Missing from this discussion is the question of whether A state can be both democratic and Jewish. I certainly believe so. Also a basic principle of democracy is majority rules. This principle has been eroded over the years by entrenching minority rights.
By Asher Fredman, YNET
“Democracy in Israel,” intones New Israel Fund CEO Daniel Sokatch, “is under attack.” Europeans, cautions Ben-Gurion University Dean David Newman, are beginning to question Israel’s commitment to democracy, especially following criticism of European government funding for Israeli NGOs.
Warnings that Israel’s democracy is under assault are becoming a popular refrain.
On the morning radio talk show, Mah Bo’er (What’s Hot), the host recently dedicated an entire segment to Israel’s faltering democracy. He ticked off the warning signs; uniformed soldiers barred from a Haifa restaurant, court-imposed gag orders on state security grounds, our treatment of foreign workers…
Antipathy towards the military, the balance between freedom of the press and state security, and immigration policy are all important issues for discussion. Likewise the impact of European government funding for politicized NGOs is a worthy topic for consideration.
But whatever one’s position on these issues, the fact that they are being debated is not a sign that the end of democracy is near.
Why then is it being portrayed as such?
In reality, this is not a battle for democracy. Rather, it is part of the ongoing attempts by different groups to shape the state in their image. Now that the slogans of the peace camp and the “civil revolution” no longer resonate with most Israelis, certain parts of Israel’s ideological spectrum have raised a new banner – Democracy. As democracy’s self-appointed standard-bearers, any criticism of their activities or worldview becomes an assault on democracy itself.
Of course there are many views within academia as to what democracy entails. At its most basic level, democracy is a set of rules of the game, a political framework in which power ultimately rests in the demos. Democracy theorist Robert Dahl lists eight conditions necessary to sustain democracy. These include the right to vote and be elected, freedom of expression and association, and “institutions for making public policies depend on votes and other expressions of preference.”
Building on this base, every democracy balances competing rights, freedoms and interests in its own way. Democracy is compatible with a wide range of policies and practices. If one turns to our enlightened counterparts, it appears that democracy is compatible with the Swiss ban on building minarets, the French ban on forms of Islamic dress, and Dutch citizenship examinations meant to weed out Muslims uncomfortable with homosexual unions. It is compatible with the British and French declarations reserving the right to carry out reprisals that violate international humanitarian law. It is consistent with the state religions of our European friends.
Those wrapping themselves in the banner of democracy are really arguing for their vision of Israeli society. They are staking a position along the classic dividing lines – Right versus Left, secular versus religious, universalistic versus nationalist etc.
Knesset Transparency Bill
Exhibit A in the campaign to convince us that democracy is under attack is a proposed Knesset bill that would increase transparency surrounding foreign government funding for Israeli NGOs. Those leading the campaign happen also to be the beneficiaries of that funding.
The bill, largely modeled on longstanding US legislation known as the FARA Act, was first discussed at a Knesset conference on foreign government funding. The organizers, in the spirit of democratic discussion, offered the leaders of five of the most powerful NGOs, the NIF, B’Tselem, ACRI, Adalah and Gisha, an open platform. All refused to take part. The NGOs then contacted MKs from the Left and warned them against participating.
The proposed legislation would expand the funding information that NGOs must report, require timelier reporting, and ensure that this information is readily available to the public. Some NGOs already meet these standards of transparency; most do not.
While ignoring the issues of transparency and foreign interests, the NGOs have focused most of their attacks on a clause that was dropped in the early negotiations over the bill. The clause would have removed tax-exempt status, intended for organizations “promoting the public good,” from organizations heavily engaged in Israel’s most contentious political debates. Whatever the merits of the clause, its fate demonstrates the robustness of Israel’s admittedly imperfect parliamentary democracy.
The bill received government support on condition that Likud and Labor parliamentarians would agree on its final version. Subsequently, consultations took place between Labor and Likud MKs, and between the Knesset and Justice Ministry, and the clause was dropped. Nevertheless, the NGOs have continued to use this clause as a straw man to vilify the legislation.
