AP Analysis: Is Israel democratic? Not so clear

[ChiangMike]

My response was obviously to a post accusing someone of 'spin' (which you notably liked) - simply because the author said that established democracies typically wouldn't have a Jewish political party - that kind of question is a little silly. There is no Jewish party in the US either.

If Israel denies a two state solution that will leave an enormous population without a voice in their future or government - questioning whether this is philosophically a democracy is legitimate. There needs to be resolution.

[Jingthing]

I don't see the connection. A democracy includes citizens of a country. Israel citizens can vote. Their system is parliamentary. All this noise about Israel not being a democracy is just the same old game ... Israel demonization and obsession with the faults of Israel to an irrational degree relative to all other nations.

[Johpa]

For me, with the results of latest elections, I would describe Israel as an ethnic theocratic republic.

Nothing more...

And surely, not a democracy !

Your day-to-day knowledge of Israel is grievously lacking.

Most Israelis are secular and not religious. There are neighborhoods that could be described as "theocratic", say the Mea Sharim neighborhood in Jerusalem, as well as some conservative Muslum neighborhoods. But for the most part, the majority of the population is secular and in opposition to the religious right. Religion may be used for ethnic identity, and used to exclude others, but certainly its usage for theocratic purposes is severely limited. Even Netanyau is secular for Christ sake.

Democracy in Israel may have limitations, but there has long been vigorous political debate, often acrimonious debate between parties. And the political parties in Israel represent a far greater spectrum of political thought than does the political debate in most western countries, including the US. At the other end, in contrast, we have Thailand, which has nearly universal suffrage but absolutely no real political discourse (apart from perhaps exiled academic Giles Ungpakorn and his lonely voice in the UK), the difference between the parties in Thailand is simply who gets the biggest piece of the pie. So which country one chooses to be representative of "democracy" is highly subjective, with faults to be found everywhere. In the end, to declare one nation to be a democracy and another to be not be a democracy, as a simple yes/no answer, is doomed to get one nowhere.

[phrodan]

For me, with the results of latest elections, I would describe Israel as an ethnic theocratic republic.

Nothing more...

And surely, not a democracy !

Your day-to-day knowledge of Israel is grievously lacking.

Most Israelis are secular and not religious. There are neighborhoods that could be described as "theocratic", say the Mea Sharim neighborhood in Jerusalem, as well as some conservative Muslum neighborhoods. But for the most part, the majority of the population is secular and in opposition to the religious right. Religion may be used for ethnic identity, and used to exclude others, but certainly its usage for theocratic purposes is severely limited. Even Netanyau is secular for Christ sake.

Democracy in Israel may have limitations, but there has long been vigorous political debate, often acrimonious debate between parties. And the political parties in Israel represent a far greater spectrum of political thought than does the political debate in most western countries, including the US. At the other end, in contrast, we have Thailand, which has nearly universal suffrage but absolutely no real political discourse (apart from perhaps exiled academic Giles Ungpakorn and his lonely voice in the UK), the difference between the parties in Thailand is simply who gets the biggest piece of the pie. So which country one chooses to be representative of "democracy" is highly subjective, with faults to be found everywhere. In the end, to declare one nation to be a democracy and another to be not be a democracy, as a simple yes/no answer, is doomed to get one nowhere.

See - this is where the self-delusion comes in. The acrimonious debate takes place between parties that are agreed on one thing - denying others the vote.

It's a joke - wake up to the hypocrisy.

[phrodan]

It's telling that BiBi had to go crawling to the Arab electorate when the true level of racism that pours through his warped mind was exposed. Even he, that notorious megalomaniac, realized he'd gone a step too far with that one.

Many Israeli Jews, not all - have no intention of ever allowing democracy in their land. Every single election is rigged by denying people the vote.

[Jingthing]

For me, with the results of latest elections, I would describe Israel as an ethnic theocratic republic.

Nothing more...

And surely, not a democracy !

Your day-to-day knowledge of Israel is grievously lacking.

Most Israelis are secular and not religious. There are neighborhoods that could be described as "theocratic", say the Mea Sharim neighborhood in Jerusalem, as well as some conservative Muslum neighborhoods. But for the most part, the majority of the population is secular and in opposition to the religious right. Religion may be used for ethnic identity, and used to exclude others, but certainly its usage for theocratic purposes is severely limited. Even Netanyau is secular for Christ sake.

