Guest Post by RaP The media and PR repercussions from the by-now watershed appearance by Yair Lapid in the Knesset
youtube are still being discussed and analyzed. The Charedi press is portraying it as a manifestation of doom and gloom and part of the new "decrees" that Charedim are being subjected to, even though not just Charedim but many other sectors will see cuts in funding. Lapid faced a torrent of attacks from the Ashkenazi Charedi Degel HaTorah faction Knesset party members, particularly Rabbis Gafni, Porush, Litzman and Eichler who are all very skilled debaters of the OLD SCHOOL in their own right but somehow came across as the "losers" in the face-off with Lapid because they were not ready for the ambush he laid for them: A suave TV and media personality acting in the role of "ringmaster" who deliberately unleashes an act that he knows will unfold with screaming and shouting. Lapid junior does not ooze the evident anger and hostility of the old-timer Lapid senior who came across as a vengeful old man. Lapid the younger is your typical Israeli yuppie who are tired of the Charedim making demands of the Israeli nanny state. Western countries are all broke now, and Israel is headed in the same direction willy-nilly if it does not save itself now.
What the Degel HaTorah party members, and the other Charedim who are there, do not realize is that the role of the Knesset has changed. Just like the American political conventions, it is now all about theater and not substance, and the better showman aware of the best angles and prepared with the sharpest soundbites wins. Real deals are made off-camera behind closed doors, board-room style, but PUBLIC OPINION is always up for grabs. That is how Ronald Reagan buried Jimmy Carter, even though Carter had the reputedly genius IQ while the less sharp Reagan knew how to position himself in front of the camera and came equipped with his amusing catchy quotes and was the obvious master of how and when to deliver them with the most devastating effect AS THE TV CAMERAS WERE ROLLING.
Charedim MUST wake up to the new reality of what they are up against. PR people and kiruv type "salesmen" are now needed. Let's see Rabbis like Berel Wein (a former lawyer) or Uri Zohar (a former TV star) who WITH WIT AND HUMOR know how to confront and deal with hostile questions that are meant to attack Yiddishkeit.
The recent news that the Sefardi Shas party will now be headed by Aryeh Deri, re-appointed by the Sefardi gedolim, is an indication that on some level there are expectations that "the good old days" can somehow be restored and the gravy train will somehow start rolling again. That is a strategic mistake. It's a new situation now that calls for new responses and so far the Charedi parties are falling back on old credos and personas to "get things done" but as the confrontation with Lapid shows, nothing will get done beyond tantrums and throwbacks to names from the past, to somehow bring back the "good old days"! But those days are gone now. They will not be back for a very long time. As they say, "that was then, this is now"!
Charedim will have to learn to STOP asking secular people, many of them are in fact NON-Jews Halachicaly, for financial bailouts. Charedim have enough numbers in Israel and enough leadership to begin to map out a strategy of INDEPENDENCE from the Chilonim. Just as the old Yishuv prior to 1948 while still under British Mandate rule, under occupation of a vast force of British soldiers and police, had to start to figure out how they would live independently without the British -- and secular Israeli Jews will have to learn, just as the British had to learn that they could never force the Jews to bend to their will by threats of military force or government decrees or even imprisonment of the Jewish leaders.
That is why Charedim need to come up with plans to establish PR teams who understand what PUBLIC OPINION is and how to use the media and the CAMERA and not just rely on old-fashioned beis medrash style "debates between chavrusas" that are great for the
milchamta shel Torah but comes across as a "barbaric" tactic when up against the super-cool Lapid, who is not even that heated up against religion, as he tells it, while the Charedim seem like they are the ones that hate everyone when they scream away in front of cameras that then broadcast it all over the net and the world.
