The aim of the hawkish faction of Blue and White is not simply to govern. Its true aim is to severely compromise the freedom of choice of Israeli citizens. Yesh Atid's Ofer Shelah and Yair Lapid have resolved to remove PM Netanyahu from the political arena for good, no longer allowing the citizens to elect him. They no longer suffice with deciding who will lead the Blue and White party; they also seek to decide who will lead the opposing party – and, in particular, who won't.

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter

Their path to reaching this aim is well-trodden. This week we heard the overly activist Justices of the Supreme Court – who had no qualms about hampering the Knesset's status, for example in their willingness to discuss the disqualification of Basic Laws – suddenly upholding the importance of the executive branch, their only goal being to hasten the formation of parliamentary committees.

Have they repented, no longer supporting the activist school of thought? On the contrary. They're doing their best to remove any obstacle standing in the way of Shelah and Lapid, whose aim is to legislate personal laws (which left-wing politicians have stridently opposed over the last year). The objective of these laws is to remove Netanyahu from Israel's political map, by means of direct election.

The Supreme Court is just one device used by the generals' party – a crucially important device, but certainly not the only one. They are aided by partisan media outlets more interested in the personal insult sustained by Benny Gantz during the election campaign and in the major psychological issue – to what degree will that insult's emotional residue allow Gantz to collaborate with Netanyahu.

The empathy for their preferred political son apparently engages the interest of television presenters and their guests much more than the violent derailing of the political choice made by Israel's Jewish-Zionist majority, by a party that cannot form a Zionist coalition government.

But the true irony of this attempt is the use of the Arab vote – or rather, the charge of racism. Three former chiefs of staff are trying to exploit a patently anti-Zionist vote in order to defeat the vote of the majority of Zionist voters. Any protest against this attempt is immediately countered with the trump card of equality – the undisputed argument that the Arab vote is equal to the Jewish one. However, this is pure demagogy, since in practice, the Arab vote will at some point annul the political will of the majority of Israel's Jewish public.

The meaning of this is clear. In Israel's socio-political food chain, the Arab Hiba Yazbek (sheltering under the wings of three IDF chiefs of staff) will decide for Israel's Mizrahi periphery who they can elect, and who they can't.

If, up until now, this periphery was under-represented in every possible sphere of influence in Israel, from now on its representation at the polls will also be downtrodden – the "ignorant masses" are not making the right choice, therefore the Justices of the Supreme Court will assist Lapid and Shelah in overturning that choice. Of course, this farce is taking place under the holy veil of upholding democracy – in other words, upholding the Israeli left-wing, which alone represents the country's true and essential democratic foundation.

And if, heaven forbid, anyone dares to speak out against them – the protectors of democracy will raise a black flag.

The post Our freedom of choice has been compromised appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

In his speech this week, Shar leader Aryeh Deri explained that all deals between Blue and White, Yisrael Beytenu, and the Labor-Gesher-Meretz alliance were signed and sealed long ago away from the public eye, adding that this was not "a political assumption", but actual, factual information.

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter

Reality suggests that Deri is correct. When MK Yoaz Hendel, Blue and White's token rightist, dared to state his opinion about potential annexation under the Trump administration's peace plan, Joint Arab List MK Ahmad Tibi called him to order in an explicit, humiliating threat, along the lines of, "Want my support? You better behave." Hendel did as he was told.

Those who realized that Blue and White's rightist fig leaves are nothing but an aesthetic decoration, but think that the growing post-Zionist leftist government would be neutralized by three former IDF chiefs and Yisrael Beytenu chair Avigdor Lieberman, should think again. A military past, illustrious as it may be, guarantees nothing, let alone hawkish right-wing politics. If anything, history has proven the opposite.

Blue and White leader Benny Gantz's remarks when he was IDF chief – essentially admitting the IDF risked the lives of Israeli soldiers fighting in Gaza so as not to harm Palestinians – echo those of former IDF Deputy Chief of Staff Democratic Union MK Yair Golan. Former IDF chief Moshe Ya'alon of Blue and White enjoys, for some reason, an air of political integrity, but he is not guided by principals. Since he resigned as defense minister in 2016 Ya'alon has been driven by one principle only: Revenge.

