An ongoing trope of the Netanyahu government since the war on judicial 'reform' began is that the majority spoke when they voted a religious-right-wing government to power last November 1st. The campaign to thwart the government's plan to sterilize and politicize Israeli courts is nothing more than an attempt to challenge the will of the people. The religious right-wing government does indeed have a decisive 64-seat majority in the Knesset, but this does not quite reflect how Israelis vote. Taking into account the actual votes, including the “wasted” votes by the parties that did not pass the electoral threshold, the four coalition parties received 48.4 percent of the vote . This was barely more than the 48.9 percent that the centre-left and Arab parties won . Such an election result does not imply a mandate to move forward with far-reaching judicial moves that half and perhaps more of the country oppose. But more importantly, even in modern democracies where every adult has one vote, the social and political reality is that some voters have more power than others, and they can and do use it long after the polls are closed. One vote, relative influence A high-tech investor and CEO of a large corporation only has one vote when he goes to the polls, but he has far more “votes”, or rather, much more political influence, thanks to his ability to create jobs. and boosts the economy. The same is true for prominent political activists, journalists, scientists, engineers and intellectuals who did not receive more than one vote on election day, but whose contributions to the economy and society make their ideas important. They are the people who made Israel the strong, prosperous and technologically innovative country it is today. Of course, not all of this elite is against the overhaul of the judiciary. However, the survey figures give an idea of ​​the socioeconomic divide between those who support the changes and those who oppose them. In short, they show that support for judicial reform increases and average income decreases as you move to the right and religiosity across the political spectrum. The trend on the left is a little more complex but basically follows the same trajectories in the opposite direction. Thus, a poll conducted last summer by the Israel Democracy Institute found that 40.4 percent of voters who self-identified as right-wing reported below-average incomes . Meanwhile, a separate IDI poll conducted earlier this month showed that support for judicial "reform" was overwhelmingly on the right, with up to 86 percent of United Torah Judaism voters. 40.6 percent of those identifying with the moderate left reported higher-than-average incomes, compared to 37.1 percent of those on the left . Support for judicial reform falls into single digits among left and centre-left parties, according to the IDI poll. The survey almost certainly underestimates the size of the socioeconomic gap. This is because the average gross monthly income in Israel is about 11,900 shekels ; this means that the range of below-average incomes is much narrower than that of above-average incomes, which can easily reach tens of thousands of shekels for higher incomes. - to hundreds of thousands of people for tech workers and CEOs and the like. Herein lies Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's problem: The election gave him and his religious and right-wing allies a clear majority in the Knesset, but basically lacks the support for judicial reform among the people who run Israel. Netanyahu may have ignored the rallies in Tel Aviv, but when high-tech leaders, bankers, economists and business people voice their opposition, it's time for him to worry. Not that kind of ideologue Its far-right and ultra-Orthodox associates are more concerned with supporting their ideological vision and serving their constituents. But Netanyahu is not that kind of ideologue. He is more interested in creating a militarily and economically strong country. Settlers do not attract billions of dollars of foreign investment each year, the Haredim lack the training and skills to serve in elite high-tech units of the military, and Saudi Arabia will not normalize relations with Israel because it craves for products returning to Israel. by Israel's low-tech industries. This goes a long way in explaining why the government suddenly started talking about negotiations and reconciliation. Netanyahu and his allies want to characterize the opposition as leftists, but that's not what defines the opposition. If it were, the real left would not complain that the protests did not address the occupation and other to-do items on the left's agenda. What defines opposition to "judicial reform" is a shared concern that components of Israel's success are under threat. At a conference hosted by OurCrowd venture capital investment platform on Wednesday, US Ambassador Thomas Nides explained it all: "You're doing one thing right, okay? The judiciary that allows innovation, technology, monetization, quality to thrive, has been in place for a long time, and that's what happened." Israel's "elite" - let's call it 20 percent, because in this case it's not strictly limited to 1 percent - voted at the polls and re-voted through protests, open letters, and other appeals to the government. If the reforms pass intact, or pass pretty much the way they are now, these people have other ways to "vote" against him. While judicial reform can act as a catalyst for a fundamental change in the character of Israeli society that can happen over time, it need not necessarily come in the form of emigration. Most likely, it will manifest itself through indifference or apathy - an astute high school student trying to leave military service, an investor who prefers to invest his money abroad, or a potential entrepreneur who does not want to take the risk of starting a company. new business. Russia shows how this can happen. Post-communist Russia has never succeeded in creating a stable, thriving democracy, and fundamental freedoms have been steadily curtailed under Vladimir Putin. Big business was the domain of oligarchs and partisans; The hi-tech sector has never approached its full potential, despite a large number of scientific and engineering talents. The best and brightest Russians mostly chose to stay, even if circumstances prevented them from making the most of their talents and talents. For many, however, the invasion of Ukraine was the last straw—a sign for them that their country was desperately headed in the wrong direction. And they leave in droves, handing Russia over to an even more bleak economic future.