Talk:Otzma Yehudit/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

The term far-right form an opinion

I saw that other parties in Israel which are far-left are not stated as such. The term far-right is taken from a times article which expresses the view of the writer. I suggest to replace far-right political party to "right-wing political party with non compromising Jewish Zionist agenda" which is the way the party describes itself.

Name of the party

The page should be the name of the party in Hebrew since there is no official confirmation otherwise. The Likud's name is not anglicized, neither is HaTenuah. --Shuki (talk) 20:59, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

Which is the most common orthography -- in English language sources -- for the party's name? Otzma LeYisrael, Otzma Leyisrael, or Otzma Le'Yisrael? I'm seeing all three from Google News results. 84.203.34.169 (talk) 22:29, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Suggested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved. Staberinde (talk) 08:25, 18 February 2013 (UTC) (non-admin closure)


Otzma LeYisrael → Otzma Leyisrael – Common name in English, as evinced in the majority of reliable sources. While actual usage is very mixed -- I've seen Otzma Leyisrael, Otzma Le'Yisrael, Otzma le'Yisrael, Otzma Le-yisrael, you pretty much name it -- it appears that The Times of Israel, Haaretz and AFP use Otzma Leyisrael consistently (as far as I know), while Ynetnews uses the current title, and Arutz Sheva flipflops between those two. The balance of reliable news sources seems to favour such a move. 84.203.34.28 (talk) 23:11, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Survey

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.
The latter two don't generate enough google news hits for that to be a very useful guide, but certainly "Degel Hatorah" seems to be the common name in English as used by reliable sources. Having a domain-specific guideline that seemingly purports to override those criteria, as set out in policy, seems problematic in that case, too. And indeed, in general. 84.203.36.42 (talk) 02:16, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
I beg to differ - reliable sources seem to be split on the HaTorah/Hatorah approach and there is no apparent COMMONNAME. The first page of Ghits (minus wiki) has 5 "Hatorah" and 5 "HaTorah". Of the reliable sources coming up in the first couple of pages, Israel National News, the Jerusalem Post and Matzav use "Hatorah", whilst the Israel Democracy Institute, Yeshiva World, Ynetnews and the Times of India use "HaTorah". Number 57 11:02, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
"This" being the WP article, or the usage in the English-language media? I'm certainly happier with "RS usage not yet clearcut enough" than "homebrew house style trumps sources" as a determining principle.Thanks for the clarification!
On the translation: both sound equally grammatical (and equally awkward) to me. "Strong Israel" seems to be slightly more common in news sources, especially in those cases where it's used on its own, rather than alongside the Hebrew official name, but the sample size is pretty painfully small either way. The party itself at one point uses "Strong Israel", though that's on a webpage where it also refers to itself as "the Otzma L'Yisrael faction" (missed that one in my nom!), so take that for what it's worth. Both could be readily cited if one wanted to add a discussion to the body of the article, though the opening should ideally not get too cluttered or digressive on the point. 84.203.36.42 (talk) 05:35, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose per Number 57. Oppose move as well as an idea to use the English translation too. --Shuki (talk) 18:11, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose—not compliant with Wikipedia guidelines, WP:COMMONNAME less relevant for capitalization issues. —Ynhockey (Talk) 18:21, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
Why any less relevant? In order to "comply" with one guideline (that I was unaware of the existence of prior to this), you seem to insisting that we ignore two policies. 84.203.36.42 (talk) 22:44, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Discussion

Any additional comments:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Election symbol?

