Is democracy a cure all? We have previously circulated some of the work of the GLORIA Center on this subject. Their work disputes the notion that democracy in itself is a perfect goal. This topic is worthy of a conversation in itself.
What should be the basis for the right to vote in Israel? In the U.S, those born here have a right to vote even if uneducated, below average in intelligence, uncommitted to democratic values, or even anti-American. Proving loyalty to America only arises as an issue at the time one seeks naturalized citizenship. It is not clear whether Israel should set more stringent conditions for determining who should be permitted to vote, particularly non-Jewish Israelis. That subject would, in itself, be worthy of hours of debate. Just one example of why this subject is so complex: should an Arab who is loyal to Israel have lesser or greater rights than a Jew who thinks that Zionism was a mistake?
What should be Israel’s Constitution? While the Torah is the constitution for the Jewish people, it is not clear that it should be the constitution for a modern secular state. There are many people who think that Israel’s Basic Laws comprise a constitution (that was the official position of Israel’s Supreme Court under Aharon Barak) and others who think that Israel needs to write a new constitution (a project currently under way in the Knesset, with which we are intimately involved).
Should anyone leave Israel? You seem to be suggesting that Muslims be expelled and that secular Israelis be invited to leave. Beyond the obvious moral issues and legal issues (e.g. Kach was outlawed for suggesting that Arabs should be expelled), there are serious questions about the economic and social impacts. Moreover, since the majority of Israelis fall into the categories you name, Israel’s population might end up being reduced to 2 million if your recommendations were followed. This topic isn’t one that could be handled in a paragraph or two.
I replied. (The italicized sentances are Neil's comments on my reply.)
In essence you seem to favour a democratic Israel rather then a Jewish Israel assuming the two are mutually exclusive or at least inconsistent. No I don’t. All I said is that this is a complex issue that requires paragraphs to explain, not pithy comments. The Left wants Israel to be a state like any other Which left are you talking about? Labor Zionists want no such thing. They want a Jewish State, and they were the majority of the people who spilled their blood fighting for such a Jewish State. If they had been willing to settle for a non-Jewish democratic state they could have stayed in the diaspora. You keep on incorrectly ascribing ideas and motives to people with whose conclusions you disagree. Many on the left are as Zionist as you do and have the exact same motives and goals as you, but make different judgements about what will work and what won’t. and the Right wants Israel to be a Jewish state.
I don't believe that the two are inconsistant. Israel can be both a Jewish and a democratic state. I agree. But even if they are I prefer to sacrifice "democracy" to preserve the Jewish state.. You make the assumption that such a sacrifice would end up with a Jewish state. Others have argued that such a state would quickly lose its Jewish character. They argue that it would become “treif.” I am not prepared to argue here whether they are right or wrong. But, I do want to argue that the outcome is not obvious. You have every right to argue for what you believe in, but you should not be so dismissive when others who share your goals have a different view about what will help preserve Israel’s security.
Is there one model of what is acceptable in a democratic state. I think not. The American constitution strove to preserve certain cultural values. Absolutely not. First of all, the American constitution strove to preserve the different systems of the various states (that’s why the U.S. was established as a federal system; it is the reason for the fight between the federalists and their opponents) as well as individual rights (the Constitution could not be ratified until the Bill of Rights was added) as a bulwark against majoritarianism. Secondly, about a year ago a debate ensued between those who think that there is an American culture and those who think there is an American vision. It is not clear that there ever has been a single culture in America. Third, I am not sure what this has to do with Israel????
It used to be that the educational system was slanted to preserve patriotism. Now there is a shift to undermine what is uniquely American replacing it with multiculturalism and relativism. That has become the essence of what America stands for although the Right is fighting that notion.
I personally disagree with these ideas. I believe a State has the right, the democratic right, to create a parochial state which stands for certain values. Europe is in the forefront of multiculturalism and reltivism and I submit to you that it isn't working. Actually Europe, historically, did exactly the opposite. German was for the Germans, French for the Franks (and to a limited extent for the Bretons). Only the U.S. was open to the Scots, the Germans, the Italians, and the Jews, and permitted each of us to maintain our individual culture while becoming and being full and free Americans. My father and uncle lived on the lower East Side, spoke Yiddish at home, ate knishes and blintzes and went to shul. No one told them that they had to do otherwise. My uncle went on to be part of the Manhattan Project and headed up the computational section that developed the hydrogen bomb. Because America allowed multiculturalism, he was able to become a top mathematician and the U.S got the bomb. If he had been denied his right to be himself, he would have been excluded from college and the U.S. would have lost out.