After refusing to take part in the Knesset discussion, 11 prominent NGOs continued to demonstrate their commitment to the democratic process by turning to the European Parliament and urging it to intervene. Among their recommendations is that the “EU should follow closely all anti-democratic trends in Israel with a view to supporting Human Rights and democracy.”
These NGOs and their supporters make a determined effort to portray legitimate criticism of aspects of their activities as an assault on Israeli democracy. Then they warn that unless their critics repent, those abroad will view Israeli democracy as under assault.
Rather than employing hollow slogans and alarmist rhetoric, all sides should return to a substantive discussion of the important issues facing Israel’s democracy. Criticism and debate are not signs of the weakness of democracy, but of its strength.
Asher Fredman has worked with several Jerusalem-area think-tanks and with Minister Michael Eitan
Pure democracy is mob rule—three wolves and two sheep voting on what’s for dinner. Democracy is one component of a free society but should not be the cornerstone—individual rights should be. When a minority controls the wealth of a nation and makes dependents of a majority as a mandate to rule the remainder as they please, freedom is dead.
False. The USA was founded upon these ideas,
In Washington there the is a sculpture on one one of the buildings of an eagle under which is engraved the Ten Commandments. The right eagles’ wing comes down and covers up the first four commandments, which pertain to man’s obligation to his Creator. The remaining six commandments which refer to mans duty of law to his fellow are the only ones in view.
The symbolism seems obvious. The first four commands exist, but the state is blind to them and has no power of enforcement on any matter in that regard. The obligation of faith belongs to each person according to the dictates of his own conscience. The remaining six which are the basis of civil law were the only areas where the state was to have power: murder, fraud, stealing, slander, etc.—crimes committed by men against men.
What Tar Yag means by absolute truth is a theocracy, which ultimately in any society will be corrupted when men are allowed to determine what the infallible truth is according to their own private interpretation. This is what you had with Rome historically and what you have with Islam today. Jews, or any other people are not immune either if they should ever allow a small group to dictate the ‘absolute truth’ to all—even if that ‘truth’ is secular.
When any society ceases to be in conflict there is tyranny and the people are in bondage.
Ted, Judaism is compatible with democracy in a certain extent, but the concept of democracy is irrelevant on the basis of our believes, i.e. that there is truth and inherent justice, in contrast to that democracy is necessary on the bais of the western premise of moral equivalence and the non-existence of truth. you should read in that context one of the books of hans kelsen, a jewish atheist law professor who happened to be one of the authors (if not the main author) of the pre-shoah austrian constitution.
Tar Yag
My position is that she can. I do not suggest that she can be as Jewish as you want her to be and be democratic. I don’t know enough about Judaism to offer such an opinion.
My position is simply that given the various forms of democracy that one might find, and given Israel as it is today, there is no conflict with democracy. This is what the debate is about. It a whole other debate whether Judaism is democratic. By that I mean orthodox Judaism.
As for your question Does a Jewish state need democracy?, I answer, it does if he people want it. Of course the Arab Israelis would not like it.
I didn’t hear the show but most of the restaurateurs in Haifa are Arab/owned and operated.
Haifa has always been known here as Haifa the Red.
Miserable unpatriotic skunks. The reason they have the freedom to operate a restaurant is because of the sacrifice of Israeli soldiers. The public should boycott that restaurant.
I question Europe’s commitment to democracy given the infiltration of sharia law.
Ted, I understand that your question is: Can Israel remain Jewish by being democratic?
But my question is: Does a Jewish State need democracy?
Can Israel be both Jewish and Democratic? by Ted Belman
Yamit, according to the Gemara (Moed Katan) the 24000 students of Rabbi Akiva died during an “Azkara” (which means “war”) and of a “Mita Ra’ah” (which means “by the sword”). Rabbi Akiva supported Bar Kokhva of whom he thaught that he was a potential Mashia’h Ben Yosef. Unfortunately, the people was devided and therefore Bar Kokhva did not succeed, but at least he massacred an entire roman division, probably on the 18th of Iyyar which is the 33rd day of the ‘Omer.
the Jewish people, in order to be strong must unite. In 1948 the Hagana, the Lehi and the Etzel tried to liberate Jerusalem, each one from a different gate, and therefore non of them succeeed, Jerusalem remained divided as was the people of Israel. In 1967 was formed the first national unity government of Israel, and immediately Jerusalem was liberated and unified.