As for Lieberman, he has proved he is a political chameleon, dedicated to only one thing – securing Knesset seats at all cost. While his party was dying, he reinvented himself, and the his usual campaign slogan of "Death penalty for Arabs" has been replaced with "Better Tibi than Bibi."

But the best proof for Deri's claim is pinned in the simple fact that not one of Blue and White captains or Lieberman has bothered to deny the collaboration with the  Joint Arab List. Moreover, it stands to reason that if this allegation was baseless, an across-the-board denial of this nature would dominate the two parties' campaigns.

The fact that an immense Right-voting public is about to vicariously elect lawmakers who oppose the existence of a Jewish state, hurts tenfold in this historic and fatal moment. Applying sovereignty and extending Israel's legitimate borders is a dream most in the Israeli public has been longing for. This dream will come to life only after the elections, and only with a real right-wing government, at the helm, chaired by the one person who paved the way to acknowledging this vision.

But according to recent surveys, the more likely scenario is that in which right-wing voters are about to leave this historic moment to the likes of Meretz lawmakers Tamar Zandberg and Nitzan Horowitz, Labor parliamentarian Merav Michaeli, and Joint Arab List MKs Ahmad Tibi and Ayman Odeh.

The post The Right is about to miss the opportunity of a lifetime appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter

This comparison reminded me of one of Segal's other peak moments at Channel 12 News: When former Labor MK Eitan Cabel's investigation transcripts first surfaced, everyone compared them to Case 2000 against Netanyahu – because in both cases the person who negotiated positive coverage in Yedioth Ahronoth with them was the paper's publisher, Arnon "Noni" Mozes. However, Segal's extrapolation from that was that all Israelis who fear for the rule of law should actually be troubled by the parallel between Cabel and Case 4,000 against Netanyahu.

In Case 4,000, the police and state prosecutor were forced to recruit state's witnesses, shake them down, undermine their credibility, extract testimonies through dubious methods, and forcibly connect the dots between witness A and witness B to circumstantially and weakly point to some unprecedented bribe that never took place. In Cabel's case, however, the suspect himself sat opposite his investigators and was allowed to practically recount from memory the deal he concocted with Mozes – with no need for state's witnesses and independent of the attorney general's (reasonable or otherwise; proportionate or otherwise) circumstantial stretches of the imagination.

Segal pondered, as a result, how it could be that in Cabel's easy case, in which he clearly and patently received positive coverage, the police closed the file; while in Netanyahu's case, with no investigation transcript directly implicating him and zero tangible positive coverage of which to speak – the prosecutor decided to put him on trial.

This wonderment on Segal's part leads us directly to what is becoming, in the eyes of many, a clinic on selective and political enforcement of the law against a right-wing leader. If this impression is accurate then support for Netanyahu is nothing resembling a religious cult, rather it is a logical imperative, not to mention a civic duty for any Israeli who wants to continue living in a democratic state.

So why then is it still referred to as a "religion?" According to Segal's explanation, if Netanyahu cannot form the next government, other alternatives must be explored and prepared for in advance. The difference between the "cultish approach" of Netanyahu's supporters and the "practical approach" that Segal is suggesting, is essentially a utilitarian difference at its core.

But what kind of right-wing governance can grow in Netanyahu's aftermath, assuming the coup succeeds? And why are non-members of the church of "only Bibi" – such as Prof. Ruth Gavizon or Prof. Daniel Friedmann – decrying this coup attempt as if they were the most zealous of his supporters? And most importantly – what would be the use of another right-wing government, assuming the national camp ignores the fact that the current prime minister was forcibly removed from office just because of his political views?

The most practical, logical and moral thing to do is fight this coup attempt we all know is taking place, and the most effective way of doing so is at the voting stations. This is the only ritual ceremony in this religion, which holds the sovereignty of the people as a fundamental tenet. This religion is called democracy.

The post What's more rational than defending democracy? appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

The Left understands Netanyahu better than the Right, which is also one of the main reasons why it attacks Netanyahu mercilessly – Netanyahu is a nightmare that is coming true before their very eyes.

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter

This is also where the parties to the right of the Likud falter. They are too busy peeking through the keyhole to see the bigger picture.

These parties have their own political ideology, their own priorities and agenda, and they expect them all to be met, making them blind to the bigger picture – the one the Left sees very clearly, which illustrates that Netanyahu has all but lulled the peace process into an irreparable coma. Anyone who wants to understand why the Left loathes Netanyahu as more than any other right-wing leader should look to that fact.

