What’s the alternative to Netanyahu’s government?

It's not that straightforward, really.

Under the current far-right government, legislation has been advanced that would probably stop "non-zionist" [read: ethnic equality] parties from even contesting elections. This may arguably see parties such as Hadash-Ta'al (progressive left and Palestinian Israelis) unable to compete at all.

Then you have stuff such as The Democrats - a merger between Meretz and Ha'voda (basically Israeli Labour; once the overwhelmingly dominant force in Israeli politics; Golda Meir, Yitzhak Rabin, Simon Peres, Ehud Barack and, for that matter: current president Herzog? All Labour figures!).

But those are at best mildly critical of current state conduct. When Yair Golan, Democrats leader, issued a sharp statement against what was happening in Gaza that included the phrase "killing children as a hobby" the internal backlash was so harsh that he did a more or less immediate correction to "I obviously only meant the government and not the IDF whose soldiers do the actual shooting".

Then you have figures like Benny Gantz and Gadi Eisenkot (both briefly part of the war cabinet during the ongoing situation), Avigdor Lieberman (once considered hard right - overtaken by the current lot). They are by and large no less hardline but prefer softer or slightly softer rhetoric.

No good prospects in sight, I'm afraid.

Israel has had almost 80 years ‘to see how far it can go’.

Long before smart phones, SM and 24 hour news channels were invented.

They could have ethnically cleansed all the Palestinians out of Gaza and the West Bank in 1967.

Annexed them.

Could have not left Gaza in 2005 and allowed them free elections and autonomy to elect Hamas.

Could have refused Palestinians access to Jerusalem.

They could have blocked the internet and mobile data signal over Gaza in Oct 2023.

They could have cut off electricity and refused to let aid in at all.

Refused to allow international doctors to fly into Israel to treat Gazans.

They probably wouldn’t have been condemned much more than they are now.

Why do you think they didn’t?

One awful consequence might be that Israel will be emboldened by the lack of any substantial measures taken against it by the west. I'm sure that it has been monitoring closely the amount of opprobrium it's been receiving and using that to help determine how far it can go.
Israel has realised that with pretty solid support from the US it doesn't really need to worry about any bleating from Europe and it has, more or less, a free rein. It doesn't bode well.

How on earth would most of us know enough about internal Israeli politics to be able to give a meaningful answer? One of the biggest curses of this whole subject is everyone and her bloody mother has an opinion, and usually an entrenched and ill-informed one. And what follows from that is often ridiculius extrapolations like there's 'no way that Israel will go down a less extremist path in the near future'

Please tell us how you know that with such certainty?
Show less

Nope, still doesn’t add to me having read his history.

If it was Trump we were talking about, you might have a point.

I don’t think the war crimes charges against him are valid, unless you apply the same charges to every leader in history who has responded to a clear act of war.

Look at Iraq where wasn’t even an act of war.

It doesn’t stack up. A true narcissist would have thrown the towel in by now, saved their own skin, and let someone else take the flak.

The corruption charges, if proven, are minor, compared to what he’s been accused of since.

@ConscientiousObserver
I agree with a lot of what you say. He does present as a genocidal psychopath who has brought disgrace on both Israel and Judaism. This has resulted in the bigoted and stupid of the world seeing Israel's acts as representing Judaism, and as a consequence igniting antisemitism amongst the ignorant.
As for doing the above to maintain power, well, self obsessed narcissists like him will do anything to preserve their skins. And being the kind of person he is, he in no way acknowledges that any of the charges against him are valid. Bibi believes he is innocent and that the west should be grateful to Israel for doing its dirty work in tackling the problems of the region..

I disagree with your assertion that he is the most hated man in Israel. Just look at the polls, where he still has a great deal of support.

Maybe you could explain this argument to me -

Netanyahu is continuing to commit war crimes and constant breaches of international law, to enable himself to be painted as a genocidal psychopathic monster, the most hated man in Israel and globally, who’s life will be under threat for the rest of it and who also faces spending it in The Hague as a war criminal. Not only that he has deliberately ruined his country’s reputation in the world stage, put Israel’s survival at risk and put all Jewish people around the world at risk of persecution and harm.