Democracy in Israel may have limitations, but there has long been vigorous political debate, often acrimonious debate between parties. And the political parties in Israel represent a far greater spectrum of political thought than does the political debate in most western countries, including the US. At the other end, in contrast, we have Thailand, which has nearly universal suffrage but absolutely no real political discourse (apart from perhaps exiled academic Giles Ungpakorn and his lonely voice in the UK), the difference between the parties in Thailand is simply who gets the biggest piece of the pie. So which country one chooses to be representative of "democracy" is highly subjective, with faults to be found everywhere. In the end, to declare one nation to be a democracy and another to be not be a democracy, as a simple yes/no answer, is doomed to get one nowhere.

See - this is where the self-delusion comes in. The acrimonious debate takes place between parties that are agreed on one thing - denying others the vote.

It's a joke - wake up to the hypocrisy.

Let me confirm what I think is your position.

Because Israel does not allow non-Israeli citizens living in West Bank and Gaza (and presumably many more "Palestinian" Arab non-Israeli citizens living all over the world) to vote in Israeli elections, their government structure does not qualify as a democracy.

If that's your opinion, fine. but I think it's up to Israel to decide only it's own citizens can vote just as any other nation.

If instead you are suggesting that Arab Israeli CITIZENS are denied the vote in Israeli elections ... that's obviously totally wrong.

Edited March 28, 2015 by Jingthing

[phrodan]

Please! show to me one Arab, Muslim or Islamic country which has any kind of Jewish Party - Legal, Registered, participating in elections and still alive!

Please! Put up or shut up!

Genuine political parties in established democracies rarely organise on a strictly religious basis.

Sounds like spin to deflect from what we all know already.There ISN'T one and would not be one, no matter what, but Israel is expected to be perfect. What hypocrisy.

No, yours is the true hypocrisy. There are large Jewish organizations in the U.S. that find Netanyahus management/treatment of Palestine and the West Bank disturbing. Are they anti Semitic?

The first question that has to be answered - is it possible to rationally criticize the expanding settlements without being called anti Semitic? For some it isn't - they cannot get past that or accept any criticism.

Ironically at the California hospital I do contract work for two of my peers who are Jewish were depressed at the election outcome and are certainly against the settlements. One peer though wasn't shy about proclaiming his delight - was he Jewish ? Nope

- he is an old right wing evangelical who has never been to Israel and never met a Palestinian. Mostly harmless guy but thank god he's not in a position of political power.

Anyway - people have to be able to discourse the Middle East without knee jerk reactions.

Uhuhu - and you'll find plenty of old, right wing, evangelical keyboard warriors on this board.

They can't wait for the Rapture - but I don't think there's much space in the 144,000 for sex tourists.

Be careful what you wish for, boys

[Johpa]

For me, with the results of latest elections, I would describe Israel as an ethnic theocratic republic.

Nothing more...

And surely, not a democracy !

Your day-to-day knowledge of Israel is grievously lacking.

Most Israelis are secular and not religious. There are neighborhoods that could be described as "theocratic", say the Mea Sharim neighborhood in Jerusalem, as well as some conservative Muslim neighborhoods. But for the most part, the majority of the population is secular and in opposition to the religious right. Religion may be used for ethnic identity, and used to exclude others, but certainly its usage for theocratic purposes is severely limited. Even Netanyau is secular for Christ sake.

Democracy in Israel may have limitations, but there has long been vigorous political debate, often acrimonious debate between parties. And the political parties in Israel represent a far greater spectrum of political thought than does the political debate in most western countries, including the US. At the other end, in contrast, we have Thailand, which has nearly universal suffrage but absolutely no real political discourse (apart from perhaps exiled academic Giles Ungpakorn and his lonely voice in the UK), the difference between the parties in Thailand is simply who gets the biggest piece of the pie. So which country one chooses to be representative of "democracy" is highly subjective, with faults to be found everywhere. In the end, to declare one nation to be a democracy and another to be not be a democracy, as a simple yes/no answer, is doomed to get one nowhere.

