has a right to any land." Originally, he had been associated with religious Zionism and looked favorably on a system of law based on halakha. In the 1930s while still in Germany, he was aligned with the Mizrachi religious Zionist movement. On Zionism, he wrote that "we are presented with the opportunity and the task of realizing through and within the land of Israel the concealed power of Torah." He called for "a specific and detailed halakhic code for administering the full panoply of state functions" to demonstrate how religious parties would run the future Jewish state. He proposed a form of democratic halakhic Judaism. In the 1949 Knesset election, Leibowitz headed the United List of Religious Workers, which failed to win a seat. Following Israeli independence, Leibowitz moved away from religious Zionism. He was disappointed with the way the religious parties compromised with the secular government. In his view, they had prostituted themselves to the government to guard their own brand of religious sectarianism, subordinating religion to the government. He viewed the rabbinic leadership as morally corrupt. As a result, he became disillusioned with religious Zionism. His disillusionment was further bolstered by the Qibya massacre, which caused him to become more progressively critical of government policy. In his later philosophy, he became an outspoken defender of the complete separation between religion and state, which he was calling for by 1959. He came to view political involvement as having a corrupting influence on Judaism, and argued for the separation of religion and state for Judaism's sake. He viewed politicized religion as not being truly religious, believing that it focuses less on the demands it makes on its adherents. He was among the first Israeli intellectuals to state immediately after the 1967 Six-Day War that if the occupation continued, this would lead to the decline in moral stature. In a 1968 essay titled "The Territories", Leibowitz postulated a hellish future: The Arabs would be the working people and the Jews the administrators, inspectors, officials, and police—mainly secret police. A state ruling a hostile population of 1.5 to 2 million foreigners would necessarily become a secret-police state, with all that this implies for education, free speech and democratic institutions. The corruption characteristic of every colonial regime would also prevail in the State of Israel. The administration would suppress Arab insurgency on the one hand and acquire Arab Quislings on the other. There