Israeli people are currently being brainwashed into thinking that Sharon's death will be a great loss for Israel. Even those who do not support him politically seem to repeat a statement, which I've recently heard from far too many people, so I can't help but think that television got that idea into their heads.
The statement is this: "Israel needs Sharon as a leader , because only a strong leader can bring peace".
I don't know about you, but this is an insult to my intelligence.
Anyone who chooses to run for prime minister in place like this should be a "strong" person. But when people in Israel today say they need a "strong leader" they simply mean a military man. This specific former military man has demonstrated his ability to be violent, merciless and cruel.
Why does that qualify him to bring peace, as opposed to, say, a peace activist?
I have no idea. But people here seem to think it makes sense...
It's convenient to believe in a "leader" who would lead us, the helpless little people, into a better world. It relieves us of responsibility for our own lives, and for the lives of people around us. The people around us include those we have been taught to call "our enemy".
The popular conception is that "our enemy" is violent, merciless and cruel. So we can trust a strong military man to know how to handle those terrorists. After all, they speak the same language. Why does that qualify him to bring peace? I would have thought it only qualifies him to drag this war forever. And guess what, he was doing just that.