There is a common motif that gently interweaves the visit of US President Joe Biden with the Gantz-Sa'ar merger and even touches on Yair Lapid's political project. We could call it the "charisma threat." After the Lapid-style politics' abuse of the ideological debate, which is the life and soul of any vibrant democracy, it's time to isolate the chemical element – support by the majority.
Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram
It has to be admitted that the Biden visit met with apathy here. Despite the concerted efforts by his hosts in Israel's leadership to market it as a formative national event, and despite the reporters' excitement at the sight of the presidential convoy. It might be the political crisis that colors everything in propaganda, or the clarity of the American president's interests. But more than anything else, it's apparently the knowledge that the distinguished guest is what's known as a "weak president," one who is losing support. There is no point in pretending that a star the likes of Barack Obama or Donald Trump is here to spread intercontinental stardust. Formally, he is the president of the biggest superpower in the western world and our best friend. In reality, it's less of a thrill because of the sense that it's not a leader of historic proportions who is visiting, but rather – with all due respect – a consensus candidate who managed to lead an emergency vote against Trumpism. And the truth is, the exact same thing can be said about his host.
This is the same sense that arose from the press briefing that announced that the Blue and White and New Hope political corporations would be merging. Formally, this is a move that could turn out to be important to the political system, but in reality, there was no sense of a "big bang." It wasn't Ariel Sharon founding Kadima, or even Ehud Barak leaving Labor to found his own party. This was a union of functionaries, nothing more.
Here, too, it was about charisma, or more precisely, the lack of it. Neither Gantz nor Sa'ar is managing to gain traction in the public's mind as the future of the nation's leadership. Gantz somehow retains his military glory, which has also waned. But with Sa'ar, it looks like the fact is that the public simply isn't following him.
We need to note a political pattern that is growing more common in which the "genius chess player" image attributed to figures like Zeev Elkin or Gideon Sa'ar does not come with a charismatic presence. Everything rests on calculations, addition, subtraction, multiplication and division. Everything is built on cunning. Political intrigue is replacing electoral success, not just serving it.
This applies to Yair Lapid, too. True, compared to Sa'ar he enjoys genuine support, but it's limited in scope. Let's put thing in proportion – he doesn't approach Netanyahu's leadership presence, even though on paper he has potential. Twenty seats isn't bad, but there's no coherent bloc behind him. Gantz and Sa'ar expressed their opinion of him by announcing that Gantz was their candidate prime minister, and the only person in Labor who had acknowledged that he sees Lapid as prime minister is bloc leader Omer Barlev. That's it.
This means that Lapid also knows that the qualities pundits ascribe to him, like hard work and patience have nothing to do with his ability to be seen as a leader, but rather his ability to play the cards he was dealt through the slow erosion of the Netanyahu bloc. It's true that we're heading toward a face-off between two blocs, but when it comes to personalities, there is no real "Lapid vs. Netanyahu," because there isn't so much a "Yes to Lapid" as there is a "No to Netanyahu."
Charisma, the type Netanyahu embodies, has recently been framed as vital and unique to dangerous populism. Netanyahu doesn't "convince" so much as he enchants, and his attraction is seen as poisonous. The popular support itself is seen as evil tidings.
Of course, this is a nice way for people like Hendel, Sa'ar, Hauser, and Elkin to rectify the contradiction between how they see themselves and their actual public weight. Look at how deep and nuanced Yoaz Hendel's expression "A mentality of drums vs. a concert mentality" is. Sweeping charisma like Netanyahu's is identified with the masses and a low common denominator. Thus, the unpopular is painted as high-quality and complex.
This is a mistake. Leadership charisma isn't about the candidate's ability to charm, or mislead a captive audience. We must not fall victim to discourse that identifies "charisma" with "demagoguery" or "populism." Charisma is the ability to be seen by much of the public as a true representative of their feelings and a figure who accurately reflects their system of values.
This is an important element in politics, because a leader with a charismatic presence expresses a broad national sentiment, perhaps one that is disputed, but broad enough to ensure that the leadership has legitimacy. The fact is that all the talk about a "parliamentary majority" didn't help the "government of change," because it lacked the elementary ingredient we've now learned that democracies find it difficult to function without: respect for the decision of the majority.
Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories!
