Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Israel/Palestine
Related: About this forumLegitimizing the racist perceptions at the heart of Israeli politics
Marking people like Haneen Zoabi and Baruch Marzel as the 'lunatic fringe' hides the fact that the 'mainstream' is responsible for democracy's real problems.By Aeyal Gross 17.02.15
The Supreme Court on Tuesday will consider the Central Election Committees decision to bar Haneen Zoabi and Baruch Marzel from contending for the Knesset. Before the last elections the committee had also disqualified Zoabi, but the Supreme Court overturned that decision, and one may assume it will do the same this time.
From the explanation the High Court of Justice published last week for its earlier decision to allow Zoabis suspension from Knesset activities for six months, it emerges that it accepted the argument that her remarks last June about the kidnappers of the three teenagers not being terrorists but people who see no other way to change their reality could be interpreted as expressing support for terrorism. The High Court chose, wrongly, to prefer the way the words were interpreted over their intent, as clarified by Zoabi.
But its doubtful if this determination will be enough to ban her candidacy on the grounds that she supports the armed struggle of a terror group against the state. Disqualifying political representatives is a drastic step that the Supreme Court has already said it would approve only in the most extreme cases. Zoabi stated that she did not support the kidnapping, and there are no legal grounds for disqualifying her.
With regard to Marzel, the court had in the past rejected a petition against a decision to allow him to run, and one assumes that his disqualification this time around will also be overturned. Alls well that ends well?
remainder: http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/.premium-1.642844
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
1 replies, 519 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (1)
ReplyReply to this post
1 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Legitimizing the racist perceptions at the heart of Israeli politics (Original Post)
Jefferson23
Feb 2015
OP
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)1. further:
Not exactly, since there is a substantive problem with the grounds on which Arab representatives are being disqualified. In contrast to the banning of an anti-democratic party, disqualifying a party that opposes defining the state as Jewish is not legitimate, since we are not talking about a democracy defending itself but about blocking the option of having a political debate about the states character. Disqualification on grounds of supporting the armed struggle of a terror group or an enemy state against Israel sounds convincing on paper, but in practice it acts to restrict the ability of Arab MKs to express support for the Palestinian struggle against the occupation, while it does not allow the banning of someone who supports terror against Arabs.
That the Supreme Court overturns these disqualifications is important, but it doesnt protect the Arab representatives from being repeatedly humiliated in the Central Elections Committee and before the court. Moreover, the constant threat of disqualification hovering over their heads creates a chilling effect that restricts their freedom of political action.
Although the elections committee this time also disqualified Marzel, from the time of the banning of the Kach party and its satellites in the late 1980s and early 1990s it has disqualified only Arab MKs. But if the grounds for disqualification are the clauses about denying the democratic nature of the state and incitement to racism, why doesnt it ban Naftali Bennett, Avigdor Lieberman, Benjamin Netanyahu and other candidates who support continuing the occupation regime, which fundamentally undermines democracy and empties it of content?
The prevailing attitude is that those who want to maintain an apartheid regime in the territories, those who call to boycott Arab businesses, and those who are responsible for wars in which hundreds of children and civilians are killed are considered legitimate. The Zoabis and the Kahanists are marked as being on the fringe of legitimacy in a way which hides the fact that those considered the mainstream are responsible for the real problems of democracy, as well as the institutionalization of racism.
Thus, by marking people like Zoabi and sometimes like Marzel as the lunatic fringe, their disqualification becomes a means of legitimizing the anti-democratic and racist perceptions at the heart of Israeli politics, and marking them as normal and acceptable.
http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/.premium-1.642844
That the Supreme Court overturns these disqualifications is important, but it doesnt protect the Arab representatives from being repeatedly humiliated in the Central Elections Committee and before the court. Moreover, the constant threat of disqualification hovering over their heads creates a chilling effect that restricts their freedom of political action.
Although the elections committee this time also disqualified Marzel, from the time of the banning of the Kach party and its satellites in the late 1980s and early 1990s it has disqualified only Arab MKs. But if the grounds for disqualification are the clauses about denying the democratic nature of the state and incitement to racism, why doesnt it ban Naftali Bennett, Avigdor Lieberman, Benjamin Netanyahu and other candidates who support continuing the occupation regime, which fundamentally undermines democracy and empties it of content?
The prevailing attitude is that those who want to maintain an apartheid regime in the territories, those who call to boycott Arab businesses, and those who are responsible for wars in which hundreds of children and civilians are killed are considered legitimate. The Zoabis and the Kahanists are marked as being on the fringe of legitimacy in a way which hides the fact that those considered the mainstream are responsible for the real problems of democracy, as well as the institutionalization of racism.
Thus, by marking people like Zoabi and sometimes like Marzel as the lunatic fringe, their disqualification becomes a means of legitimizing the anti-democratic and racist perceptions at the heart of Israeli politics, and marking them as normal and acceptable.
http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/.premium-1.642844