Patty Hearst was the granddaughter of millionaire media tycoon, Randolph Hearst. In 1974, she was kidnapped by an extreme-left organization, the SLA. They demanded six million dollars for her release. The Hearst family paid the ransom, but Patty didn't come home.
After an analysis of the Likud Central Committee vote in which Sharon succeeded in fending off an attempt to oust him, I was reminded of the Patty Hearst story, which psychologists have named the "Patty Hearst Syndrome". Patty Hearst didn't come home, not because her kidnappers didn't keep their end of the deal; she didn't come home because she chose to join them.
The Israeli Patty Hearst Syndrome doesn't begin with Ariel Sharon and the Disengagement. It begins immediately after the Six Day War. The national unity government of Levi Eshkol and Menachem Begin didn't really know what to do with the expanses of the Land of Israel that had fallen so unexpectedly into its hands. The general public was enthralled with the new, yet familiar, Biblical landscapes. Eric Lavi composed a hit song, "See, Mother Rachel, your children have returned to their Land", and the first movement advocating our rights in the entire Land of Israel was started by authors, poets and intellectuals -- all from the Labor party. They were the left-wing of that era.
But the great emotional outpouring did not translate into Israeli sovereignty over the newly liberated homeland. Instead, the subsequent leftist governments quietly allowed Gush Emunim to build new settlements. These governments even initiated some of the settlements.
The extreme-left of those days did not just sit quietly. Although it never represented the Jewish majority in Israel, it was always much better than the Right at taking control of the country's power bases, thus compensating for its small numbers. By the time of the Oslo Accords, the extreme-left already controlled all the power bases in Israel's cultural and media establishments, the court system, the economy and security. When Yitzchak Rabin shook Yasser Arafat's hand, Israelis -- and the rest of the world -- were astonished. But in reality, this was just the unveiling of Israel's new political face after the extreme-left had totally overpowered the consciousness of the much more centrist Zionistic Left.
At first glance, it seems that this new situation created a balance of power -- the "peace" camp against the national camp. But this balance was strictly political. The "peace" camp had all the power in its hands, and it knew how to use it. The national camp found itself eternally on the defensive. The right-wing politicians caught on quickly, and understood where the carrot and where the stick were positioned in the Israeli reality. They learned where to turn to get positive media coverage, against whom criminal charges were investigated and which laws the Supreme Court tended to reject. True, it was easier to be elected as a representative of the Right, as most of the voters were right-wing, but in order to survive in politics, the politicians preferred to turn their backs on their voters and to insinuate to the Left that they were willing to make a deal.
Ariel Sharon was one of the strongest right-wing politicians, an ardent hawk. He even managed to hijack the entire arsenal of the Left and to survive. At least, that is what he thought. But it seems that at some point after the Lebanon war, Sharon understood that he could not really overpower the Left and the power bases behind it. When he finally became prime minister, Sharon decided to finish off his career as an adored victor. All that he had to do to achieve his goal was to join the strong people.
Sharon is our own home-grown Patty Hearst. He no longer has to fear police investigation and other pressures of the Left, just as Patty no longer had to fear her kidnappers. Sharon simply internalized the Left's ideology. Today, he implements it with identification and faith in the righteousness of the Left's goals.
Sharon's determined leadership justifiably garners admiration. But we must see his leadership qualities in their proper perspective. Sharon knows how to lord over the weak -- over the despised "lowlifes" (as Omri Sharon referred to them) of the Likud Central Committee and over the naive settlers of Gush Katif. When it comes to dealing with the strong power bases -- the Israeli Left and the Hamas -- Sharon changes his tune. Then, "self restraint is the true power."
As soon as he became prime minister, Sharon, backed by the power bases of the Left, activated his new, determined leadership. In no time, he found himself directly opposed to his own voters, the people of the national camp. When he ignored the Likud members' referendum and the decisions of the Likud Central Committee, it seemed that his chances to be re-elected were very slim. But Sharon, himself a willing victim of the Patty Hearst Syndrome, understood how to turn his opponents into enthusiastic supporters. He understood that if he would consistently win, most of the public would be swayed to his side. After all, everybody likes to go with a winner.
