There is nothing more heartwarming than a call for unity. After a year in which the government divided the people and engaged in incitement and division in the wake of national trauma, a clear call for unity is now actively being heard in the midst of the ongoing war. . Therefore, it is difficult to argue against “unification”. Because who can disagree with that? But in reality, these calls are dangerous and to a large extent manipulative, as they seek to undermine the pluralism that is the basis of democratic societies.
The call for unity expects us to essentially abandon divided opinions and our own personal values. Instead of articulating national values, we are expected to rally under the umbrella of “national interest,” but that means a continuation of the status quo, especially those who seek to challenge it. It means excluding leftists and Arabs.
Unity is a paralyzing demand. It promotes unity of opinion, or rather unity. It is no wonder that “solidarity” is primarily expressed in regimes that do not allow freedom of opinion. In North Korea, everyone is “united” whether they want to or not.
In totalitarian regimes, the masses submit to the position of the leader and deviants are punished, creating a uniform mindset. Fascism sanctified unity around the state and its leader. In a democratic society, especially in Israel, where there are deep disagreements over its purpose and future, the call for unity is actually a call for the government to toe the line. This is not political thinking that should inspire us.
Furthermore, calls from the right side of the political map are inherently manipulative. They are not interested in a unity of attention or willingness to act collaboratively to create change, but rather to maintain the existing order and prevent criticism of the right-wing government that has brought Israel to the brink. I am interested in the unity of
Those who value solidarity will be the first to seek legal action against those who challenge existing ideas. For example, they may consider calls to end the war to be treason.
What conditions are involved in unity?
Solidarity does not prevent them from deciding that expressing sympathy for the children of Gaza is sufficient to threaten a person’s life and, in some cases, freedom. There is a condition to unity, and that condition is that everyone follows the policies set by the government. Unity. But only if you are part of a religious and political majority. Otherwise, you will not be able to express other opinions.
Calls for unity always serve the incumbent government and always undermine the ability to criticize and challenge the incumbent government. We will always be told why we should not demonstrate, debate, or call elections in the name of unity, because it would “undermine unity.” This seemingly innocuous call serves the government, giving it a tool to try to maintain its power.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has sought to maintain power by calling for unity, even though he is responsible for the events of October 7 and most of the population distrusts him and his leadership. . As a result, he aims to silence those who seek to hold him, his policies, and the government publicly accountable.
On the battlefield, soldiers from almost every branch, with diametrically opposed opinions, fight together with one goal: victory. Their unified actions are aimed at achieving a common goal. But when we replace the military front with a civilian front, the same unity that was so valuable on the battlefield turns into the poisonous substance of paralysis.
A democratic society should be less homogeneous and less cohesive. Better with courageous people who challenge the existing order, promote untried ideas, and promote solutions different from those proposed by the government. It is important that these voices are not silenced.
In the past, the desire for unification has already had a negative impact on Israeli society. Israel refrained from adopting a constitution in the name of unity, and as a result did not set clear boundaries between branches of government or between majority rule and minority rights.
In the name of unity, religion and state are not separated, and we continue to see the realm that should exist between people and their conscience or community become politicized. Israel has made no progress towards resolving the Palestinian issue in its name, and on October 7th we were rudely awakened from the illusion that the conflict was manageable.
We would be wise to avoid rejoicing in slogans of unity and instead seek opposing views in the public sphere: in debates, ideological conflicts between different approaches, in decisions, and so on. Only by doing so can our country repair itself and its way of being. Maintaining what we already have will only further strengthen the very problems that brought us to this lowest point.
The Jewish spirit of tikun olam (repairing the world) requires criticism and challenging convention. In fact, unity is procrastination. It directs paralysis and provides excuses to avoid decisions. If the state of Israel seeks life, it has an obligation to make decisions about its future both internally and with respect to its surrounding countries and people, especially its Palestinian neighbors. In fact, the absence of a decision is a decision that favors the very situation that led us to the situation we are in now.
Israel faces a decision that requires robust debate and choice, not a (false) national embrace.
The author is Executive Director of J Street Israel.