He did that all that just to escape minor corruption charges which would at most have put him in prison for a few years and then he’d retire anyway. He’s 74.

Does that make much sense to you?

Nobody forced Netanyahu to get into bed with the far right and the ultra orthodox. He did it because it was the only way that he could remain in power. Although he may maintain that "defending Israel" or "returning the hostages" are his priorities, in reality saving his own skin is actually at the top of his agenda. I'm surprised more people don't see that.

It's interesting that that's your interpretation.

Do you think many countries are worrying who will be the next leader in your own country, and do you wonder why they're so invested?
Unless of course you are in US, Russia or China....and then they might be understandably interested in how the political process will change the rest of the world.

It's interesting that not a single person can answer the OPs question. It looks like there really is no way that Israel will go down a less extremist path in the near future at least.

Maybe we should be focusing more on a government for the Palestinian people as this can’t go on any longer, let alone Hamas trying to stay in power.

This is a link to a documentary made with Palestinians, assumably from before the current conflict -

https://x.com/rehoov/status/1952267684529221697

What I found particularly eye opening was Palestinian’s saying that flour was much cheaper and roads got repaired quicker under Israel.

Ah to a point but most voters are pretty clued up on who the parties are going to go into coalition with if they need to. I can't speak for Israel I've not followed their elections but I'd be surprised if people voting for the Likud party didn't have some idea who they'd bring into government with them and who they'd give ministries too.

Yes, I agree, that is one of the main arguments for PR. But the flip side, if you like, is disproportionate influence of parties you don't support because they too have a voice.

I'm still not sure exactly who considers it 'more democratic'.
Maybe I've used the wrong terminology rather than more democratic it should be a better ranked electoral system. I've been a voter in a fptp system and a pr system and as a voter I felt my voted had more clout and went further in the PR system I voted in. I would be very conscious of what a privilege the right to vote is and would always use my vote but the fptp system really left me feeling there was little point because of the constituency I was in.
My initial response on this was to a poster that was very negative about the system and I was challenging that. At the end of the day if voters feel their vote can mean something and make a change that is what matters most and leads to more active and engaged citizens, apathy is not good for any democracy.

They can't afford to be complacent, but neither can any other minority in that region. War on home territory is a fading memory for most of Western Europe. Scandinavia and former soviet bloc countries are a little twitchier. Imo of course.

I think you're probably right. Its widely recognised that societies at war behave differently to those at peace, and its human nature to some extent.

I'm still not sure exactly who considers it 'more democratic'. The electoral reform society does, obviously. Lots of countries who use various PR systems do rank highly in various rankings linked to being functioning democratic societies but it seems to me people argue a lot about what system is best and how democratic each really is. Effective democracy is about other things too like level of political engagement, civic education, free press, which affect how the democratic will of the people is exercised and how you stop extremists have disproportionate and therefore undemocratic influence.

PR may work in some countries (tends to lead to stagnant governments who struggle to effect change) but I would tender that Israel is a special case at the moment.

I've read up on different rankings from different sources and it tends to come out on top. Of course that's not conclusive which is why I said it is "considered to be" not that it was. I referenced in my post that there are a number of different systems under the umbrella of PR no need to repeat that back to me.

I only visited the country a few times, work purposes, and short visits only but that ties in with the impression I picked up..

Socially it can be very very liberal but scratch the surface and you sense the steeliness.

Priority number one is national survival..

PR is considered the most democratic system worldwide.
I'm wondering how you come to that conclusion? Who has decided that and what authority do they have? Which PR system are you referring to as there are several different ones?

There are lots of ways in which PR can be profoundly undemocratic, and Israel is a good example of that. e.g.where extremists make deals to keep a party in power but there is no accountability for those deals.

They vote right leaning because those are the parties strong on defence, and Israelis feel under existential threat
Most Israelis are socially liberal.

I think that's quite a simplistic take on the PR electoral systems. There are over 90 countries using PR worldwide, to suggest it is the electoral system that results in far right extremists in government is disingenuous. PR is considered the most democratic system worldwide. There are though different systems used that all come under the PR umbrella

There are enough far right ultra frum AND illiberal Arab Muslims in the population
They get elected and Netanyahu chooses to form a coalition with them to get into government.

Yes, how can you negotiate with that.