Can Israel be a Jewish state and a Democracy? -Your take

[Micah]

As I think about Israel's past, and it's future, I can't help but think that democracy just isn't what Israel needs.

From a practical standpoint, some of the policies taken by Israel, however correct I believe they are, aren't democratic. I would like to emphasize that I don't believe such things as expelling terrorists families or policies with leasing propertie to Arabs ect. are wrong. The idea of a Jewish state is very correct indeed, but the steps Israel takes to keep a Jewish majority aren't in my opinion, democratic.

My personal opinion on it is to go back to the beginning of how Israel was when it was first born when Joshua defeated the Canannites. That is, a Monarcy/Theocracy. But, for the time being that really isn't a possibility while Israel is so secular.

So what is your take on this?

[sharonbn]

Micah,

I think your diagnostics are correct. But the solution is way way too extreme.

The government system in Israel is flawed. It requires the PM to maintain his coaltion by contant negotiations with demands of coalition members. The demands never stop, the negotiations go on for the duration of the term and consume way too much of the PM's time and energy.

To solve this problem, the election system was changed but the election system is not the problem. The problem lies in two flaws of the Israeli government and political system:
1. The government members are members of political parties
2. The knesset has the power to disperse the government, remove the PM and call for elections.
The two conditions are the cause why Israeli governments never finish their 4 year terms.
AFAIK, these conditions do not exist in the US political system. The members of the government are personally chosen by the president and the Senate and Congress do not have the power to remove the president. The president can only be removed if found guilty of criminal act.

What we need in Israel is a "presidential" government system, similar to that of the USA and France.
The Israeli PM is elected seperately from the Knesset. He personally chooses his cabinet members without regard to the political map in the Knesset and the knesset cannot disperse the government and call for lections.
These amendments will give the Israeli PM the peace of mind that he has 4 years to implement his vision/plan and will free his resources from political pressure from the many pressure groups.
The responsibility of the knesset is limited to passing rules.

[Mediocrates]

Somewhere around here I raised the issue of constitutions. Clearly a Parliamentary system is becoming a handicap for Israel and there is a need to create an executive branch that does not derive its power from the majority party. Just as clearly though it is vitally important to maintainn parties for that is what legitimizes political dissent and discussion.

[Philip]

Can Israel be a Jewish state AND a democracy? Sure -- it will just have to expel every so often chunks of its population that does not accept it being a Jewish state, just as it did in the beginning. As long as the the majority can be maintained in this way, there is no contradiction between fascism and democracy.

[Micah]

As I said, the solution I proposed is unrealistic at this time.

And I don't see how your solution could be any good. So you assume that when the PM is't in danger of losing his position he won't give into "blackmail?" What happens when a PM like Sharon doesn't have the problem of the labor party threatening to kick him out?

[Vic]

Originally posted by Micah
My personal opinion on it is to go back to the beginning of how Israel was when it was first born when Joshua defeated the Canannites. That is, a Monarcy/Theocracy. But, for the time being that really isn't a possibility while Israel is so secular.

So what is your take on this?

Do you have a candidate for the position of the founder of the royal dynasty?

[sharonbn]

Originally posted by Micah
And I don't see how your solution could be any good. So you assume that when the PM is't in danger of losing his position he won't give into "blackmail?" What happens when a PM like Sharon doesn't have the problem of the labor party threatening to kick him out?

The labour party is not the only problem of Sharon. He has to negotiate between the ministry of treasury and ministry of education, between the ministry of treasury and the national bank, between the the ministry of treasury and religious parties ............... its a wonder he finds time to do ANYTHING else besides domestic politics.

Regardless of what you or I may think of Sharon, he was elected by the Israeli people and should be given at least the chance to realize his vision/plan to end the terror attacks. For that to happen he needs space to operate.

By the way, I believe if Barak was given the same opportunity, may be he would approach Camp David summit in a different manner and maybe the outcaome would be different.

Same can be said for Netanyahu, for Rabin, for Peres ......... they all had to accmodate for domestic politics when realizing their diplopmatic vision.

