A few thoughts on the elections in both the United States and Israel.
I start from the premise that participating in political life is the right thing to do. That most citizens want a better future for their country, even though their ideas of what constitutes “good” may differ considerably. That people are far more complex than simplistic divisions suggest, and cannot be neatly sorted into right and left, Republicans and Democrats, believers and atheists, or intelligent people and fools.
I also believe that raising the moral standards we expect of politicians is the right thing to do. And that you will never have an ideal candidate. That is why, when voting, I think it is better to focus not on a particular individual, but on the principles they stand for.
Yes, there may be exceptions to these rules, but in the overwhelming majority of cases, these principles hold true, and I believe they are worth considering when you cast your vote.
1. A politician must be prepared to lose an election.
A politician who knows they can lose power is forced to take voters' interests into account. A politician who is convinced they will remain in power regardless has an incentive to gradually change the rules in their own favour: controlling the media, weakening competitors and appointing loyalists to key positions.
2. A politician must strengthen the institutions that limit their own power.
If a candidate promises to restore order but simultaneously wants to weaken the independent judiciary, bring prosecutors under their control, restrict parliamentary oversight and take control of the media, I would regard that as a warning sign — even if their political programme seems attractive.
3. A politician must regard the opposition as a legitimate part of the political system, not as an enemy of the people.
If the opposition makes mistakes, it can be criticised. If it proposes a bad programme, it can be defeated at the ballot box. But when the very existence of the opposition is declared a threat to the state, the system loses its ability to correct its own mistakes.
4. A politician must care about the truth, even when it is inconvenient.
A country needs more than leaders who know how to make decisions. It needs leaders capable of finding out when their decisions are not working.
This requires independent media, statistical agencies, scientific experts, auditors, professional civil servants and the freedom to report failures publicly without fear of punishment.
5. A politician must be able to admit mistakes and change course.
In politics, there is a temptation to regard a good leader as someone who never changes their mind.
A weak leader continues pursuing a failed policy because admitting a mistake would undermine their image of infallibility. If someone cannot acknowledge their own mistakes, it is dangerous to entrust them with extensive powers.
6. A politician must prevent the capture of the state by any particular interest group.
Corruption is not just about an official accepting a bribe.
There is a much larger problem: rules can be designed so that particular companies, families, party factions or influential groups enjoy advantages at everyone else's expense.
If access to state resources depends primarily on personal loyalty to the president, the country is in danger.
How transparent are a politician's income and business connections? And how do they respond to investigations into their own activities?
7. A politician must respect professional competence.
Every leader has a natural desire to surround themselves with people they know and trust.
But when personal loyalty becomes the sole criterion for appointment, professional institutions lose their ability to function properly.
A politician must understand the limits of their own competence and create conditions in which professionals can do their jobs, challenge their superiors and be held accountable for results.
There is a wonderful maxim: "You can only lean on what resists."
8. A politician must invest in the country's development, not merely in its immediate consumption.
The most important investments often take decades to pay off: education, fundamental scientific research, preventive healthcare, infrastructure and children's education.
We must not become obsessed with quick results.
Fifteen years after a populist comes to power, real GDP per capita is, on average, approximately ten per cent lower than it otherwise could have been. This applies equally to left-wing and right-wing populists.
9. A politician must not confuse security with unlimited power for the military and intelligence services.
The excessive influence of the military and intelligence services within government is harmful in any country.
These people are trained to identify threats, concentrate resources, follow orders and neutralise opponents. But these skills are not sufficient to govern a society.
A citizen is not a potential adversary. Political disagreement is not sabotage.
10. A politician must know how to negotiate.
The ability to compromise is not a weakness but a strength.
Different interests inevitably exist within any society: between regions, generations, employers and employees, religious and secular citizens, majorities and minorities.
If every conflict becomes a struggle to destroy the other side once and for all, the country begins wasting its resources on an internal war.
11. Religion, like the decision not to believe, is a matter of personal choice.
Abandoning core school subjects — mathematics, physics, chemistry and biology — in favour of religious education diminishes the intellectual potential of any country.
Neither religious belief nor the absence of it should automatically confer any advantages on anyone.
P.S.
It is better to choose not only someone you are willing to entrust with power, but also someone under whom you will retain the ability to take that power away.