Hawk? That's not true. Who wrote it? Israel will never use the hawk as a symbol for anything, because it was the symbol of the Nazis. It should be removed. Galzigler (talk) 12:42, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, it was the eagle, who was the symbol of the Nazis, but they are both related. Galzigler (talk) 12:43, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

It is true, but it's not a picture, it's just the letters "נץ". Number 57 13:12, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Otzma Yehudit vs. Otzma LeYisrael

The article originally delt with Otzma LeYisrael, a Knesset faction and shortly after a 2013 electoral list, based on 2 registered patries: Hatikva (political party) and headed by Eldad and Jewish National Front, a non active party headed by the Marzel-Ben Ari duo and revived when they split off from Eretz Yisrael Shelanu. After the unsuccessful bid the two parties parted ways and and the new Otzma Yehudit brand has nothing to do with Otzma LeYisrael. It is a rebranding of Jewish National Front using a name similar to the almost successful 2013 list (the 2006 Jewish National Front list was much less successful) and fooling many including Use:Number 57. I am therefore boldly reverting his last edits and renaming of article. DGtal (talk) 19:45, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

Have any sources? According to this source [1], the Otzma LeYisrael party council decided to run under the new name.David O. Johnson (talk) 20:12, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
With all due respect to Gill Hoffman of the JP, the article is based on factual mistakes. Parties in Israel are registered legal entities and there has never been a party name Otzma LeYisrael (check the party registrar site), which is no more than a former knessent faction and alliance of 2 parties, now defunct. In such cases the name "belongs" to no. 1 on the list, i.e. Prof. Eldad of Hatikva, so Ben-Ari and Marzel can call themselves whatever they want but legally cannot run under Otzma LeYisrael. DGtal (talk) 21:53, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
Arutz 7 also consider it to be a rename of Otzma LeYisrael, and given that media outlet's closeness with the settler movement, you'd assume they would be accurate. Unless there is any evidence to the contrary, the article is currently as it should be. Number 57 22:27, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
The only official proof I have is a facebook query in my inbox, something I doubt is acceptable here. The rest (like the otherwise unexplained change of party name) is circumstantial. In a side note: One of the marks of these elections is the huge wave of mergers so writing today on a brand that might disappear tomorrow is a bit premature. DGtal (talk) 09:58, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
Otza Yisrael is listed as a parliamentary group on the Knesset website.[2]. David O. Johnson (talk) 00:47, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
User:David O. Johnson - There is certainly no question about Otzma LeYisrael, the only question ia about Otzma Yehudit. Is it just the new name of the former entity or a seperate entity. DGtal (talk) 08:13, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

second round

I would like to renew the disscusion after seeing the almost final candidate lists. The final status is a merger of Marzel and Ben-Ari's party into Yachad (political party) led by Eli Yishay. Marzel got slot #4 and the name of his party was not included anywhere in the ballot, so the bottom line is that "Otzma Yehudit" was a temporary name and the renaming should be reverted. DGtal (talk) 13:21, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

It's not a merger - Otzma Yehudit are simply running on the Yachad list (much as Tkuma do with the Jewish Home). The party's name is still Otzma Yehudt, as shown in articles like this and this. Number 57 13:41, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
Here's a ref from February 1st; it says that Otzma and Yachad formed a technical bloc [3]. That means both parties unite for the election, but they can split up once the election is over. [4].David O. Johnson (talk) 17:41, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Religious

Is Otzma Yehudit a religious party? I think it would be useful to clarify this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.141.1.162 (talk) 10:47, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

Yes.[1] Will add it in as soon as possible. ShimonChai (talk) 11:24, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ "Nationalist Party Otzma Yehudit Officially Unveils Platform". Israel National News. Retrieved 2017-08-18.

Sub categories in history section.

Instead of as a timeline of events, would it be a good idea to add sections based on activity, i.e electrical, marches, drone program, formation? ShimonChai (talk) 15:13, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

Fix citations

TODO: There is a problem with citations, and that is that the citations don't have the "a,b,c,d" instead multiple of the same citations are appearing as different # citations. For example "Otzma Yehudit Says 'Yishai's Party Doesn't Want Us" appears as 2 citations, I need to fix this, or if someone else knows how / wants to, it would clean up the page. ShimonChai (talk) 05:07, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

I fixed the duplicated citations using this tool [5]. Hope it helped. David O. Johnson (talk)