[danholo]

From a religious point of view, Israel should be a Jewish state, whose laws go by the Torah. Israel is not a state with Jewish laws.
If it were though and the law would be taken by the word the country would be better then many out there.
The goal of the Jewish law is to make a perfect country/nation.
Jewish law is great since, welfare is important, judicial system is almost flawless etc. Even foreigners are accounted for and they must be treated as equals. Though if the foreigner can not act according to a humane moral code (i.e Noahide laws) he is to be banished.
A group of suicide bomber families would not be allowed in Israel fot instance.

[sharonbn]

Originally posted by danholo
From a religious point of view, Israel should be a Jewish state, whose laws go by the Torah. Israel is not a state with Jewish laws.
If it were though and the law would be taken by the word the country would be better then many out there.
The goal of the Jewish law is to make a perfect country/nation.
Jewish law is great since, welfare is important, judicial system is almost flawless etc. Even foreigners are accounted for and they must be treated as equals. Though if the foreigner can not act according to a humane moral code (i.e Noahide laws) he is to be banished.
A group of suicide bomber families would not be allowed in Israel fot instance.

A pretty view.
Unfortunately, this is both untrue and unrealistic:
The religious political parties are the hardest pressure group in Israeli politics, taking care of their own with total disregard to secular Jews or other groups.
Making Israel an ultra-religious country will make it similar to Iran, with zero tolerance towards other belifs and other life styles (e.g. homosexualism, abortions, single parenthood, etc.)
and last but not least, imagine if all of the Israelis were orthodox religious - who will be left to serve in the military and defend Israel?

[danholo]

Originally posted by sharonbn


A pretty view.
Unfortunately, this is both untrue and unrealistic:
The religious political parties are the hardest pressure group in Israeli politics, taking care of their own with total disregard to secular Jews or other groups.

It doesn't mean that a Jewish country should act accordingly.

Making Israel an ultra-religious country will make it similar to Iran, with zero tolerance towards other belifs and other life styles (e.g. homosexualism, abortions, single parenthood, etc.)

About the life styles you are correct.
Though the Torah says to respect outsiders as you would yourself. Muslims should be wholeheartedly be welcome in Israel. I guess Haredim just have a stereotype of Arabs:
Arabs sacrifice their children and want to destroy the Jews.

and last but not least, imagine if all of the Israelis were orthodox religious - who will be left to serve in the military and defend Israel?

You telling me that ancient Israel didn't have a military?
In Torah, defence of land is very important. You don't have to be secular to defend your country.
Too bad many Haredim do not join the army. I think military service should be mandatory for them also.

[sharonbn]

Originally posted by danholo
It doesn't mean that a Jewish country should act accordingly.[/B]

Yes it does. for two reasons:
1. In ancient times, all Jews were religious. However, for the last 150 year this was not the case. Today, the VAST majority of Jews are secular. Orthodox religious are 15%. Moreover, it is the secular Zionist movement who made independant Israel possible. Many orthodox Jews still oppose the state and its laws.
It would be a historical injustice to make the Zionist creation, the state of Israel, an ultra-religious state.
2. If the representatives of the Jewish religion are the orthodox political parties, than the Jewish faith is indeed primitive and narrow minded. The orthodox political parties are a bunch of greedy, stupid, selfish, criminal gangsters. The secular parties do a MUCH better job of portraing all that's beatiful and wise in the Jewish people.

Originally posted by danholo
About the life styles you are correct.
Though the Torah says to respect outsiders as you would yourself. Muslims should be wholeheartedly be welcome in Israel. I guess Haredim just have a stereotype of Arabs:
Arabs sacrifice their children and want to destroy the Jews. [/B]

I didn't even speak about Arabs. I spoke of Jews who choose to live an alternative life styles. If Israel will become ultra-religious, it will have draconian laws forbidding homosexualism, erotic art, abortions, single parenthood and probably women vote.

