Professor Eidelberg has long claimed that there are inherent defects in Israel’s political and judicial institutions, rendering true Jewish leadership virtually impossible until those defects are fixed.
The professor claims that even though Manhigut Yehudit - which means "Jewish Leadership" - aims to take over the Likud and implement worthy ideals, “by implanting Manhigut Yehudit as a faction of the Likud, and by urging people to register for the Likud, Feiglin aroused and magnified Likud consciousness among many voters in the 2003 election. He thereby contributed—how much no one knows—to the Likud’s winning 38 Knesset seats – a number that enabled Sharon to dominate the nationalist parties in his cabinet.”
Eidelberg goes so far as to claim that the Jewish leadership movement contributed directly to the leadership that implemented “anti-Jewish” programs such as the Disengagement Plan. “If the Likud had won fewer seats, those seats would have gone to National Union and NRP and perhaps Herut - and this would have prevented Disengagement."
Herut is the umbrella party under which Eidelberg’s Yamin Yisrael party ran in the 2003 election. It failed to gain enough votes to be in the Knesset, however.
"Remember," Eidelberg said, "the present Sharon-Peres government was confirmed by the Knesset by a [narrow] vote of 58 to 56.”
Another claim made by Professor Eidelberg is that the plan to gain control of the Likud will take at least ten years. “Long before that, Judea and Samaria and 250,000 Jews will suffer the same fate as Gush Katif - if the Likud remains in power,” he said. “The Likud’s 2003 government guidelines, endorsed by Netanyahu and Landau, affirmed the Oslo Agreement. Indeed, the guidelines affirmed the leftist projection of Israel as a state of all its citizens, which means the end of the Jewish state.”
Eidelberg's main contention, though, is that Manhigut Yehudit's drive to take over the ruling Likud Party is misleading those most likely to be on the forefront of demanding electoral reform into embracing the current system. “Feiglin hinders that goal by dividing the nationalist camp,” Eidelberg alleged. “By drawing good people into the Likud, a corrupt party, he prevents the formation of an anti-establishment Party that can unite all non-parliamentary nationalist groups. This alone can save Israel from its decadent political system.”
Eidelberg sees a window of opportunity in the coming election. “Because of widespread disillusionment with the Likud, National Union, and NRP, there will be more than 750,000 floating votes, or 30 Knesset seats, that can be won next year by an anti-establishment party, provided it campaigns not just against 'corruption,' but against institutionalized corruption.”
Offering a historical precedent for such a turn of events, Eidelberg cites the 1977 elections, when the newly formed Democratic Movement for Change, whose platform consisted solely of being against the status quo, won 15 seats. “And our situation today is far more critical,” he said.
The professor’s Anti-Establishment Party plans to campaign, with or without Feiglin, on a single issue: the transfer of power from parties to the people.
“We want MKs to be individually elected by the people in constituency elections, to exclude MKs from the cabinet - a major source of corruption, and to democratize the method of appointing Supreme Court judges - whose rulings so often violate the abiding beliefs and values of the Jewish people,” Eidelberg said.
“It’s amazing how educated people—including professors and lawyers—are so ignorant about the subtle workings of Israel’s political system, how they have been sucked into Feiglin’s disastrous gambit,” Eidelberg said. “Instead of exposing and fighting the system, Feiglin joined it, dignified it, and increased its power to undermine the very thing he holds most dear, Jewish leadership.”
“The expulsion of Jews from their homes was the greatest desecration of G-d’s name; and since the Likud was primarily responsible, Manhigut Yehudit should leave that party, otherwise they are mere hypocrites.”
Asked by Arutz-7 Monday why he did not contact Feiglin and Manhigut leaders directly, instead bringing the seemingly internal strategic issue directly to the public eye, Professor Eidelberg said that a distinguished friend of his had indeed broached the topic, but that Feiglin had said he is not ready to abandon the effort.
A7: "But why can’t you pursue your Anti-Establishment Party alongside the more long-term effort of taking control of the Likud? How can you be 100% certain that the effort to take over the Likud Central Committee is destined to fail any more than the effort to get two people into the Knesset to demand electoral change? Such efforts have not exactly been successful in the past..."
