The history of American lobbying shows a curious tendency: liberals tend to operate on the federal rather than state level. School integration, pro-abortion, pornography, due process, expansive Fourteenth Amendment rights, and minimum wages—all went through federal rather than state courts. Certainly, there is a technical reason: liberals strive for sweeping judgments based on vague constitutional rights rather than addressing the issues narrowly. Also, there is the matter of convenience: winning a federal case substitutes for litigation in each of the states. More important is a reverse correlation between common sense and hierarchy: the further the bureaucrats are removed from their constituency, the more responsive are they to liberal demands.

At the local level, voters are remarkably sensible. Despite immense brainwashing, voters defeated gay marriage even in ultra-left California. Since only a small proportion of residents attend local elections and vote on proposals, left-wing activists constitute a much larger proportion among voters than the general population. Polls confirm that the silent majority is reasonably conservative. The term is rather derogatory: their point is not to preserve old ways but to sustain societal values; it’s not conservatives vs reformers, but people with values vs nihilists.

The central power depends on interest groups and lobbies more than voters. The interests of “liberals” and bureaucracy fundamentally coincide: both groups want more regulation. Bureaucrats want regulation to arrogate more powers to themselves, and liberals need regulation to forcibly do away with traditional values. Thus appears a bizarre situation in which liberals want more rather than less regulation and favor expanding government powers. True liberals would respect a society’s freedom to hold values and practice their deviations in private rather than seeking the government’s enforcement of them on the unwilling majority.

Jewish leftists similarly gravitate toward the top. Ultra-leftist views are non-existent on the local level: in schools and offices, Jews hate Arabs and discount the idea of a Palestinian state. Israeli leftists operate through the unelected arm of the state—the courts and police. They are even stronger in America, whose Jews are completely removed from Israeli realities.

The Israeli Supreme Court is similar to its US counterpart in that it has developed a habit of reading morals into the Basic Law—Liberty. The court strikes down laws and regulations arbitrarily, with only vague references to the Basic Law. Every regulation contradicts some liberty, and so the court got absolute jurisdiction.

The solution lies in administrative autonomy: Jewish towns must be able to establish their own codes and regulate everything that the majority wants to be regulated. Townships must have the right to exclude Arabs, mandate public observance of Shabbat, and anything else they deem necessary. The Supreme Court’s self-arrogated right to strike down any law or regulation must be limited to inter-city events. Inside towns, jurisdiction should be local only, with no central judicial authority; residents must be allowed to live as they like and those who don’t like can move out.