Quality of sourcing

Large parts of this article are nothing more than a promotion of this party. A simple example is the use of the settler "news" outlet Arutz Sheva an amazing 39 times. So, an article on a racist party full of citations to a racist source. Great. Zerotalk 01:53, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

@Number 57:: Is Arutz Sheva WP:RS in the context that it is used in this article? ShimonChai (talk) 02:07, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
Please avoid attacking sources you don't like without sources backing this up. As Otzma Yehudit's voters are to a large extent settlers (+ a few urban settlers - e.g. Southern Tel-Aviv) - it is not surprising that much of the coverage of them is in Arutz-7 (whose editorial line is actually quite a bit away from Otzma - Otzma and HaKol HaYehudi are somewhat aligned - but Arutz7 is quite a bit to the left of Otzma) which is a mainstream news outlet among Jews in the West Bank. Icewhiz (talk) 07:25, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
Wait, wait, wait... I thought you were against the use of "right wing" sources? Now here you are defending them.Volunteer Marek (talk) 23:12, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

Racist

The party is extensively and generally described as "racist" in mainstream sources. This is so common that the info clearly belongs in the lede. [6][7][8] (etc. etc. etc.)Volunteer Marek (talk) 07:53, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

Forget the lede, none of the positions listed in anywhere in the article are racist or anti-Arab (even though the party is currently described as both of the above in the lede and/or body). The closest I could find is On 24 February 2019, party member Itamar Ben Gvir called for the expulsion of Arab citizens of Israel who are not loyal to Israel. I agree it's a shitty party, but strong claims like these really need to be backed up. Perhaps start with expanding on their definition of "loyal". M . M 15:12, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
The party is racist to its core, but we shouldn't say that in our voice. The article could use some reasoned analysis by experts (not other politicians). Zerotalk 01:39, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

Jewish Supremacy?

While i'm aware that Otzma are extremely anti-Arab and anti-Muslim, how do we define then being Jewish supremacist? Do they think that Jews are superior to all gentiles?

22:05, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

Paragraph not supported by its citations

The "Controversies" section currently includes the following paragraph:

In December 2012, Otzma LeYisrael ran an ad campaign on billboards and bus advertisements that included words in Arabic such as "equality" and "taxes". One of the signs was banned by the Israeli Central Elections Committee on the ground that the ad was seen as racist. The ad shows the Arabic word "loyalty" with the Hebrew caption "Because without duties, there are no rights".[1] This ban was later reversed by the Supreme Court of Israel.[2]

However, the only mention of Otzma Yehudit in the first cited source is "The banner [of portraying Israeli Arabs as disloyal] has instead been taken up by a small faction calling itself “Otzma Leyisrael,” or “Strength for Israel,” populated by extremist settlers and Kahanist acolytes like the current MK Michael Ben-Ari", and the second source, while it states that the censoring of some Otzma Yehudit ads was overturned by the Supreme Court, links to another article describing the ads which makes it clear that the ads in question were TV commercials that made specific accusations of tax evasion. Since these citations don't support the paragraph in question, I'm going to replace them with Template:Citation needed for now. - LaetusStudiis (talk) 06:13, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ Matti Friedman (16 January 2013). "Coexistence, despite everything". The Times of Israel. Retrieved 2 February 2015.
  2. ^ Elad Benari (16 January 2013). "Supreme Court Allows Otzma LeYisrael and Balad Ads". Arutz Sheva. Retrieved 10 February 2013.

