings while also changing the benefits system, the highest burden falls on a specific group, those dependent on benefits. For the greater good of the majority, a minority group, those on benefits, are being sacrificed; sacrificed on the altar of austerity. And they are being sacrificed in part so that others may be spared. Utilitarian ethics considers the ba

Keir Starmer has a lot to offer

The Labour Party is in the process of making a decision that will decide whether it can recover from the defeat in 2019 General Election.  All the candidates have much to offer and are making their case well. No doubt for some the decision will be difficult.  Others may well have made up their minds on the simple binary of Left-wing-Right-wing. The choice should be whoever is best placed to pull the party together.  Someone who can form a front bench of all talents and across the spectrum in the party. That is what Harold Wilson did in the 1960s.  His government included Roy Jenkins on the right and Barbar Castle on the left; it included Crossman and Crossland, and Tony Benn with Jim Callaghan.  It presented a formidable team. Keir Starmer brings to the top table a formidable career outside politics, having been a human rights lawyer and then Director of Public Prosecutions.   He is a man of integrity and commitment who believes in a fairer society where opportunities are more

The lion and the wildebeest

Birds flock, fish school, bees swarm, but social being is more than simply sticking together.  Social groups enable specialisation and a sharing of abilities, and enhances ability, learning and creating new tricks. The more a group works together, the more effective they become as a team.  Chimpanzees learn from each other how to use stones to crack nuts, or sticks to get termites.  All around us we see cooperation and learning in nature.  Nature is inherently creative.  Pulling together becomes a rallying cry during a crisis.  We have heard it throughout the coronavirus pandemic.  "We are all in this together", a mantra that encourages people to adopt a common strategy. In an era of 'self-interest' and 'survival of the fittest,'  and 'selfish gene', we lose sight of the obvious conclusion from the evidence all around us.   Sticking together is more often the better approach.  This is valid for the lion as it is also for the wildebeest.   We don't