Tell me Tar Yag do you believe the siphorei saftah that the twenty thousand students of Akiva died of a plague?
One thing is for sure the rabbis and sages were shitty leaders who got tens of millions of Jews killed. They may have had Torah wisdom and even here the jury is out re: most of them but as leaders? I would prefer a Livni or an Olmert, With these miscreants I have no illusions, no expectations for good and have no respect for any of them.
yamit, not always can we understand historical and recent events, the Shoah and the Israli anti-Semitic olygarchy. Maybe the wicked feel the truth and are trying to do to us what will be done to them. Certainly, Amalek will be annihilated, and Dorit will be tried and sentenced.
the Rabbis said: “every utterence contains a truth” (En Davar SheEn Lo Maqom, Pirqe Avot)
thus Hitler, Stalin and Beinisch are not completely wrong in that wisdom must sometimes be corrected. the great historical correction will certainly be the day of judgment for Dorit.
TaRYaG=400(T)+200(R)+10(Y)+3(G)=613
The Europeans love the Saudis, Love, most of the third world non democratic nations and do not question their legitimacy because they have this or that type of political system. They accept them and if there is criticism it is muted unlike with Israel.
Since I belong to that growing minority that holds that Judaism and democracy are incompatible; therefore I find the root of this topic mute. Israel is in so many ways not democratic and how could it be with the hegemony of the left regardless of which political party rules, a clear sign of the non democratic nature of Israel.
Our leadership is not transparent, our government and their institutions they administer are not transparent. The average Israel feels disenfranchised from any political decisions and the decision making process. Nobody ever asks us hat we think or what we want. Even a choice by elections every few years when in fact whoever is chosen seems to be a clone of those replaced.
I could write a whole treatise on why Israel is no democracy but that doesn’t explain the criticism of the leftist EU: All their NGO’s want Israel dismembered and given to our enemies who wish us dead. Underlying the EU support for those anti Israel NGO’s is a long millennial wish to see the Jews either dead or in the most demeaning of states.
They are not happy campers when challenged and threatened by Jews. Especially Jews who posses in their little hand a small red or green button. We have the power to illuminate a thousand suns.
no they are not happy campers and I really don’t care.
Tar yag
What is the origins of this name?
You write
the King, who has the power to overule sentences of wise men, e.g. the King can kill whome ever he wants without explanation of reasons, in order to correct the limits of human wisdom which never can be absolute
I would not place your king in charge of my cats and dog, especially my cats and dog
You are not a little mad Tar Yag!
Ted
I wrote a reply to this, and it did not go through.
Then I wrote a piece on my blog http://www.4international.wordpress.com
Hope this will develop the discussion which centres around whether it is correct to call these people like Pappe left or Jewish traitors. I believe the latter
western democracy departs from the postulate that there is no inherent truth (cf. “moral equivalence”) and therefore contents itself with purely formal criteria. of course, formalism has nothing to do with true justice (cf. Hans Kelsen who wrote that every norm can be law (Reine Rechtslehre. p. 201))
in contrast to that, Judaism maintains three things:
a) there is absolute truth and justice
b) this absolute truth is inaccassible by men, by any man,
c) the degree of truth accessible for wise men is high enough in order to place them above the unwise men, but there can be several equally wise men, and in this case a democratic solution must be found within a panel of the wisest men
d) there are situations when the hand of wise men are bound by their own wise rules and then they are obliged to wisely pronounce an injustice, e.g. to liberate a murderer because there cannot be found two credible witnesses, and in this case Judaism provides an additional authority, the King, who has the power to overule sentences of wise men, e.g. the King can kill whome ever he wants without explanation of reasons, in order to correct the limits of human wisdom which never can be absolute