If you're young, Israeli and anywhere to the left of our current Prime Minister there's a good chance you're at least a little bit in love with Israeli's youngest Knesset member, 27 year old Stav Shaffir. Shaffir rose to prominence by leading the massive cost-of-living protests in 2011 (the ones that helped contribute to the rise of the Occupy Wall Street movement). Since then she's entered politics as a member of the Labor Party, and is currently number four on Labor's list of candidates, meaning she will definitely be in the next Knesset. She recently sat down for an interview with David Horovitz, the founding editor of the Times of Israel, an English language site (also in French, Arabic and Chinese) frequently featured on this blog. You should definitely check it out.
While reading the interview it's important to remember that she's a politician running for office, so we should hardly be surprise that she's anti-corruption. What politician isn't? On the other hand, it certainly seems like she's made a serious effort to improve transparency and the overall quality of governance. She's officially the least well-off member of the Knesset and one of only eight to refuse a raise. She publishes the hours she works. She's established a committee of volunteers to help sift through the vast technical jargon that makes up the budget. These actions are definitely good publicity, but that doesn't mean they're not how we should want our Knesset members to behave.
One of the most interesting aspects of the interview for Americans, in my opinion, is that she frames her positions in terms of Zionism. In America candidates often try to frame themselves as the "most American", and the other candidate as "un-American". In Israel we talk about Zionism. Shaffir, as a member of the left, has certainly been attacked (and will be in the future) as anti-Zionist and an Arab apologist. Members of the right will say she's soft on security and that her willingness to give up land and make peace is unrealistic and dangerous. Shaffir's response in this interview is to lay out a Zionism that is not just about security. She claims that the right, and Netanyahu in particular, can only offer a Zionism of fear. She explains
She also accuses the right of promoting a Zionism that ignores the long term needs of the state. In particular, she seems to find Netanyahu's relations with the rest of the world as being bad for the Jewish state. She says that
While reading the interview it's important to remember that she's a politician running for office, so we should hardly be surprise that she's anti-corruption. What politician isn't? On the other hand, it certainly seems like she's made a serious effort to improve transparency and the overall quality of governance. She's officially the least well-off member of the Knesset and one of only eight to refuse a raise. She publishes the hours she works. She's established a committee of volunteers to help sift through the vast technical jargon that makes up the budget. These actions are definitely good publicity, but that doesn't mean they're not how we should want our Knesset members to behave.
One of the most interesting aspects of the interview for Americans, in my opinion, is that she frames her positions in terms of Zionism. In America candidates often try to frame themselves as the "most American", and the other candidate as "un-American". In Israel we talk about Zionism. Shaffir, as a member of the left, has certainly been attacked (and will be in the future) as anti-Zionist and an Arab apologist. Members of the right will say she's soft on security and that her willingness to give up land and make peace is unrealistic and dangerous. Shaffir's response in this interview is to lay out a Zionism that is not just about security. She claims that the right, and Netanyahu in particular, can only offer a Zionism of fear. She explains
The political right is Zionism without content. Can it be better here? No. Can ordinary people manage here financially? No. When we protested, Bibi mocked us. We called for affordable housing, affordable public transport. Bibi answered, be glad you’re alive and stop moaning. Fear and that’s it; we can’t change the situation, we can’t ensure security. They’ve taken Zionism to a place where Bennett (leader of the right wing Jewish Home party) is prepared to relinquish security for the sake of a few hills in the West Bank.From her perspective this is not what Zionism is, or what it has ever been. She contends that Zionism is as much about building the institutions of the state and making sure the less fortunate are taken care of as it is about physical security and Israel's borders. For example, she contends that far too many resources are being directed to Jewish settlements in the West Bank, a common complaint from left and even centrist Israelis. But from her perspective (at least in this interview) the larger problem is not the political implications (though she acknowledges those as well) but the fact that this diverts resources from other areas. In Israel we often talk about "the merkaz" (literally "the center", basically the Tel Aviv metropolitan area) and the periphery. Shaffir wants more resources sent to Sderot (a poor community near the Gaza strip), for example, instead of to the territories.
She also accuses the right of promoting a Zionism that ignores the long term needs of the state. In particular, she seems to find Netanyahu's relations with the rest of the world as being bad for the Jewish state. She says that
Far-right Zionism is to hate the world and be different from the rest. Real Zionism is to ensure the well-being of the state in the long-term. And for that, we can’t be at odds with the world. We have to bring the world to us, have them support us, be our partners.Whether you agree with her, think she's just a lying politician like every other or think her left-wing views will endanger Israel's security, she couches her argument in specifically Zionist terms. One of the things that I try to convey to my students (and to Americans in general) is what it means to live in a Jewish state, and, for me, one of the key aspects is that every part of our life here is Jewish, including the politics. So what does Zionism mean in the modern day? Is it a relevant part of the debate for the upcoming elections or just political posturing? Feel free to let me know what you think in the comments!
Like we said in class, there is no clear meaning of having "a Jewish state". Everyone has their own ideas of what it means to be Jewish, so no clear definition. So, of course, it must be difficult to implement religious policies in the Knesset. Some may argue that certain policies are too orthodox, while others argue that some reform ideas may be "anti tanakh". Obviously, this is a major problem between the religious and non religious parties, as well as the right and left wings. And because everyone has there own ideas, they are reluctant to listen to anyone else's. I'm the upcoming election I think Zionism will be a big debate, mostly because it has to do with ideas concerning the two state solution. In order to come to an agreeable solution, politicians have to listen to each other and not only argue about the faults in each other's plans.
ReplyDeleteFrom learning what we have so far, I feel as though Stav and the Labor party is more for the people as a whole. That being said, I think that Stav wanting to make peace with the Arabs, and create a more fair offer than Bibi has done, really is another example of her ethics. I agree with her that we should try and create a fair solution to dividing the state of Israel (if we decide that it is necessary to divide at all). I also think that Zionism should be part of the debate because it is not only shows our views on what the canidates view for Israel is, but it directly connects to their views on security for Israel and how important it is. This election is so much more interesting for me than an American because there are so many more components to take into consideration. I hope that we continue to talk about the election!
ReplyDeleteI'm not a big fan of Shaffir. She seems to have good intentions, but unreasonable. You are not wrong when you say she's just a politician, so my view of her isn't as some perfect person.
ReplyDeleteHer idea with the money going to the people may not be right for Israel. Netenyahu believes money needs to go to security most importantly, and he is not wrong. Shaffir should worry more about security for the people than their money.