The confusion is understandable. Netanyahu is a moderate right-wing leader, who is not gung-ho to go to war. In fact, his insistence on containing the security escalation on the Israel-Gaza border has prompted many politicians in the Left to slam what they called his "weak policies" there.

This seemingly served the Left's agenda: it wants to revive the peace process and therefore urged Netanyahu to topple Hamas' regime and reinstate Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas' rule in the enclave from which he was ousted in 2007. A wide-scale military campaign in Gaza could achieve this goal.

Netanyahu understands that well, which is why he is leaving Hamas exactly where it is – severely crippled but still viable. As long as Hamas rules Gaza, chances of anyone reigniting the peace process are slim.

Absent any extraneous remarks, fireworks or pathos-filled speeches, Netanyahu has completely defeated the Left's principal agenda. He proved that Israel could thrive without making "painful concessions." Furthermore, his policies have not led to Israel's diplomatic isolation but rather forged new ties with Sunni Arab states. And the economy is flourishing. All the while the Left hopes for the dystopia it knows is "sure to come" in the absence of painful diplomatic concessions.

Netanyahu has led the country forward, an achievement even more impressive given that he has succeeded in doing all of the above under the watchful eye of a hostile US administration under former President Barack Obama.

A renewed diplomatic process will lead to additional wars and the spilling of blood. Netanyahu saw this up front and that is why he invested all of his effort in thwarting such a process. They understand this full well on the Left. It's a shame that to the right of Netanyahu, they choose to peek through the peephole and as a result, are unable to see the full picture, which those on the Left are able to see: Netanyahu buried the diplomatic concession process.

The post Peeking through the keyhole appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

I think about the Israeli Left and wonder, could it be that all its emotional and intellectual resources have been wasted on hating Netanyahu? What remains of the current Left's economic, social, or defense and security agenda?

Let's start with security. In the election, the center-left Blue and White party was headed by a candidate who included a counter in one of his campaign videos. The numbers, which constantly went up, were counting the number of Arabs killed in Gaza during Operation Protective Edge. I don't remember any right-wing candidate who boasted about the number of casualties the other side sustained as an achievement – and certainly not in a campaign video. A month ago, that same Left was also pressing Netanyahu to launch a full-scale war in Gaza, while calling the Qatari funds that Netanyahu agreed to transfer to Gaza "protection money" and ignoring the wretched humanitarian situation that afflicted most Gazans ahead of the Ramadan holy month. Then Avigdor Lieberman showed up. "The war minister," as they used to call him fearfully, until he took a stand against Netanyahu and miraculously became a viable, desirable candidate for them in the upcoming election. Is that how the "peace camp," whose people preach coexistence unity among the people, works?

Let's look at the social side of things. A demographic breakdown of the last election left no room for doubt: the Israeli Left lives in the socioeconomically strongest, most in-demand cities. Anyone who examines left-wing responses on social media will spot an interesting trend: many people on the Left admit that they live in very good financial circumstances, but take care to express concern for the old lady in a hallway hospital bed; the rate of unemployment (which is at an all-time low, by the way); and pity for residents of the periphery whose lives have, of course, been ruined because of Netanyahu. Their concern for the "vulnerable" is touching, but every time that one of these "vulnerable" people from the periphery describes the notable improvement to their quality of life that resulted from Netanyahu's socio-economic policies, the empathy dries up and the "vulnerable" person instantly becomes part of the "blind herd" or just a baboon. After the election, empathy turned to denunciation, which included hopes that the "vulnerable" would die from Gaza rockets. Is that how the "social camp," which is so concerned about the weaker sectors that are supposedly being trampled by the Netanyahu government, conducts itself?

The most interesting picture becomes clear when we review the economy. Socialist democracy doesn't really exist in Israel. The Left likes to brag about its socialist conscience, but a shiny capitalist SUV is parked in a private space next to their private homes. Netanyahu's "piggish capitalism" is doing well by them, and all the rest is nothing more than a worn-out pose with nothing true behind it.

All the Israeli Left has now is a chaotic pile of agenda items that often contradict each other, and a stockpile of curses for the Netanyahu family. Lots and lots of curses. Devoting so much hatred to the prime minister has used up all the Left's intellectual resources, and made it into the unattractive camp it is today.