See how Yair Lapid responds to his treatment in this article that he has published himself, it is VERY hard to refute what he has to say here:
http://www.jewishpress.com/indepth/opinions/thats-just-how-it-is-in-the-knesset/2013/05/01/0/
The Jewish Press: " 'That's Just How It Is In the Knesset'
Rabbi Gafni is a complex person. Most of the time in the plenum he acts haughty, but the moment he is away from the cameras he becomes a sweet, reasonable person.
By: Yair Lapid
(Latest update: May 2nd, 2013)
Last week, a few minutes after my stormy exchange with haredi members of Knesset, I went to what we in the Knesset call the “back cafeteria.” It is not exactly a cafeteria but rather a lounge area behind the plenum where members of Knesset alone can enter.
There are couches and chairs, a smoking room, an espresso machine, and a large plasma TV that broadcasts the Knesset channel. This is the place where Knesset members can rest a little, gossip, close deals, and even develop friendships far from the public eye.
I took a coffee and sat with two fellow Yesh Atid MKs, Rena Frenkel and Yifat Kariv, who were still short of breath from the emotions that had just been unleashed in the plenum. After a minute, UTJ MK Rabbi Moshe Gafni, whom I had engaged in most of the debate, appeared next to us.
Gafni is a complex person. Most of the time in the plenum he acts haughty, attacking and shouting – a “hero of interruptions” who is equipped, as I mentioned from the podium, with a very strong pair of lungs that enable him to deafen you without a microphone.
But the moment he is away from the cameras he becomes a sweet, reasonable person whom you can come to agreements with regarding laws and committee work. In my eyes, and apparently in his as well, this is not duplicitous. When one is in the plenum, one is a representative of the public. When one is in the back cafeteria, one can be a human being.
“You are making a mistake, Rabbi Gafni,” I told him.
“Regarding what?” he asked.
“Regarding the debate.”
“Why?”
“Listen,” I said. “Tomorrow I am ascending the stage at the National Institute for National Security Studies in Tel Aviv to give my first comprehensive speech as finance minister. I am going to present the principles of the economic policies I plan to present to the government, to provide details regarding my vision for Israeli society, and to explain for the first time the reforms the finance ministry is planning to pass in the Economic Arrangement Law. ”
“So what was the mistake?” Gafni asked.
“The mistake,” I answered, “is that from every perspective it would be better for me to present this speech in the Knesset. In my view, it is more democratic and more fitting that members of Knesset be the first to hear from the finance minister regarding his financial program rather than reading about it the next day in the newspaper.”
“You are very right,” said Gafni, “so why don’t you do that?”
“Because your faction won’t let me even complete the first sentence,” I said. “We both know precisely what will happen. I will start to speak, you will begin to scream, and I won’t succeed in explaining anything. An economic plan is complex and it deserves to have a real discourse and thoughtful dialogue based on facts and realities. I need twenty-five minutes to explain the budget and I don’t think it is too much to ask MKs to listen with seriousness and without interruptions for twenty-five minutes to something that will set the course for the country’s economy.
“If you would agree to give me this opportunity, I am prepared to sit afterward for six straight hours, to listen to your side regarding every detail in the budget, to take notes, and to look into every issue with seriousness and in good faith.”
“It doesn’t work that way,” said Gafni.
“Why not?”
“Because that’s just how it is in the Knesset.”
“What kind of answer is that? If that is so, then we need to change it.”
“It won’t work.”
“But don’t you agree with me,” I insisted, “that this is how it should work? That this will bring honor to the Knesset and to ourselves?”
“It could be,” Gafni said with hesitation.
“So I want to challenge you,” I said. “Go to the members of the opposition and get them organized. Tell them the time has come to change the rules of the game and create a new discourse. We will establish a couple of hours without interruptions from the floor and I will listen to you and you will listen to me. Perhaps a dialogue will emerge that will make us better. Want to try?”
“I’ll get back to you,” Gafni said with a smile.
Of course he never got back to me, and it appears he won’t. What a shame. It could be different, and “that’s just how it is in the Knesset” is a weak excuse for us not to be able to restore the lost honor of our scarred parliament."
