Poverty is a RELATIVE term, it has to be viewed in the context of time and space. Even the richest man in antiquity did not have a car, nor a telephone, etc. Calling such an ass-riding man "poverty stricken" is foolish in the extreme. Likewise, a poor man is only "poor" compared to a "rich" man within his horizons. Amos Oz is speaking about the EARLY years of the state, when people did not have much, compared to TODAY's Israelis, but they were NOT poor (in their own eyes). They worked hard (compared to today) but had enough to live on and build the state. In those early days, it was also necessary to use public funds to make progress, because people were not wealthy enough to invest on their own. It was important then to feel part of the whole, and this is what Amos Oz is missing today, the sense of unity. Clearly, some free market reform was necessary when circumstances changed. The problem with Netanyahu is that he decided to imitate the US, not follow the European model. Everyone can see the results in today's demonstrations, except for blind ideologues like Netanyahu and Strassler.
US rally shows support for ex-Marine held by Iran on spying charges (AP)
from the article: Amos Oz's mistake