Until the sensitive and determined pogrom in Gush Katif was actually perpetrated, a strong and frustrated national camp stood firmly against Sharon. As soon as the pogrom was successfully and easily carried out (with a little help from Sharon's friends within the settler camp), Sharon swept the entire national camp far into the reaches of the extreme-left. The Likud, as an expression of the Jewish majority in Israel, and the Likud Central Committee as its representative, expressed this erosion in its recent vote. Likud Central Committee members, some obviously religious, danced ecstatically after the victory of the man who led to the destruction of the synagogues of Gush Katif. Patty Hearst would have been proud.
With the defeat of the faithful public at the Likud Central Committee, the extreme-left completed its slow process of domination over Israeli society. They gained control over all the power bases in Israel without regard for who had won the elections. While the consciousness of the national camp had still remained essentially unfettered, Sharon has now put an end to that, as well. While before the Disengagement it was still possible to wage a determined battle, the only option open to the faithful public after the Disengagement is to protest. The conflict is no longer between the national camp and the Left, but between the settler camp and the rest of the nation.
The implications of this analysis are difficult to digest. Many settlements are in immediate danger. It is almost impossible to oppose any further Disengagement, as it has become the will of the majority. But the orange public has a great and decisive advantage. Reality. Ten years of bloodshed and economic plight brought the Israeli public out of the Oslo-induced stupor and into the right-wing camp. The Disengagement (far more dangerous than Oslo) is liable to stir up terrible anti-Semitism in the world, and to cause a bloodbath and economic hardships never before experienced in Israel.
For months, the Israeli media brainwashed the Israeli public with the Disengagement Festival. But in the process, the public was exposed to the one sector that it could really count on. The average Israeli sitting in front of his TV set saw idealistic people -- modest, willing to make sacrifices, children and their parents prepared to fight for their principles. Despite all the character assassination perpetrated against the settlers by the media, the image of the one sector to whom the Israeli public can turn when the current elites jump ship was seared deep into their unconscious.
It took ten years for Israel to snap out of Oslo. It is unclear how long it will take for us to snap out of the Disengagement. But paradoxically, although Israel is trying so hard to eliminate the "orange public", it is specifically this public that is their only chance to survive. And they know it!
When the time comes the "orange public" will lead.
After an analysis of the Likud Central Committee vote in which Sharon succeeded in fending off an attempt to oust him, I was reminded of the Patty Hearst story, which psychologists have named the "Patty Hearst Syndrome". Patty Hearst didn't come home, not because her kidnappers didn't keep their end of the deal; she didn't come home because she chose to join them.
The Israeli Patty Hearst Syndrome doesn't begin with Ariel Sharon and the Disengagement. It begins immediately after the Six Day War. The national unity government of Levi Eshkol and Menachem Begin didn't really know what to do with the expanses of the Land of Israel that had fallen so unexpectedly into its hands. The general public was enthralled with the new, yet familiar, Biblical landscapes. Eric Lavi composed a hit song, "See, Mother Rachel, your children have returned to their Land", and the first movement advocating our rights in the entire Land of Israel was started by authors, poets and intellectuals -- all from the Labor party. They were the left-wing of that era.
But the great emotional outpouring did not translate into Israeli sovereignty over the newly liberated homeland. Instead, the subsequent leftist governments quietly allowed Gush Emunim to build new settlements. These governments even initiated some of the settlements.
The extreme-left of those days did not just sit quietly. Although it never represented the Jewish majority in Israel, it was always much better than the Right at taking control of the country's power bases, thus compensating for its small numbers. By the time of the Oslo Accords, the extreme-left already controlled all the power bases in Israel's cultural and media establishments, the court system, the economy and security. When Yitzchak Rabin shook Yasser Arafat's hand, Israelis -- and the rest of the world -- were astonished. But in reality, this was just the unveiling of Israel's new political face after the extreme-left had totally overpowered the consciousness of the much more centrist Zionistic Left.
