Can a Shared Mamlachti Foundation Be Found Beyond Coalition and Opposition?
This week, Astarta launched the Great Mamlachti Simulator, an AI-powered platform that ranks Knesset members against transparent criteria of civic responsibility and commitment to the national interest (mamla
chtiut). The Simulator uses AI to gather and analyze data from social media, news coverage, and parliamentary activity.
The components of our updated concept of "neo-mamlachtiut" are: 1. Universal Policy vs. Sectoral Extortion - advancing the national interest over narrow interest-group payouts; 2. Rule of Law & Institutional Safeguards - protecting statutory gatekeepers, courts, and democratic norms; 3. Jewish Character & Diaspora Relations - a commitment to the state's Jewish character and its ties with Diaspora Jewry; 4. Civil Rights & Shared Society - ensuring equal civic rights and integration for all minority communities; 5. National Cohesion vs Polarization - commitment to national unity in the face of polarization and incitement.
Our goal in developing this platform is to challenge sectoral politics and automatic allegiance to political camps, and to promote a commitment to the common good on national issues that spans both coalition and opposition — the neo-mamlachti bloc.
The platform scrapes data daily from social media, news outlets, and Knesset activity, and ranks the mamlachtiut of each candidate for the next Knesset, as well as separately ranking the current Knesset.
The system has already sorted tens of thousands of actions, and the data it collects allows us to identify patterns, trends, and insights. Since the index changes daily, we will not address the coalition-opposition numerical breakdown in this post, but instead focus the spotlight on several interesting patterns:
The gaps between coalition and opposition center on the judiciary - not on the character of the state. In the Rule of Law & Institutional Safeguards dimension, opposition candidates receive an average score of 93 compared to 45 among coalition candidates. The smallest gap is found on Jewish Character & Diaspora Relations, where the average score of opposition candidates stands at 70 versus 66 among coalition candidates.
The neo-mamlachti bloc cuts across political camps. 27 candidates meet the threshold on all five axes, including nine from current coalition parties — illustrating the possibility of identifying a shared mamlachti foundation beyond the conventional political divide.
Ra'am is more mamlachti than the ultra-Orthodox parties. In Ra'am, 2 out of 5 are in the bloc; in Shas, 2 out of 11; in United Torah Judaism, 0 out of 7. Shas leads the coalition on Civil Rights & Shared Society (99), but scores 40 on Universal Policy vs. Sectoral Extortion.
The most vocal are not the most mamlachti. 9 out of 10 coalition members with the most documented actions are non-mamlachti. Topping the list: Kara (320 actions, score 2) and Gottlieb (305 actions, score 4).
What Does the Possible Neo-Mamlachti Bloc Teach Us?
The simulator rests on the broader vision outlined in "National Resilience in Times of Polarization" - the paper Astarta published last month.
At the core of this vision lies the understanding that Israeli society offers no sustainable path to the total victory of one camp over another. Any attempt by either side to impose its full worldview on the other risks deepening polarization, eroding trust in state institutions, and undermining national resilience.
Mamlachtiut, under this framework, does not require abandoning ideological disagreements. It requires agreement on a shared framework within which those disagreements can be conducted: democratic rules of the game, mutual accountability, civic partnership, and commitment to Israel's future as a Jewish and democratic state.
The neo-mamlachti bloc seeks to translate this vision into practical political action. Rather than waiting for one camp to prevail, we can examine right now what broad agreements can be built among the elected officials expected to serve in the next Knesset.
In this sense, the simulator is not merely a data-presentation tool. It offers a different way of thinking about political power in the Knesset: not only as a struggle between rival blocs, but also as an opportunity to identify the common ground that can exist between them.
Comments