Originally posted by danholo
You telling me that ancient Israel didn't have a military?
In Torah, defence of land is very important. You don't have to be secular to defend your country.
Too bad many Haredim do not join the army. I think military service should be mandatory for them also. [/B]

I'm telling you that the orthodox Jews are the parasites of the Israeli society. What happened 2000 years ago bares zero relevance to these people. I'm not only talking about military service. These people do not work, do not pay taxes, do not mix in the cultural and economic fabric of the Israeli society. They wish to distance themselves from everything that even smells as productive community life. They live in self created ghettos. They do, however, receive money from the state, courtesy of their greedy political representatives.

[Vic]

Is one of the problems of the Israeli governmental system a low entrance threshold for participation in the Knesset? It is, if I am not mistaken, 1.5% of total votes. Parliaments of European countries mostly require around 5% for a single party (in theory or in praxis: some have a kind of "winner takes all" system, i.e. the candidates who recieve the most votes for their districts become parliamentarians - with no corrections for the overall votes for their parties). The results are typically parliaments with 2 to 6 parties represented in them. Governments often require merely parliamentary majorities for appointments, important executive decisions, etc. It varies greatly from country to country of course.

It doesn't seem a good idea for a government to act without stringent parliamentary supervision. In fact, it can be one of the most efficient weapons of democratic control. We tend to complain about its weakness, especially where the EU administration is concerned

From my POV, such a system

Originally posted by sharonbn
The Israeli PM is elected seperately from the Knesset. He personally chooses his cabinet members without regard to the political map in the Knesset and the knesset cannot disperse the government and call for lections.
These amendments will give the Israeli PM the peace of mind that he has 4 years to implement his vision/plan and will free his resources from political pressure from the many pressure groups.
The responsibility of the knesset is limited to passing rules.

can lead to serious mismanagement and corruption of the executive all too easily. The ideal case is IMO between these extremes: government members who are first and foremost government members and not high-ranking party officials, who actually cooperate and do not trespass on each other's territory, their major decisions controlled by a competent and - for the average citizen - transparent parliamentary system.

What would the Israeli political landscape look like if only parties with, say, 5% of the votes would be permitted into the Knesset?

As for,

Originally posted by sharonbn
1. The government members are members of political parties
2. The knesset has the power to disperse the government, remove the PM and call for elections.

It is the same in many European countries. Re. 2.: Although parliaments do bring governments down from time to time, it doesn't seem much of an overall problem. The most prominent country with a chronically unstable government is Italy. Most of the others seem to function.

Is the problem I have written about here somehow related to the overall governmental system? I cannot seriously imagine any European Foreign Minister giving such interviews to the foreign media without losing his job.

[sharonbn]

Originally posted by Vic
Is one of the problems of the Israeli governmental system a low entrance threshold for participation in the Knesset? It is, if I am not mistaken, 1.5% of total votes. Parliaments of European countries mostly require around 5% for a single party (in theory or in praxis: some have a kind of "winner takes all" system, i.e. the candidates who recieve the most votes for their districts become parliamentarians - with no corrections for the overall votes for their parties). The results are typically parliaments with 2 to 6 parties represented in them. Governments often require merely parliamentary majorities for appointments, important executive decisions, etc. It varies greatly from country to country of course.

Yes, one of the problems that cuases the Israeli parliament to house over 15 parties is the low entrance threshold. The current threshold allows for parties to have as low as 2 seats. It should be made somewhere in the vicinity of 5%, making minimum size of ~7 seats.

Regarding winner takes all (as in the US), I don't know. Currently, Israeli elections are general (i.e. state encompassing). Although the internal election of the labour party, for instance, are a mix of district and state.

Originally posted by Vic
It doesn't seem a good idea for a government to act without stringent parliamentary supervision. In fact, it can be one of the most efficient weapons of democratic control. We tend to complain about its weakness, especially where the EU administration is concerned

It works fine for the US..... maybe we should try it here. If it doesn't work, we can always go back or try another system. What I do know is that the current system is seriously flawed to the point of crippling the PM from acting decisively.
About mismanagement: maybe. I don't have the experience. But again, the current system leads to "institutionalized corruption" where the PM is subject to blackmail from his coalition members.

