Who controls the country after the elections? The struggle tearing the Likud apart from within | Prof. Moshe Cohen Eliya
Prof. Moshe Cohen-Eliya analyzes the Likud primaries as a struggle between a statist approach emphasizing trust in institutions and a populist approach emphasizing popular sovereignty. He places the struggle in the global context of the rise of populist right, and warns of two dangers: anti-democratic populism and elitism that bypasses the voter's decision.
Prof. Moshe Cohen-Eliya analyzes in his opinion column the results of the Likud primaries as a struggle between two concepts of power, not just between personal styles. According to him, the struggle is between a 'statist' approach that emphasizes trust in professional and unelected institutions, and a populist approach that demands returning sovereignty to the people and to elected institutions. He places the change in a global context, noting movements like 'Alternative for Germany', 'Reform UK' and MAGA in the US, which grew against the backdrop of a sense of detachment of working classes and periphery from elites. The author quotes Prof. Noam Gidron, who described the Likud as a center-right party that became populist to an unusual degree, but argues that this can be seen as a democratic backlash. He warns of two dangers: anti-democratic populism that claims exclusive representation of the 'true people', and elitism that sees itself as the sole understander of the public interest. The article ends with a call not to confuse style with the identity of the sovereign.