Prof. Eidelberg: "There are efforts being made to establish the Anti-Establishment Party, we are not waiting for Feiglin. The fact is that he would be the best man for the job and it is just a shame that efforts are being misdirected and wasted on rehabilitating this corrupt Likud party instead."
Feiglin, speaking with Israel National Radio’s Yishai and Malka Fleisher Monday, responded to Prof. Eidelberg's charges, saying he sees no merit in his proposal. "Prof. Eidelberg is a very talented man,” Feiglin said. “I read his articles and I recommend his books to many people. I appreciate him very much, but when it comes to politics, I have given up. I am not arguing with him anymore. What he is really offering is the same exact solutions we have run toward since Begin gave away Sinai and the same mistakes again and again."
“If I had not run for the head of the party, he would have been right. If all we had done is go in and play by their rules, get jobs from them and become part of the system, then he would be right - but we are doing the opposite. We were offered many, many jobs - but we don't care about these things. And more - I don't even care about being a Knesset Member. I could have become a Knesset Member in many different ways over the past ten years.
“We have 8% support before we have even started to campaign. and even just that 8% is driving the Likud crazy. Sharon told Yediot Acharonot [newspaper] this past weekend that ‘a Likud that is 8% for Feiglin is not my Likud.' What Paul Eidelberg wants us to do is leave reality and go back and play in a virtual reality. If you want to offer something to the Israelis you have to go to the Israelis – you cannot create your own ballgame. The Israelis are in the Likud, in the Carmel market - the Sephardim, the workers – if you can’t play in that ballgame then you can just go home - you are fooling yourself. You can’t create your own false reality and think that you are influential in that way.”
Eidelberg to Feiglin: Get Out of Likud
By Ezra HaLevi, INN
Prof. Paul Eidelberg has launched a scathing attack on Moshe Feiglin and the Manhigut Yehudit movement, which has endeavored to take over the Likud to induce it to be true to Land of Israel ideals.
In an interview with Israel National Radio’s Avi Hyman during The Activist Hour Sunday, Prof. Eidelberg slammed the notion of bringing about positive change from within the ruling Likud Party. He claimed that such an effort was not only ineffective, but harmful to efforts to bring about change in the Israeli electoral system.
“Let me first point out that I wrote one of the first papers on Jewish Leadership for Manhigut Yehudit,” Eidelberg said. “In fact, Mr. Feiglin is reported as saying that he regards my book, Jewish Statesmanship, as his bible. I respect the man and that is why I believe it is so critical that he lead the effort to reform Israel’s electoral system.”
Professor Eidelberg has long claimed that there are inherent defects in Israel’s political and judicial institutions, rendering true Jewish leadership virtually impossible until those defects are fixed.
The professor claims that even though Manhigut Yehudit - which means "Jewish Leadership" - aims to take over the Likud and implement worthy ideals, “by implanting Manhigut Yehudit as a faction of the Likud, and by urging people to register for the Likud, Feiglin aroused and magnified Likud consciousness among many voters in the 2003 election. He thereby contributed—how much no one knows—to the Likud’s winning 38 Knesset seats – a number that enabled Sharon to dominate the nationalist parties in his cabinet.”
Eidelberg goes so far as to claim that the Jewish leadership movement contributed directly to the leadership that implemented “anti-Jewish” programs such as the Disengagement Plan. “If the Likud had won fewer seats, those seats would have gone to National Union and NRP and perhaps Herut - and this would have prevented Disengagement."
Herut is the umbrella party under which Eidelberg’s Yamin Yisrael party ran in the 2003 election. It failed to gain enough votes to be in the Knesset, however.
"Remember," Eidelberg said, "the present Sharon-Peres government was confirmed by the Knesset by a [narrow] vote of 58 to 56.”
Another claim made by Professor Eidelberg is that the plan to gain control of the Likud will take at least ten years. “Long before that, Judea and Samaria and 250,000 Jews will suffer the same fate as Gush Katif - if the Likud remains in power,” he said. “The Likud’s 2003 government guidelines, endorsed by Netanyahu and Landau, affirmed the Oslo Agreement. Indeed, the guidelines affirmed the leftist projection of Israel as a state of all its citizens, which means the end of the Jewish state.”