The Left demands that Israel conform to their ideas of what a state should be..Israel has the right to dance to a different drummer. I maintain that Israel has the right to keep the right of return for Jews only for instance.. Israel has the right to enshrine in the constitution, should it ever get written, the right for issues of national concern to be determined only by Jews or by at least a super majority. If people don't want to live in a Jewish state, whatever that means, they can go live where they want. I agree. That’s why it’s so important to write a constitution that will make it clear that Israel is a Jewish state. I don’t want Israel to be the U.S. We want separation of church and state in the U.S. but support Israel being a Jewish state.
Many democratic states have different requirements for citizenship. Why should Israel be denied the same right. I believe that the constitution in Israel could protect the continuation of Israel as a Jewish state. Israel has the majority to do it now. And why not. . You ask why not; I could spend an hour telling you why it might be a good idea and another two hours why it would be a bad idea. Any state can set standards for what it takes to be a citizen. For example, a Muslim state could deny citizenship to Jews. But just because it can do it, doesn’t mean that it would be smart to do it.
But I maintain that Israel would remain "democratic" giving democratic a wide definition. I believe that the democratic club the Left uses against Israel is meant not to advance democracy but to deny the maintenance of a Jewish state. Liberal Jews favour the universal over the particular. That's what it is about.
I like your question "should an Arab who is loyal to Israel have lesser or greater rig hts than a Jew who thinks that Zionism was a mistake?"
As for the latter, a Jew is a Jew no matter what he thinks. Israel was created for Jews. Afterall the Palestine Mandate held the land on trust for the Jewish people. So even such a Jew may live in Israel and vote as a Jew. That's the Jewish way. As for the loyal Arab, he should have the same voting rights as any citizen. I would rather have a loyal Arab citizen then a disloyal Jewish one. By the way a recent poll found that 60% of Israeli Arabs accept Israel as a Jewish state. It is the business of the Israelis what kind of state they want and the world including diaspora Jews should butt out.
Having said that a new constitution should be created which is designed to maintain Israel as a Jewish state. Every citizen would have the right to vote. I would want such a constitution to provide for super majorities on questions related to relinqishing land or maintaining defense or immigration rules.. Is this not democratic? Don't all countries have requirements for super majorities.
Your last point does not reflect my views whatsoever. I think you are implying that from my suggestion of requiring all applicants for citizenship to sign a loyalty oath. This does not refer to Jews who have an unchallenged right to be citizens. Nor does it apply to Arab citizens. But it should apply to potential new citzens. I also think Israel should pass laws that define treason better and to prosecute under such laws. The Arab MK's are given too much latitude. Actually, here I am more conservative than you are. I don’t reject out of hand the idea of requiring a loyalty oath of everyone in Israel.
If Israel isn't going to be a Jewish state, what's the point? I agree.
-------------------------------------------------------------
In response to Neil's interlineated comments I want to clarify the issue of multiculturalism. He is referring to the melting pot when he talks of multiculturalism. I am all for the melting pot and equal rights and opportunity and freedom of religion. What I don't like about multiculturalism is that it undermines the melting pot. People are entitled to maintain their religious identification in public without adverse consequences. My objection to multiculturalism is not intended to prevent this from happening .
My kind of Israel
By Ted Belman
I forwarded a number of my articles on disengagement and the peace process to members of the AJC. Neil Goldstein, the Executive Director, replied identifying a number of issues that he took from them,
I replied. (The italicized sentances are Neil's comments on my reply.)
In essence you seem to favour a democratic Israel rather then a Jewish Israel assuming the two are mutually exclusive or at least inconsistent. No I don’t. All I said is that this is a complex issue that requires paragraphs to explain, not pithy comments. The Left wants Israel to be a state like any other Which left are you talking about? Labor Zionists want no such thing. They want a Jewish State, and they were the majority of the people who spilled their blood fighting for such a Jewish State. If they had been willing to settle for a non-Jewish democratic state they could have stayed in the diaspora. You keep on incorrectly ascribing ideas and motives to people with whose conclusions you disagree. Many on the left are as Zionist as you do and have the exact same motives and goals as you, but make different judgements about what will work and what won’t. and the Right wants Israel to be a Jewish state.
I don't believe that the two are inconsistant. Israel can be both a Jewish and a democratic state. I agree. But even if they are I prefer to sacrifice "democracy" to preserve the Jewish state.. You make the assumption that such a sacrifice would end up with a Jewish state. Others have argued that such a state would quickly lose its Jewish character. They argue that it would become “treif.” I am not prepared to argue here whether they are right or wrong. But, I do want to argue that the outcome is not obvious. You have every right to argue for what you believe in, but you should not be so dismissive when others who share your goals have a different view about what will help preserve Israel’s security.