[danholo]

Originally posted by sharonbn


Yes it does. for two reasons:
1. In ancient times, all Jews were religious. However, for the last 150 year this was not the case. Today, the VAST majority of Jews are secular. Orthodox religious are 15%. Moreover, it is the secular Zionist movement who made independant Israel possible. Many orthodox Jews still oppose the state and its laws.
It would be a historical injustice to make the Zionist creation, the state of Israel, an ultra-religious state.

Here you are correct. My belief though is that G-d has used the secular to make the new Jewish state. In the end even seculars will be more involved in the Torah, but not in the extreme way.
For instance extreme Jewish laws shouldn't be taken that literally.

I have nothing against homosexuals. The Torah forbids men to have sex with other men. It does not and can not forbid a person to be homosexual. But homosexuality and sex between two homosexual males is somehow entwined and I see it impossible and stupid to put a man to death if he has homosexual relations.

I say, if Israel was a religious state, homosexuals could act as they please. This is not possible though according to ultra-orthodox.
Not all orthodox people are ultra-orthodox though, but I don't think they accept gays.

2. If the representatives of the Jewish religion are the orthodox political parties, than the Jewish faith is indeed primitive and narrow minded. The orthodox political parties are a bunch of greedy, stupid, selfish, criminal gangsters. The secular parties do a MUCH better job of portraing all that's beatiful and wise in the Jewish people.

I don't know much about the ultra-orthdox vs. secular situation in Israel, but I think it's one of the biggest problems in Israel and overall Jewish society.
It is true that many ultra-orthodox are like what you described. Thing is, are they really "good Jews" at all? They have gone a little over the top, IMO. I'd like to be religious and I hope I can one day, but everything has it's limits, no?

I didn't even speak about Arabs. I spoke of Jews who choose to live an alternative life styles. If Israel will become ultra-religious, it will have draconian laws forbidding homosexualism, erotic art, abortions, single parenthood and probably women vote.

Somehow, when I think of Judaism, it doesn't sound this extreme.
I'd make a state with Jewish and secular law in perfect harmony.
I'm in no position to do so though.
If I could, I'd probably be stoned to death by some extremists.

I'm telling you that the orthodox Jews are the parasites of the Israeli society. What happened 2000 years ago bares zero relevance to these people. I'm not only talking about military service. These people do not work, do not pay taxes, do not mix in the cultural and economic fabric of the Israeli society. They wish to distance themselves from everything that even smells as productive community life. They live in self created ghettos. They do, however, receive money from the state, courtesy of their greedy political representatives.

All the orthodox and haredim I know in Israel are nice people and they don't fit into your category.
What you mentioned though is a problem. Haredim think they are in some kind of special position while they actually are not.
Why are the government officials in Israel afraid to stand up to the haredim and demand more responsibility from them towards the state? Even if most of them don't accept the present State of Israel, they should do something to help or to be productive.
Thing is, that they don't study anything else but Torah.
But in Torah it is almost a command to do work and then if you are rich SOB and can help the community without much work, then you can focus more on the Torah.
Somehow the balance should be revived.

[Vic]

A question to the American posters,

Originally posted by sharonbn
quote:
----------------------------------------------------------------

Originally posted by Vic
It doesn't seem a good idea for a government to act without stringent parliamentary supervision. In fact, it can be one of the most efficient weapons of democratic control. We tend to complain about its weakness, especially where the EU administration is concerned

----------------------------------------------------------------

It works fine for the US..... maybe we should try it here.

How much control does the parliamentary system in the US really exercise over the government?

----------------------------------------------------------------

If it doesn't work, we can always go back or try another system.

No, you won't be able to go back, this will be the problem. Once the head of the state is offered near-dictatorial power, he won't relinquish it easily. There is a similar development in Italy under way, after decades of political instability comparable in some respects to that in Israel, with Berlusconi trying to accumulate all the political power he can grab. It is very alarming, really, since once the parliament loses power, it would probably take a full-fledged civil war to get it back.

What I do know is that the current system is seriously flawed to the point of crippling the PM from acting decisively.
About mismanagement: maybe. I don't have the experience. But again, the current system leads to "institutionalized corruption" where the PM is subject to blackmail from his coalition members.

Is it possible to optimize the parliamentary system without bringing down the whole country?