The post The Left has worn itself out hating Netanyahu appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

We were afraid when we saw an Israel Police commissioner bend and break before the media, and then align himself with it, because his personal and professional life were hanging in the balance. We were afraid when we realized (just like Police Chief Roni Alsheikh did) that while the police were investigating nonexistent bribery, before our very eyes a different kind of bribery – more open and more dangerous – was going on. The media was bribing law enforcement.

We were afraid when we, like Alsheikh, realized what the media was making shamelessly clear: If he gave them Netanyahu's head on a platter, they would make him the darling of the nation; otherwise, nearly every media outlet would continue to make Alsheikh's life miserable. We were afraid when we saw Alsheikh break and name one of Netanyahu's enemies as a consultant to the police and when "zero leaks" turned into a flood that was trying to sweep away a sitting prime minister.

We were afraid when we saw what was given for the unwritten deal in which the head of the Israel Police, who was the person the media hated most when he started the job, turned into Channel 10's "man of the year" by the time he left.

We were afraid when we saw the demonstrations outside the home of Attorney General Avichai Mendelblit, when we saw the protesters cursing his mother's memory, when they chased him as he was shopping for groceries. Who can stand up to a Sicilian-style mafia that picks who to threaten and then threatens him that if he stands in the way of sending Netanyahu to prison, he'll be sorry. This time, it's just a warning. Next time, they'll follow through.

We were afraid when we realized that these were the same people who are horrified by the legal system and the persecution of law enforcement officials except the personal, frightening persecution of the attorney general. In the "anyone but Bibi" game, everything is allowed – including veiled threats against one of the top law enforcement officials in the country.

We were afraid when we heard one of the shady leaders of the "protest" describe the move step by step before the first case was even opened. First, he said, we'll take the police, then we'll take the State Attorney's Office, and then we'll take over – the media is already in our pockets. We were afraid to see that he was right. We were afraid when we got to know the process by which all this happened – the little country within the country that had been built up in secret – a country of functionaries that are crowned by wealthy leftist foundations, sent to study abroad, and return to Israel to take up jobs as "guardians of democracy."

We were afraid when we discovered what they are taught over there – that democracy is not the will of the majority, and there is an "essence" of democracy that is identified with a certain set of values that must be forced on the will of the majority. We were terrified to discover how much power they have and how they wielded it to bring about a change of government while hounding the prime minister who has brought Israel into its most successful decade since the state was founded. This time, it's not "they" who are scared; it's us.

It's not only Netanyahu they want to put in prison – it's everyone who stands behind him: the ignorant masses who were mistakenly given the right to decide how an election would turn out.

The post Netanyahu's voters are under the gun, too appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

Let's imagine the following scenario: 50 vegans on a regular flight suspect that their meal contained meat. The flight attendants promise the angry passengers that their specially-ordered vegan meals did not contain meat. Imagine how the passengers would respond the moment one of them learned that the airline had lied to them.

The vegans would raise hell after the discovery, and would have understanding and support from media outlets. The public would receive an accurate, appropriate report about the incident. It wouldn't occur to anyone that the airline would betray its passengers' trust.

Despite the fact that the ultra-Orthodox passengers on the Shabbat flight had been deliberately misled and forced to desecrate Shabbat, unwillingly violating one of the tenets of their faith, they didn't riot. This minor fact didn't stop media outlets from leaping on biased video clips that showed stereotypical images of primitive, violent haredim, frightening the miserable flight crew – terror in the skies.

The amazing thing is the total absence of any news outlets who made a minimal effort to clarify the facts before broadcasting the footage. Any young and inexperienced editor, even at a local outlet, would do better journalistic work and investigate the matter before reporting it.

The news broadcasts used the biased El Al version of events, and some of them didn't even bother to make a pretense of objectivity. One broadcast stuck to the narrative put out by El Al – a commercial company, remember – and repeatedly reported the "haredi outbursts." The report was so biased that the El Al spokesman said that a complaint would be filed against the haredim who rioted on the flight.