Switch ideology section to party platform?

https://www.jewishpress.com/news/israel/jerusalem/otzma-yehudit-platform-radical-on-jewish-values-hazy-on-practical-implementation/2019/02/26/ Could the party platform just be used instead of the ideology section? It seems to cover most of what is currently talked about in the article, but unsure how the copyright works on copying verbatim. Though I presume there is an exception in this instance? ShimonChai (talk) 01:53, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 22 November 2023

On 5 November 2023, Otzma Yehudit government minister Amihai Eliyahu was suspended from the Israeli cabinet for claiming that the use of nuclear weapons was "one of the possibilities" when discussing Israel's options in its ongoing military action in the Gaza Strip following the October 7, 2023 brutal massacre of over 1,200 Israeli civilians perpetrated by Hamas.[1] 68.195.2.104 (talk) 03:38, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ Nuki, Paul (5 November 2023). "Netanyahu suspends minister who says dropping nuclear bomb on Gaza is an option". The Daily Telegraph. Retrieved 8 November 2023.
 Already done ARandomName123 (talk)Ping me! 15:36, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

RfC: Should this party be explicitly described as being "Jewish fascist" in the ideology box?

Nobody in Israel openly describes themselves as espousing the ideology of fascism, but Otzma Yehudit is widely described by the media, both Israeli and non-Israeli, as a Jewish fascist party. There are plenty of sources on this page that describe it as such, and no sources (which might be a flaw of the page itself) that contest the description or assert that Ben-Gvir is not a fascist. As such, should we put the description of being fascist in the wikibox and label it in categories as a neo-fascist party? HadesTTW (he/him • talk) 23:53, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

  • I remain skeptical, because "fascist"/"fascism" are frequently misused as synonymous with "far-right" or "authoritarian" at all, and this is not really what the word means. While exact definitions vary, our own article Fascism does a pretty good job of synthesizing them into a sentence: "Fascism is a far-right, authoritarian, ultranationalist political ideology and movement, characterized by a dictatorial leader, centralized autocracy, militarism, forcible suppression of opposition, belief in a natural social hierarchy, subordination of individual interests for the perceived good of the nation or race, and strong regimentation of society and the economy." I doubt that Otzma Yehudit fits every element of that description even if it fits many of them (as does most any far-right group). But I am not a subject-matter expert and need to look into it more, so I'm just going to sit neutral-but-skeptical for now. My overall concerns is that it will not be helpful to our readers for us to go along with a term loosely bandied about by some writers, if it ends up conflicting with a more circumscribed definition in our own main article, and convinces one subset of readers that the Otzma Yehudit article is wrong in leaving out various aspects of their alleged fascism, and a different subset of readerse that our fascism article is wrong by including definitional aspects that don't pertain to some things like OY that we claim are fascist. In short, it is not okay for our articles to contradict each other. It is almost certainly sufficient for us to quote and link to various writers who use this term; that is WP:DUE enough coverage of the usage of it in reference to OY. Without poring and poring over this, I'm not seeing evidence of "belief in a natural social hierarchy" nor "strong regimentation of society and the economy", nor even generalized "militarism", just a push to forcibily annex all of the Palestinian land. Nor do they have "a dictatorial leader" (though I can certainly imagine Ben-Gvir heading in that direction with OY's support; he's clearly a populist provocateur catering to prejudices and fears). But I also concede that it's possible this stuff is all really there and we just don't have it clear and cited in the article yet.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  01:09, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
    Discussing the minutiae rather than source conclusions is getting a little bit into OR territory surely? But on the substance, OY's anti-Arabism and Jewish supremacism are clear examples of a "belief in a natural social hierarchy"; while as for "militarism" - Ben Gvir just created his own paramilitary and armed civilians; and "strong regimentation of society" - Ben Gvir has been moving against peaceful protest, demanding a crackdown. Iskandar323 (talk) 06:28, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
Support: This does not feel like a controversial addition as merely one aspect of their ideology. Otzma Yehudit is the present-day exemplar of Jewish fascism, as plenty of material attests. Iskandar323 (talk) 06:22, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
  • Support (Summoned by bot) We go where the reliable sources take us and in this instance we have an Israeli academic amongst a pile of other reliable sources calling Otzma Yehudit a fascist group. TarnishedPathtalk 02:25, 15 November 2023 (UTC)
Oppose: the level of sourcing doesn't appear to come anywhere that which should be in place for such a contentious label in WP:VOICE. Some sources currently used don't support the label, the Nation piece only uses the word 'Fascist' in the article title, while Haaretz uses the term rhetorically. That they are far-right appears to be undisputed, but the 'Fascist' claim is not strong enough to be in our voice AFAI can see. Relativelt minor point, but being described as Jewish and Fascist doesn't automatically make one a Jewish Fascist, even less so a neo-fascist. The bulk of WP:RS should state either term explicitly.Pincrete (talk) 15:18, 15 November 2023 (UTC)
  • Maybe Personally I'd be more comfy with describing it as "Kahanist" and "Jewish supremacist" because I think those descriptions are a lot better sourced than "fascist". Per MOS:LABEL we'd need a truly overwhelming number of sources to describe it as "fascist" in Wikivoice, and I'm not confident we have that. Loki (talk) 05:59, 16 November 2023 (UTC)
    One amendment to my vote: I'm still skeptical of describing them as fascist in the ideology box, but I do think we should say something like "they are often considered to be fascist" in the page description, and maybe even in the lead, because significant sourcing for that label does exist. Loki (talk) 00:30, 17 November 2023 (UTC)
  • Support per TarnishedPath. 89.206.112.10 (talk) 09:25, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
  • Support Yes, it should be explicitly described so; per TarnishedPath. Ali Ahwazi (talk) 22:04, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
  • Oppose - The word "fascist" is used by the media very loosely. Dovidroth (talk) 09:41, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