Is there one model of what is acceptable in a democratic state. I think not. The American constitution strove to preserve certain cultural values. Absolutely not. First of all, the American constitution strove to preserve the different systems of the various states (that’s why the U.S. was established as a federal system; it is the reason for the fight between the federalists and their opponents) as well as individual rights (the Constitution could not be ratified until the Bill of Rights was added) as a bulwark against majoritarianism. Secondly, about a year ago a debate ensued between those who think that there is an American culture and those who think there is an American vision. It is not clear that there ever has been a single culture in America. Third, I am not sure what this has to do with Israel????
It used to be that the educational system was slanted to preserve patriotism. Now there is a shift to undermine what is uniquely American replacing it with multiculturalism and relativism. That has become the essence of what America stands for although the Right is fighting that notion.
I personally disagree with these ideas. I believe a State has the right, the democratic right, to create a parochial state which stands for certain values. Europe is in the forefront of multiculturalism and reltivism and I submit to you that it isn't working. Actually Europe, historically, did exactly the opposite. German was for the Germans, French for the Franks (and to a limited extent for the Bretons). Only the U.S. was open to the Scots, the Germans, the Italians, and the Jews, and permitted each of us to maintain our individual culture while becoming and being full and free Americans. My father and uncle lived on the lower East Side, spoke Yiddish at home, ate knishes and blintzes and went to shul. No one told them that they had to do otherwise. My uncle went on to be part of the Manhattan Project and headed up the computational section that developed the hydrogen bomb. Because America allowed multiculturalism, he was able to become a top mathematician and the U.S got the bomb. If he had been denied his right to be himself, he would have been excluded from college and the U.S. would have lost out.
The Left demands that Israel conform to their ideas of what a state should be..Israel has the right to dance to a different drummer. I maintain that Israel has the right to keep the right of return for Jews only for instance.. Israel has the right to enshrine in the constitution, should it ever get written, the right for issues of national concern to be determined only by Jews or by at least a super majority. If people don't want to live in a Jewish state, whatever that means, they can go live where they want. I agree. That’s why it’s so important to write a constitution that will make it clear that Israel is a Jewish state. I don’t want Israel to be the U.S. We want separation of church and state in the U.S. but support Israel being a Jewish state.
Many democratic states have different requirements for citizenship. Why should Israel be denied the same right. I believe that the constitution in Israel could protect the continuation of Israel as a Jewish state. Israel has the majority to do it now. And why not. . You ask why not; I could spend an hour telling you why it might be a good idea and another two hours why it would be a bad idea. Any state can set standards for what it takes to be a citizen. For example, a Muslim state could deny citizenship to Jews. But just because it can do it, doesn’t mean that it would be smart to do it.
But I maintain that Israel would remain "democratic" giving democratic a wide definition. I believe that the democratic club the Left uses against Israel is meant not to advance democracy but to deny the maintenance of a Jewish state. Liberal Jews favour the universal over the particular. That's what it is about.
I like your question "should an Arab who is loyal to Israel have lesser or greater rig hts than a Jew who thinks that Zionism was a mistake?"
As for the latter, a Jew is a Jew no matter what he thinks. Israel was created for Jews. Afterall the Palestine Mandate held the land on trust for the Jewish people. So even such a Jew may live in Israel and vote as a Jew. That's the Jewish way. As for the loyal Arab, he should have the same voting rights as any citizen. I would rather have a loyal Arab citizen then a disloyal Jewish one. By the way a recent poll found that 60% of Israeli Arabs accept Israel as a Jewish state. It is the business of the Israelis what kind of state they want and the world including diaspora Jews should butt out.
Having said that a new constitution should be created which is designed to maintain Israel as a Jewish state. Every citizen would have the right to vote. I would want such a constitution to provide for super majorities on questions related to relinqishing land or maintaining defense or immigration rules.. Is this not democratic? Don't all countries have requirements for super majorities.
Your last point does not reflect my views whatsoever. I think you are implying that from my suggestion of requiring all applicants for citizenship to sign a loyalty oath. This does not refer to Jews who have an unchallenged right to be citizens. Nor does it apply to Arab citizens. But it should apply to potential new citzens. I also think Israel should pass laws that define treason better and to prosecute under such laws. The Arab MK's are given too much latitude. Actually, here I am more conservative than you are. I don’t reject out of hand the idea of requiring a loyalty oath of everyone in Israel.
If Israel isn't going to be a Jewish state, what's the point? I agree.
-------------------------------------------------------------
In response to Neil's interlineated comments I want to clarify the issue of multiculturalism. He is referring to the melting pot when he talks of multiculturalism. I am all for the melting pot and equal rights and opportunity and freedom of religion. What I don't like about multiculturalism is that it undermines the melting pot. People are entitled to maintain their religious identification in public without adverse consequences. My objection to multiculturalism is not intended to prevent this from happening .
Posted by Ted Belman at February 1, 2006 07:43 AM