 |
| Member of Knesset, Miri Regev. עברית: חברת הכנסת מירי רגב (Photo credit: Wikipedia) |
The Minister of Culture and Sport, Miri Regev, apparently is the “apple of the eye” of PM Benjamin Netanyahu. Miri Regev is keen on making the Likud agenda an integral part of Israeli culture. She has become involved in deciding what cultural projects qualify for getting state funding as well as being very outspoken on this issue of which she makes no bones.
Her emphasis on culture is basically a double-edged sword. The one edge is that theatre and literature must be Sephardi Jewish-oriented (this includes piyutim - A piyyut or piyut (plural piyyutim or piyutim, Hebrew פּיּוּטִים / פיוטים, פּיּוּטִ / פיוט pronounced [piˈjut, pijuˈtim]; from Greek ποιητής poiétḗs "poet") is a Jewish liturgical poem, usually designated to be sung, chanted, or recited during religious services. Piyyutim have been written since Temple times.) as well as the songs and performances of Israeli Sephardi pop stars such as Eyal Golan that she personally sponsors, which, according to the Knesset Ethics Committee, is illegal.
The following is an article from Haaretz illustrating Miri Regev’s sponsorship of Eyal Golan:
Miri Regev says clip for superstar Eyal Golan's show 'was designed to encourage Mizrahi music.'
Dafna Arad and Chaim Levinson Aug 02, 2016 9:59 PM
MK Miri Regev, December 2, 2014.Emil Salman
Eyal Golan's new album will send you running to the beach
Mizrahi culture gains a voice, experiences revival in Israel
The Knesset Ethics Committee decided Tuesday that the video clip showing Culture and Sports Minister Miri Regev praising the television program “Eyal Golan Is Calling You,” which is aired on Channel 24, has crossed the line and become a prohibited public relations promotion, according to Knesset ethics regulations.
The committee, headed by MK Yitzhak Vaknin (Shas), decided not to adopt sanctions against Regev, without explanation. The decision was made after MK Tamar Zandberg (Meretz) asked the committee to “clarify the boundaries regarding the participation of Knesset members in commercial activity, promotion and public relations in general, and for television programs in particular.”
In the clip that Regev posted on her Facebook page last month, she is standing in a back yard and saying, “Eyal Golan is calling you. What a joy, the program is coming back. An amazing program with Israeli, Mizrahi music, joyful, moving, including the good old songs and of course finding new talents and new songs. So go for it and good luck. Eyal, good for you, great production.” At the end Regev forms a heart with her fingers.
The Ethics Committee reminded everyone that MKs are not permitted to provide sponsorship, to help or promote commercial entities, including media outlets. “After watching the clip, the Ethics Committee believes that in this case the line was crossed between a viewpoint and a declaration of policy, and even sharing a personal experience, which are permitted and legitimate, and ‘prohibited PR.’ The nature and content of the clip serve a specific program and a specific singer, and are seen as a kind of ‘promo’ for the program. An advertising campaign and PR by commercial entities is liable to lead to a violation of ethics and the imposition of sanctions.”
Regev told the committee that “the clip was designed to encourage Mizrahi music and was part of the encouragement and support I give to activities that provide a platform for Mizrahi music, as I’ve done in the past. That’s the only reason for my activities, without a blemish and without any commercial or promotional intention.”
Zandberg’s reaction: “There is a clear boundary line between participation in a television program to promote a viewpoint, and marketing a show only for commercial promotion. In a precedent-setting decision the Ethics Committee instructs the MKs to refrain from such advertising and PR, and that’s as it should be.”
Regev’s reply: “I regret the decision of the Ethics Committee, which didn’t accept my viewpoint in the letter of reply that reflects my policy. However, I respect its decision.”
Dafna Arad
Haaretz Contributor
Miri Regev is becoming autocratic in her quest to encourage partisan “Sephardi” culture and to personally encourage it. Israel is a multicultural society of which Sephardi culture and heritage is a part and by no means superior contrary to what Regev thinks. She should represent the culture of all Israelis and certainly not be sectarian or political. She is muscle flexing to force her idea of culture on all Israel’s society, irrespective of their cultural background. Western culture that is very much part of Western civilization is inferior according to her world view and is not deserving of government subsidies to the same extent. Any artist who opposes her world view on culture is considered a traitor to Israel.
The government is considering closing down the Israeli Broadcasting Authority as according to them it is not profitable and wishes to replace it with a new public broadcaster that will not be independent. The policy of this public broadcaster will be Likud-oriented. Miri Regev has given her support for that and believes that if subsidized by the government then the latter should control what is broadcast. Even Regev’s Likud colleague, Gila Gamliel, opposes this and has accused Regev of moving towards fascism.
Miri Regev is not suited for her cabinet post. She is incendiary, divisive and autocratic. Her narrow world view of culture and understanding disqualifies her from that post. She is creating a schism between the various cultural groups that make up Israel’s society. She is racist and suffers from a massive inferiority complex. Her desire to push for a macabre mix of kissing tombstones of ignorant Sephardi rabbis (tzadikim) as well as kissing amulets given by self-styled, money grabbing, lecherous, Kabbalists and rabbis. Ear-splitting low class Mizrachi music performed by singers (many of whom are on drugs) are also part of her definition of culture. In Regev’s view this partisan folklore should be given top priority in becoming Israel’s mainstream culture.
Miri Regev speaks for her community and is not concerned with Israel’s multicultural community. She has taken it upon herself as to which cultural projects are deserving of state funding and which are not. It is obvious that cultural projects that are “left wing oriented” or away from the right wing coalition political line will automatically be disqualified from state funding. Her criteria for state funding are as follows:
- Denying the existence of Israel as a Jewish and democratic state;
- Inciting racial hatred, violence and terrorism;
- Supporting act of terrorism against Israel;
- Marking Independence Day as a day of mourning;
- Acting against an Israeli symbol;
- Boycotting or calling for a boycott of Israel.
"I make a clear distinction between freedom of expression and freedom of funding," the Culture Minister declared. "Freedom of expression is a supreme value in Israel. But, the state has the right not to finance factors that undermine its Jewish and democratic character." Poetry of the late talented Mohamed Darwish is considered treasonous and not to be even discussed despite the fact that he was born and bred in Israel and is part of its culture. There is no violence against any group in his poems. Yet it is not the poetry for “La Passionaria” Miri Regev’s approval.
Interpretation of Miri Regev’s “cultural criteria” is very subjective and does not allow much cultural leeway. She has dovetailed these criteria to suit her world view as to what is patriotic and what is treacherous or anti-Israel.
Some of the criteria are reasonable. Inciting racial hatred, violence and terrorism is definitely positive and should not be allowed. As for the rest, it must be viewed in the context of the message that the writer or producer wishes to convey and should not be included in criteria for state subsidies or funding.
Regev, in her statement on her criteria even contradicts herself. She can lump any of her criteria on any cultural project that does not conform to her world view or that of the Likud Government. She can even interpret a political satirical play or book according to the criteria that she has formulated even if this may not be the case.
This is an example of the Late Poet Mohammed Darwish's Poetry! What is provacative about it?
This is an example of the Late Poet Mohammed Darwish's Poetry! What is provacative about it?