At first glance, it seems that this new situation created a balance of power -- the "peace" camp against the national camp. But this balance was strictly political. The "peace" camp had all the power in its hands, and it knew how to use it. The national camp found itself eternally on the defensive. The right-wing politicians caught on quickly, and understood where the carrot and where the stick were positioned in the Israeli reality. They learned where to turn to get positive media coverage, against whom criminal charges were investigated and which laws the Supreme Court tended to reject. True, it was easier to be elected as a representative of the Right, as most of the voters were right-wing, but in order to survive in politics, the politicians preferred to turn their backs on their voters and to insinuate to the Left that they were willing to make a deal.
Ariel Sharon was one of the strongest right-wing politicians, an ardent hawk. He even managed to hijack the entire arsenal of the Left and to survive. At least, that is what he thought. But it seems that at some point after the Lebanon war, Sharon understood that he could not really overpower the Left and the power bases behind it. When he finally became prime minister, Sharon decided to finish off his career as an adored victor. All that he had to do to achieve his goal was to join the strong people.
Sharon is our own home-grown Patty Hearst. He no longer has to fear police investigation and other pressures of the Left, just as Patty no longer had to fear her kidnappers. Sharon simply internalized the Left's ideology. Today, he implements it with identification and faith in the righteousness of the Left's goals.
Sharon's determined leadership justifiably garners admiration. But we must see his leadership qualities in their proper perspective. Sharon knows how to lord over the weak -- over the despised "lowlifes" (as Omri Sharon referred to them) of the Likud Central Committee and over the naive settlers of Gush Katif. When it comes to dealing with the strong power bases -- the Israeli Left and the Hamas -- Sharon changes his tune. Then, "self restraint is the true power."
As soon as he became prime minister, Sharon, backed by the power bases of the Left, activated his new, determined leadership. In no time, he found himself directly opposed to his own voters, the people of the national camp. When he ignored the Likud members' referendum and the decisions of the Likud Central Committee, it seemed that his chances to be re-elected were very slim. But Sharon, himself a willing victim of the Patty Hearst Syndrome, understood how to turn his opponents into enthusiastic supporters. He understood that if he would consistently win, most of the public would be swayed to his side. After all, everybody likes to go with a winner.
Until the sensitive and determined pogrom in Gush Katif was actually perpetrated, a strong and frustrated national camp stood firmly against Sharon. As soon as the pogrom was successfully and easily carried out (with a little help from Sharon's friends within the settler camp), Sharon swept the entire national camp far into the reaches of the extreme-left. The Likud, as an expression of the Jewish majority in Israel, and the Likud Central Committee as its representative, expressed this erosion in its recent vote. Likud Central Committee members, some obviously religious, danced ecstatically after the victory of the man who led to the destruction of the synagogues of Gush Katif. Patty Hearst would have been proud.
With the defeat of the faithful public at the Likud Central Committee, the extreme-left completed its slow process of domination over Israeli society. They gained control over all the power bases in Israel without regard for who had won the elections. While the consciousness of the national camp had still remained essentially unfettered, Sharon has now put an end to that, as well. While before the Disengagement it was still possible to wage a determined battle, the only option open to the faithful public after the Disengagement is to protest. The conflict is no longer between the national camp and the Left, but between the settler camp and the rest of the nation.
The implications of this analysis are difficult to digest. Many settlements are in immediate danger. It is almost impossible to oppose any further Disengagement, as it has become the will of the majority. But the orange public has a great and decisive advantage. Reality. Ten years of bloodshed and economic plight brought the Israeli public out of the Oslo-induced stupor and into the right-wing camp. The Disengagement (far more dangerous than Oslo) is liable to stir up terrible anti-Semitism in the world, and to cause a bloodbath and economic hardships never before experienced in Israel.
For months, the Israeli media brainwashed the Israeli public with the Disengagement Festival. But in the process, the public was exposed to the one sector that it could really count on. The average Israeli sitting in front of his TV set saw idealistic people -- modest, willing to make sacrifices, children and their parents prepared to fight for their principles. Despite all the character assassination perpetrated against the settlers by the media, the image of the one sector to whom the Israeli public can turn when the current elites jump ship was seared deep into their unconscious.
It took ten years for Israel to snap out of Oslo. It is unclear how long it will take for us to snap out of the Disengagement. But paradoxically, although Israel is trying so hard to eliminate the "orange public", it is specifically this public that is their only chance to survive. And they know it!
When the time comes the "orange public" will lead.