If it hadn't been for the report by Israel Hayom correspondent Yehuda Shlezinger, who was on the flight in question and busted the false story open, the truth would never have been told outside of social media. We would have been left with a fake version and a healthy helping of anti-haredi hatred served up on a silver tray of weekend ratings. Who knows how many similar cases we've witnessed without ever learning the truth?

On the Ulpan Shishi ("Friday Studio") program, when all the details were already out, no member of the panel expressed the slightest self-criticism or regret for the earlier false reports. The same media figures who often take a righteous stance against the discourse of hatred saw no need to say anything about the slander they helped spread. What's more, when the full picture had already been made clear, and it was clear who the perpetrator and who the victims were, anchor Danny Kushmaro mocked the El Al apology, remarking: "The airline might wind up opening a kollel [study center] for these haredim."

Maybe he said that to make it clear that the righteous haredi mask hides a blackmailer who is trying to squeeze benefits out of innocent companies.

That is what hatred looks like, and that is the anatomy of fake news.

The post The anatomy of fake news appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

How can the media be so much more interested in the prime minister's new plane than the new destinations that plane is set to reach? How can a historical process, the likes of which the "peace camp" has fantasized about for years, not be afforded any praise, or at the very least, polite recognition?

The lack of joy exposes a very deep truth about the "peace camp": The normalization of ties between Israel and moderate Sunni Arab states is important, but not as important as the tribe. This is not a political or rational truth but rather an emotional truth – peace is only a consequence of what really matters, which is the Left, or in order words the tribe.

It's understandable. In many ways, the warm ties being forged between Arab states and the Likud government are not a dream come but true rather a nightmare that has pulled the rug out from under the Left. It seems all the basic assumptions of the Zionist and post-Zionist Left have been tossed out the window when in Abu Dhabi they appear to be on the verge of celebrating the annual Likud party summit right before the astonished eyes of the enraged prophets of diplomatic isolation.

They promised us dystopia. They called Netanyahu's stance arrogant, dangerous and patronizing and warned we were standing on the edge of the abyss. They made it clear there was an inherent connection between the forging of diplomatic ties with Arab states and the possibility of solving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The equation was clear – normalization in return for territory; there was no other way.

It turns out that another path does exist, and while it does not include painful concessions on Israel's part, it does include the woman they love to hate, Culture Minister Miri Regev. Yes, Regev, who wearing a hijab, charmed her hosts on a tour of the UAE's Sheikh Zayed Grand Mosque. In their minds, they envisioned white men from the right tribe signing off on this or that painful concession and shaking hands; Regev was the last person they could have imagined in this context.

The media's conduct has been almost heartbreaking – they are so out of ideas that they have resorted to slamming Yair Netanyahu's tweets as a counterweight to the amazing and unprecedented diplomatic process now taking place between Sunni Arabia and the State of Israel under Netanyahu's patronage.

Among the plethora of Pavlovian responses, of particular note was one that came from Hadashot News reporter Ilan Lokach. Lokach called Kiryat Shmona resident Orna Peretz a "typical Likud supporter" following the much-publicized incident in Kiryat Shmona, where Netanyahu lost his cool and shut her down after she interrupted his speech. Lokach said Peretz would certainly continue to vote for Likud despite the fact that she had been humiliated by Netanyahu, who had called her "boring." According to Lokach, people like Peretz are part of the "irrational herd" which consistently prioritizes the sanctity of the tribe over any other consideration. While I do not know if that is true of Peretz, given the recent developments in the Middle East, there can be no doubt it is true of Lokach and all the other members of the leftist tribe.

The post For the Left, its tribalism before peace appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

"They miss Spain and they intend to go back there, too. From their standpoint, Spain was stolen from them just like Palestine," he said.

The fact that the country of Spain existed before and after its Muslim conquest does not change this perception: According to the laws of Allah, Spain belongs to the Muslims. They were there at one point and they were forced to leave. There are Muslims who call for the realization of a right of return to Spain, and some who even see themselves as refugees who fled from Spain and the Spanish as occupiers.

Muslim refugeeism and Western refugeeism are two entirely different concepts. A Muslim can be a refugee even if his father and grandfather never fled any country. They can also be refugees from a country they forcibly conquered and were subsequently kicked out of. Muslim refugeeism is metaphysical, and, as such, eternal. If a Muslim does not conquer or reconquer what was given to him by Allah, meaning the world in its entirety, he has shirked his religious obligation.