English name?

The English name on this article is 'Jewish Strength'. However, most English language outlets seem to refer to the party as 'Jewish Power'.

Which name is more appropriate for this article? --Jay942942 (talk) 11:44, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

I would agree with "Jewish Power", I am not a native Hebrew speaker, but strength is a different word and yours and this other Times Of Israel article confirms it as well https://www.timesofisrael.com/jewish-home-reaches-unity-pact-with-extremist-otzma-yehudit/ Shushugah (talk) 16:12, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
As a native Hebrew speaker, the term "Jewish Power" is much more acurate. Otzma in the context of the name means "Power" related to other minorities, or more power to the Jewish majority in Israel. The similarity or hint to other racist ideologies is also acurate, as Otzma Yehudit repeatedly uses racist rethorics- for example, the party leader Itamar Ben-Gvir, called the mother of Eyad al-Hallaq- the autistic man who was shot by Israeli police a "terrorist" during a protest outside the court during the officer's trial. Josephus41198 (talk) 20:39, 5 August 2023 (UTC)
We should go by what sources call it, but, Otzma LeYisrael is not the same thing as Otzma Yehudit in terms of what sources translate it as. The same word can have multiple meanings in different contexts. Edit: The party also seems to translate it themselves as Jewish Strength. ShimonChai (talk) 21:24, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
The translation "Jewish Power" (properly) evokes similarly racist ideologies (e.g. "white power", "black power"). However, papers with Israeli origin seem to tend towards "Jewish Strength"[1][2] or "Jewish Might"[3][4] -- Avisnacks (talk) 11:45, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
Actually the first three of those sites use Jewish Power repeatedly. Zerotalk 12:33, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
More conclusive than a random sampling of news sources is the scholarly summation to date, and here we have 38 hits for 'Jewish power' to about 5 for strength and just 1 for might. Pretty clear cut. Iskandar323 (talk) 13:37, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
We should look at the party's own English description: https://ozma-yeudit.com/the-platform-of-otzma-yehudit-jewish-strength/ which is indeed Jewish Strength, not power. 207.102.20.93 (talk) 20:56, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ "Far-right Otzma Yehudit Party to run in next election".
  2. ^ "Top Jjewish Members of Congress Condemn Netanyahu's Deal with Far-right Party".
  3. ^ "Extremist Otzma Yehudit announces unity pact with Jewish Home".
  4. ^ "Israel's Centrist Parties Merge to Take On Netanyahu".
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Otzma_Yehudit/Archive_1&oldid=1224669651"