By Moshe Feiglin
19 Tamuz, 5767
July 5, 07
This article is translated from the NRG website and the Yisraeli newspaper.
The local bank manager was tired of competing for every customer. "At this rate," the manager said to himself, "I will finish my career as the manager of a small branch in a small town. I must show the national management some impressive achievements."
He had already tried the accepted forms of wooing new customers, but without much success. "In the local vegetable market," he reasoned, "all the produce is piled up high on the stands for everyone to see. Why shouldn't the bank do the same?"
The next morning, the passersby were surprised to see large bags of cash piled up high in front of the bank. The bank clerks stood next to their new money stands and hawked their wares -- convenient loans and services -- convincing the townspeople to partake of their merchandise. At first, people were a bit surprised and wary. But in no time, the new marketing initiative paid off, and the bank's profits dramatically increased.
The bank manager was already sure of his new position in national management. But the other banks began to complain. "You have created a new marketing culture that will create serious problems," they protested. "Not everyone will withstand the temptation. When they pass by the heap of money bags, they will simply take one or two." But by this time, our single-minded bank manager was giddy with success.
The bank employees, who had been afraid of lay-offs during the bank's conventional days, were also pleased with their new found popularity and roundly acclaimed the new, liberal marketing culture. They no longer had to work hard to convince customers with long rows of numbers and percentages. The customers simply passed by, saw the money and entered the bank. "Hiding the money in locked safes is a thing of the past," they proclaimed. "We are living in a new world, and every person may do as he pleases with his money. We have laws and the police to deal with thieves. It is our privilege to put the money outside."
The other banks had no choice but to jump on the new marketing bandwagon. But it didn't take long for the competition to balance the market, and the easy profits disappeared. A new problem, though, had been created. As expected, many people could not withstand the temptation, and stole bags of money. The banks lost money rapidly and turned to the parliament to enact more stringent penalties for thieves. The parliament complied and the new penalties for theft became law. "After all," the lawmakers explained, "we cannot allow theft to become a national sport."
Nothing, though, helped. Nobody took the new laws seriously, and the "grab all that you can" culture spread like wildfire. The banks insisted on putting more and more money out on the street -- in the name of liberal culture and personal freedom. On the other hand, in a futile attempt to prevent people from absconding with bags of money, the legal system created more and more laws. It failed, of course. Laws are supposed to express culture, not create it. But in our case, the law agencies attempted to enforce laws to deal with a culture that society insisted on perpetuating.
One day, the entire country was shocked by astounding news. The Honorable President had also been accused of taking bags of money. Everybody argued with everybody else -- but nobody suggested that perhaps the problem was with the culture -- and not with the law. Clearly, theft is forbidden and somebody who steals money from the pile of money bags must be punished. But maybe the source of the problem is cultural? Maybe a bank is not a vegetable market? Maybe money is a serious commodity that should be guarded in vaults and not flaunted on the street?
*
I have no sentiments for Moshe Katzav. His great test was during the expulsion from Gush Katif and he failed miserably. When that national crime was being committed, President Katzav chose to support the system instead of providing the expellees with legitimacy and understanding. But later, when his own career was at stake, the President certainly knew how to decry the very same system. So I do not feel sorry for Katzav or for newly appointed Deputy Prime Minister Chaim Ramon. Both their stories represent the same problem. On the one hand, society widely supports the promiscuous culture that has developed in Israel to the extreme. On the other hand, it has enacted grossly inconsistent laws to deal with the negative results.
Ridiculously, the court determined that Chaim Ramon is guilty, but that his actions are not a "moral disgrace." But just the opposite is true. Ramon -- and possibly Katzav as well -- did not break the law. But the moral disgrace that accompanies their actions is crystal clear. As long as Israeli society refuses to deal with the cultural failure that exists here, we will continue to convict government ministers of breaking the law on the one hand, and to appoint them to top government positions on the other. "After all," we will dubiously proclaim, "their actions may have been illegal, but they were not disgraceful."
The law does not create culture. It expresses it. In this case, it contradicts it.
Keep up to date with the latest articles and audio updates.
No comments:
Post a Comment