"But for 30 years, Orthodox leaders have tipped the balance between hawks and doves, and have been in a position to determine who forms a coalition and who runs the country"
About this Quote
Power in politics doesn’t always look like power, and Amos Oz is naming the trick: a bloc that’s numerically modest but structurally indispensable can run the table. “Tipped the balance” is the tell. It frames Orthodox leaders not as a governing majority with a clear mandate, but as ballast on a scale that never settles. In a parliamentary system where coalitions are stitched together from fragments, the smallest piece can become the seam. Oz’s language makes that transactional reality feel slightly scandalous, like a constitutional loophole turned into a long-running business model.
The hawks-and-doves shorthand is doing double duty. It reduces the ideological struggle over war, peace, and territorial compromise to an almost comic binary, then reveals how that binary is less decisive than the arithmetic of coalition-building. The subtext is frustration with a democratic paradox: national fate on existential questions can hinge on parties whose priorities are often not the conflict itself but religious policy, budgets for institutions, exemptions, and control over public norms. “Determine who forms a coalition” sounds procedural; “who runs the country” lands like an indictment.
Context matters: Oz, a leading Israeli novelist and peace advocate, spent decades watching electoral deadlock and razor-thin governments make religious parties permanent kingmakers. He’s not accusing Orthodox voters of illegitimacy; he’s pointing to incentives. When every election produces a near-tie, leverage migrates to whoever can credibly walk away. Oz’s intent is to expose how the center of gravity shifts from public persuasion to backroom bargaining - and how, over time, that quietly reshapes the country’s direction.
The hawks-and-doves shorthand is doing double duty. It reduces the ideological struggle over war, peace, and territorial compromise to an almost comic binary, then reveals how that binary is less decisive than the arithmetic of coalition-building. The subtext is frustration with a democratic paradox: national fate on existential questions can hinge on parties whose priorities are often not the conflict itself but religious policy, budgets for institutions, exemptions, and control over public norms. “Determine who forms a coalition” sounds procedural; “who runs the country” lands like an indictment.
Context matters: Oz, a leading Israeli novelist and peace advocate, spent decades watching electoral deadlock and razor-thin governments make religious parties permanent kingmakers. He’s not accusing Orthodox voters of illegitimacy; he’s pointing to incentives. When every election produces a near-tie, leverage migrates to whoever can credibly walk away. Oz’s intent is to expose how the center of gravity shifts from public persuasion to backroom bargaining - and how, over time, that quietly reshapes the country’s direction.
Quote Details
| Topic | War |
|---|
More Quotes by Amos
Add to List



