The president's disgrace is our disgrace
In regimes such as ours, it's difficult to fit a symbolic crown on the 'head of the state'
We tend to say that the president is a symbol; a symbol, however, is an empty vessel. It has no content of its own containing only what is poured into it. What does the president symbolize? It is customary to think that he embodies the "spirit of the nation", that he in some way represents that which is common to all. He is perceived as an island of consent in a society torn by strife.
In other age-old states, where constitutional monarchies reign, this happens to be the king's role. The symbolic significance of the crown is strengthened by maintaining a blue blood line, and with the help of pompous ceremonies and high walled castles. Maintenance of these "special" effects is becoming more difficult everyday, because the real strength of the monarchy is shrouded in mystery.
Lifting the veil
When the media lifts the veil it becomes apparent that the king is as ordinary as his subjects, often even inferior, his symbolic significance begins to crumble and voices call for his resignation from this ancient transgression.
This is what’s happened to European royalty in the last generation; nonetheless, it tends to survive, because even kings wearing superficial crowns do not destroy their national history. It's not the king who is important, it's the monarchy.
It's not like that here. In regimes such as ours, it's somewhat difficult to fit a symbolic crown on the "head of the state." Our history, our memories and yearnings, are not entwined with the history of the presidential institution.
Besides, we don't know how to conduct pompous ceremonies; our harsh and meager tongues are unable to distinguish between loftiness and the mundane and the "spirit of the nation" – whatever it means – does not beat in the hearts of most subjects.
The presidency in Israel is not royal, but rather artificial. It is weak in its very being. We all sense this. When the president walks into the Knesset plenum to the sound of a loud trumpet call, we feel embarrassed. Will the trumpet player play off key? Will the president's legs become entangled and trip him up? Will the camera capture one of the ministers yawning? There's no splendor and majesty in our province and there never will be.
Our first presidents enjoyed the grace of their generation. They emerged from the generation of pioneers, entitling them to prestige and broad consensus.
No pioneer halo
However, our latest presidents, particularly the current one, don't bear the halo of our pioneers. We tried to give "meaning" to their traits by branding them as products that embody something beyond themselves.
One such president was termed the "first Spaniard," a biographical fact intended to symbolize the unity of the people. Another president was a "great scientist," a trait purportedly symbolizing the Jewish genius. Another was a "born and bred Israeli," a mischievous pilot and the nephew of the first president, a fact that allegedly symbolizes the "new and proud generation."
The ruling president excels in the fact that he came from a "poor background," and therefore allegedly symbolizes the successful absorption of immigrants from Eastern countries, and reinforces the lie that "in Israel, anyone can reach the top."
However, the monarchial copywriting antics haven't been effective and the presidency hasn't been able to climb to the symbolic level of our awareness. The status of this position is being diminished from one president to the next, and Ezer Weizmann destroyed what was left of its prestige.
The "president's home" is not a temple towards which we direct our prayers, and its inhabitants are perceived as politicians who happened to arrive at this boring post only because of an inopportune balance of power at the Knesset.
The presidency in Israel exists because of its artificial perpetuity, and not because we feel it's necessary. It symbolizes just one thing: The president's disgrace is our disgrace as well. We are unable to bear the thought that the fault lies with the state.
In a perverse manner, the president's humiliation supports the assumption that the president does indeed symbolize national unity: We all bear the disgrace, because the president's disgrace is our disgrace as well. But is this national unity enough to justify the continuation of such an institution?