Eidelberg's main contention, though, is that Manhigut Yehudit's drive to take over the ruling Likud Party is misleading those most likely to be on the forefront of demanding electoral reform into embracing the current system. “Feiglin hinders that goal by dividing the nationalist camp,” Eidelberg alleged. “By drawing good people into the Likud, a corrupt party, he prevents the formation of an anti-establishment Party that can unite all non-parliamentary nationalist groups. This alone can save Israel from its decadent political system.”
Eidelberg sees a window of opportunity in the coming election. “Because of widespread disillusionment with the Likud, National Union, and NRP, there will be more than 750,000 floating votes, or 30 Knesset seats, that can be won next year by an anti-establishment party, provided it campaigns not just against 'corruption,' but against institutionalized corruption.”
Offering a historical precedent for such a turn of events, Eidelberg cites the 1977 elections, when the newly formed Democratic Movement for Change, whose platform consisted solely of being against the status quo, won 15 seats. “And our situation today is far more critical,” he said.
The professor’s Anti-Establishment Party plans to campaign, with or without Feiglin, on a single issue: the transfer of power from parties to the people.
“We want MKs to be individually elected by the people in constituency elections, to exclude MKs from the cabinet - a major source of corruption, and to democratize the method of appointing Supreme Court judges - whose rulings so often violate the abiding beliefs and values of the Jewish people,” Eidelberg said.
“It’s amazing how educated people—including professors and lawyers—are so ignorant about the subtle workings of Israel’s political system, how they have been sucked into Feiglin’s disastrous gambit,” Eidelberg said. “Instead of exposing and fighting the system, Feiglin joined it, dignified it, and increased its power to undermine the very thing he holds most dear, Jewish leadership.”
“The expulsion of Jews from their homes was the greatest desecration of G-d’s name; and since the Likud was primarily responsible, Manhigut Yehudit should leave that party, otherwise they are mere hypocrites.”
Asked by Arutz-7 Monday why he did not contact Feiglin and Manhigut leaders directly, instead bringing the seemingly internal strategic issue directly to the public eye, Professor Eidelberg said that a distinguished friend of his had indeed broached the topic, but that Feiglin had said he is not ready to abandon the effort.
A7: "But why can’t you pursue your Anti-Establishment Party alongside the more long-term effort of taking control of the Likud? How can you be 100% certain that the effort to take over the Likud Central Committee is destined to fail any more than the effort to get two people into the Knesset to demand electoral change? Such efforts have not exactly been successful in the past..."
Prof. Eidelberg: "There are efforts being made to establish the Anti-Establishment Party, we are not waiting for Feiglin. The fact is that he would be the best man for the job and it is just a shame that efforts are being misdirected and wasted on rehabilitating this corrupt Likud party instead."
Feiglin, speaking with Israel National Radio’s Yishai and Malka Fleisher Monday, responded to Prof. Eidelberg's charges, saying he sees no merit in his proposal. "Prof. Eidelberg is a very talented man,” Feiglin said. “I read his articles and I recommend his books to many people. I appreciate him very much, but when it comes to politics, I have given up. I am not arguing with him anymore. What he is really offering is the same exact solutions we have run toward since Begin gave away Sinai and the same mistakes again and again."
“If I had not run for the head of the party, he would have been right. If all we had done is go in and play by their rules, get jobs from them and become part of the system, then he would be right - but we are doing the opposite. We were offered many, many jobs - but we don't care about these things. And more - I don't even care about being a Knesset Member. I could have become a Knesset Member in many different ways over the past ten years.
“We have 8% support before we have even started to campaign. and even just that 8% is driving the Likud crazy. Sharon told Yediot Acharonot [newspaper] this past weekend that ‘a Likud that is 8% for Feiglin is not my Likud.' What Paul Eidelberg wants us to do is leave reality and go back and play in a virtual reality. If you want to offer something to the Israelis you have to go to the Israelis – you cannot create your own ballgame. The Israelis are in the Likud, in the Carmel market - the Sephardim, the workers – if you can’t play in that ballgame then you can just go home - you are fooling yourself. You can’t create your own false reality and think that you are influential in that way.”
Posted by Ted Belman at September 12, 2005 05:34 PM