Metaphysical refugeeism is made possible by a combination of two basic principles – clinging to the land and nonlinear time. While Western culture sanctifies the present, Muslim time stretches across another axis, in which the present is of lesser importance. A devout Muslim scorns the Western culture of instant gratification and the failure of those in West to withstand hardship and suffering. The suffering in the Gaza Strip, for example, is seen as a tax that must be paid, the sufferers themselves but a link in an important chain that is larger than the sum of its parts.

The current escalation in Gaza has once again brought our deep misunderstanding of Muslim theology to the forefront. This time, though, the hubris has been equally divided among the two camps. The Left continues to be held captive by the romantic notion that the people in Gaza are nothing but desperate victims who are forced to contend with predatory Zionism with nothing but a slingshot in their hands. Of course, the opposite is in fact true. The reality is that the gasoline fueling the incendiary kites is not a sign of desperation but the aspiration of conquering the land from the north to the south.

The Right, too, with its calls for the government to reach a one-and-done solution and topple the Hamas regime has been tainted by an arrogance that amount to contempt for the enemy. While our security forces can topple Hamas, the question is what will take its place. It stands to reason it will not be a new leadership that supports equality between the sexes and LGBT rights. The more realistic scenario is that in the absence of centralized leadership, several groups will rise up and set the border on fire in return for a symbolic payment from the Iranian patron.

Even if Israel is forced to return to Gaza, and even if it retakes the territory, we must be honest with ourselves and recognize that any such action would be cosmetic only. The people in Gaza will not be deterred by the Right's stick, nor will they be satisfied with the carrot offered by the Left. The notion that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu or the occupation is responsible for the current situation is megalomaniacal and narcissistic. He who takes full blame assumes he is omnipotent.

For the people in Gaza, this is a zero-sum game: It is either us or them. The only thing left for Israel to do then is manage the conflict, because a resolution just isn't on the table.

The post A zero-sum game appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

The first principle in this view is universalism. Because national values contradict borderless universalism, national symbols such as anthems, flags and even ideas of sovereignty are understood to be outdated in the best-case scenario, or in the worst case dangerous. The influence of this view could be seen well into the period of the Brexit, or the U.K.'s gradual withdrawal from the European Union. The desire to preserve Britain as a state with a particular sovereignty is seen as a dangerous national sentiment by progressives. According to progressivism, nationalism has died and left chauvinism and racism in its place.

Another principle in this progressivism is that there are no national classifications. The world is dichotomous and based in binary language – that which is not universal for all people must be something between fascism and Nazism. For the progressive, there is zero tolerance for a people's will to self-determination (besides the Palestinians, of course.)

The #MeToo revolution led by progressives can be seen as a war against differentiation and classification. The concept of "rape culture" blurs the spectrum of sex crimes, forcing all other sex crimes under the most serious crime of this sort. This moves lighter transgressions over the criminal threshold.

The third progressive principle is that of identity, or as they call it, identity politics. This principle combats what frightens progressives most of all – racism. According to it, what differentiates between what is moral and just and what is fascist and dangerous is identity – women, people of color, Muslims, and LGBTs are always right while men, whites, non-Muslims and straights are always to blame.

But if we examine just these three principles, we will discover a paradox – a self-contradiction that leads progressives to promote the phenomena they originally opposed.

The universalists who mourn the "martyrs" disrespect the government, which in their view is based on nationalist symbols like flag and anthem. In doing so, they support fanatical, nondemocratic, particularistic religious organizations. These are the same groups that commit acts of terrorism in the name of their own flag and anthem.

The feminist progressive revolution tied itself with the Palestinians. In doing so, it sided with organizations that parade women many years backward. This happens indirectly and directly, like when Palestinian-American activist Linda Sarsour, who supports Shariah, is made into one of the main spokeswomen for the radical feminist movement. Even the identity politics that ostensibly fight racism lead to this deep internal contradiction. On one hand, identity politics advocate for unity without discriminating based on religion, race and sex. On the other hand, they grant a priori preferential treatment to groups defining their members according to religion, race and sex.

If the progressives succeed in implementing these values, our universal world is likely to be dark, misogynist, racist and fundamentalist. It is no wonder that the public in Europe, Israel and the U.S. prefers the Right.

The post The Left's progress backward appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.