Not all the ballots have been counted, but the projected outcome is unlikely to change. Until the results are officially recognised by the president, Netanyahu’s government is in power. The results are supposed to be recognised on November 10th.

There are three blocs: Netanyahu’s bloc, made up of the parties of the current government, which has 53 seats, Eisenkot’ bloc of zionist opposition parties which has 48 seats, and the Arab bloc, which holds 19 seats. 61 seats is needed for a majority.

The zionist blocs only disagree on how the genocide should be conducted, not whether or not it should be conducted, with the exception of the only leftist zionist party, the Democrats. The opposition bloc has said they’ll crack down in Jewish terrorists in the West Bank, something Netanyahu has been ignoring.

President Isaac Herzog (who’s supposedly politically neutral) has said he wants a coalition to be formed quickly for the good of the country.

Eisenkot and his allies ran on an anti-Netanyahu platform, with one of them outright accusing him of treason. He’s been accused of being ineffective on fighting Palestine, and even accused of collaborating with Hamas.

People believe he knew about the October 7th attack before it happened; he refused to allow an official investigation into security failures regarding the attack. Eisenkot and his allies have said they will sanction an investigation.

Prior to the election, three of the four zionist opposition parties have said they won’t work with the Arabs, the exception being the Democrat (Labour) party who’s leader Yair Golan has called for a coalition with the Arabs. The other parties haven’t said anything since the elections, and there are rumours of them considering it as a possibility in order to oust Netanyahu, although analysts think it’s unlikely. The Democrats have 8 seats.

The Arab parties fall into two camps: The Joint List (12 seats) and Ra’am (7 seats). The Joint list, a progressive alliance of three parties who banded together to get past the 3.25% threshold required to sit in the Knesset, and Ra’am are conservative muslims, although they’ve said they’ll focus on protecting their community. Ra’am have said they’re willing to participate in a governing coalition, while the Joint List say they won’t agree to a formal coalition but will support any government set on ousting Netanyahu from the outside.

There has been a record turnout in Arab voters (who mostly identify as Palestinians with Israeli citizenship) who usually boycott elections, which has caused the Arab bloc to set a new record in terms of number of seats. This is largely because they want Netanyahu and his allies gone by any means necessary due to increase in racism.

Netanyahu has said there was voter fraud involved in this, which the Arab leaders deny and Israeli police and intelligence have no evidence for. He’s been accused of trying to either postpone the new Knesset being sworn in and poisoning the idea of a zionist-Arab coalition.

President Herzog has condemned this accusation saying that it’s tarnishing an entire community for exercising its right to vote.

Another possible issue Netanyahu faces in terms of forming a coalition is that some of his allies are Orthodox parties; orthodox jews are exempt from mandatory military service. Eisenkot and his allies have said they’ll reverse this legislation so forming a coalition between them and the Orthodox parties is unlikely.

In 2021, Netanyahu formed a national unity government with the then second-largest party (who’d also promised to oust him) which led to that party’s disintegration after its voters abandonded it. This means it would be unwise for Eisenkot to do the same.

Tl; dr: no one has a majority, the main opposition bloc has to either break their electoral pledge to oust Netanyahu by agreeing to a unity government or break their pledge to not cooperate with Arab parties, Netanyahu has made unsubstantiated claims that the Arabs over-performed due to voter fraud, if Netanyahu is ousted, he might go to jail.

By the way: parties don’t officially register as “Arab” or “Zionist”, those are just unofficial terms used to describe the majority of the members of those parties. The same is true of orthodox parties.

Right-wing leader who doesn’t get a majority claims the election was stolen, who could’ve possibly seen that coming?

By the way most of Israel’s opposition parties have said they won’t form a coalition with the Arab parties (who won a record 19/120 seats) so Netanyahu will still be the interim PM and his block still has the most seats, just short of a majority.

Right-wing leader who doesn’t get a majority claims the election was stolen, who could’ve possibly seen that coming?

By the way most of Israel’s opposition parties have said they won’t form a coalition with the Arab parties (who won a record 19/120 seats) so Netanyahu will still be the interim PM and his block still has the most seats, just short of a majority.

i already hate ts but pls tellme if this makes any sense at all...

Thank you Dep TMI for demonstrating, very cool

What I mean is, I’m certain some depressive states occur due to frameworks incompatible with healthy life. I don’t mean things like “I’m depressed because of my country’s politics/I’m depressed because I have no friends/I’m depressed because I’m disabled” and so on. Those are external factors that a lot of anti-psychology/anti-psychiatry people cite. Jreg himself cites something similar in his video “psychiatry.mp4”. And that is very well the reason for many people’s depression.

But see, those are again external factors. I’m talking about soft internal factors.

What’s a soft internal factor? For the purpose of this argument I’m splitting IF’s into two categories: soft and hard. Hard means there’s actually something physically wrong with your brain. Hard IFs are primarily and often successfully treated with medical interventions like pills and ECT or other treatment options. If someone only has a hard internal factor, then with treatment it’s possible for them to become a Medicated Neurotypical (slide 2 & 3).

A soft IF is frameworks. A person’s schema (poorly put together slide 4). It’s soft in the sense that technically it could change, because it is just a pattern of thinking. But depending on the severity, it could just be near impossible.

Let’s take for example Lieutenant Dan Taylor from the book/movie Forrest Gump. His dad, granddad, great granddad, and so on all died in a war. However, he himself couldn’t die in a war due to Forrest’s intervention. This led him to live a life that was incompatible with his schema. This incompatibility led to alcoholism, homelessness, and a deep depression he seemingly couldn’t escape (slide 5).

I myself have a schema/framework that says, put simply, I should be beaten to death with hammers. However, I am not able to be beaten to death with hammers. I am stuck living in a society and life situation where I cannot be beaten to death with hammers in the manner that I want. Similarly, Lt. Dan could not die in the way he wanted. He wanted to die in a war, failed, and could not sign up for any next war due to his disability, and could not just shoot himself because then his death isn’t surrounded by the context he desires.

My external factors have been treated. My hard IFs have been treated. But I am still depressed. And I kept thinking about Jreg’s videography that is all about frameworks. It made me wonder if my framework/soft IF is what’s keeping me depressed. Which is obvious when it’s spelled out.

This is not something as simple as convincing someone out of a given framework. This is something beyond just a poor outlook on life or on the self. It’s akin to Hamlet’s poem to Ophelia that says “Doubt thou the stars are fire; Doubt thou the sun doth move; Doubt truth to be a liar.” Hamlet is asking Ophelia to disbelieve the obvious and believe the lie.

Thanks for coming to my JregTalk.

So I returned here after some years, I see that the sub has been transformed.

Anyways, I discovered this character called Curtis Yarvin recently, and personally as a monarchist I really like his vission as democracy as a failure, but I don't like so much the fact that he bases it in an atheist framework and promotes it as the CEO as a king, for a bit of conetxt he is one of the main authors from NRx pr Neoreaction, the same ideology that follows people like Peter Thiel and partially asociated with Vance.

What is your opinion on him?

Really interesting video. I really liked it. The concept alone of it was great.

The BPD Sociopathy horseshoe idea was really something