See - this is where the self-delusion comes in. The acrimonious debate takes place between parties that are agreed on one thing - denying others the vote.

It's a joke - wake up to the hypocrisy.

Just what exactly are you talking about? Where is the self-delusion in my post? Where is the acrimonious debate? Thorgal and myself may be in disagreement at times, but we also "like" each others posts at other times. I see an exchange of ideas and opinions and not any hypocrisy. Not to mention that I can't fully parse your post: i.e., "debate takes place between parties that are agreed on one thing".

[Seastallion]

I don't see the connection. A democracy includes citizens of a country. Israel citizens can vote. Their system is parliamentary. All this noise about Israel not being a democracy is just the same old game ... Israel demonization and obsession with the faults of Israel to an irrational degree relative to all other nations.

But Israel controls a couple of million people to whom they give no citizenship. These people have almost every aspect of their lives controlled by Israeli laws and decrees....yet they have no say.

Democracy? No.

[dexterm]

So if you're an Christian Arab, how would one's "ethnicity" be recorded? What if a Christian ceased to be a Christian and converted to Islam - would their ethnicity be changed and then recorded differently on 'government records'.

What government records are there that record Christianity as ethnicity? Seems a mighty strange way to classify things. Maybe atheism is an ethnicity also along with Buddhism and Zoroastraism.

Why do you care so much?

Why does the world care so much about the internal policies of teeny tiny Israel?

It's really bizarre.

Actually every single nation in the world has it's own unique cultural take on racial/ethnic/religious social classifications.

That's because people are social animals and very complex.

If you think Israel's are strange look at the Dominican Republic.

Look at how Brazil classifies race compared to the USA.

But few people are interested in such things.

Teeny tiny Jewish majority Israel continues to fascinate so many to an absurdly IRRATIONAL degree.

Should Jews be flattered or angry about such unbalanced attention compared to every other thing going on in the world?

There are 4 reasons why I criticize Israel:

1. I don’t like bullies of any variety.

2. The hypocrisy ..having been persecuted and oppressed elsewhere in the world Jews are now oppressing Palestinians... 4.5 million Palestinians under occupation for almost 50 years now.

3. I expect higher standards from Israel, because it professes to be a democracy, is one of the closest friends and allies to USA with $3.5 billion in aid to boot, is virtually European/American from many of its Jewish migrants and cultural links with many Israelis holding dual nationality. I have visited Israel and the infrastructure certainly feels like a developed democratic country. It is just not acting like a civilized one at the moment.

4. Israel is savable. There is still a large minority of its citizens who want Israel to become a normal, fully democratic European style country. There is also a large swell of global public opinion who want it to be so too... and I am one of them.

Edited March 29, 2015 by dexterm

[Ulysses G.]

Please! show to me one Arab, Muslim or Islamic country which has any kind of Jewish Party - Legal, Registered, participating in elections and still alive!

Please! Put up or shut up!

Genuine political parties in established democracies rarely organise on a strictly religious basis.

Sounds like spin to deflect from what we all know already.There ISN'T one and would not be one, no matter what, but Israel is expected to be perfect. What hypocrisy.

The first question that has to be answered - is it possible to rationally criticize the expanding settlements without being called anti Semitic?

STRAW MAN ALERT!

No one here is arguing that criticism of the settlements is "anti Semitic". Expanding them is controversial even with supporters of Israel. In fact, I don't think I've ever seen anyone - besides you - make that argument on the TV forum at all. You've made up this fake position from thin air, so you can argue with yourself about that, instead of having to admit that Israel is just as democratic as most .Western powers.

[Ulysses G.]

But Israel controls a couple of million people to whom they give no citizenship.

A couple of million people who are their sworn enemies and do not want to be citizens of Israel. Take off the blinkers.

[Neurath]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

So if you're an Christian Arab, how would one's "ethnicity" be recorded? What if a Christian ceased to be a Christian and converted to Islam - would their ethnicity be changed and then recorded differently on 'government records'.

What government records are there that record Christianity as ethnicity? Seems a mighty strange way to classify things. Maybe atheism is an ethnicity also along with Buddhism and Zoroastraism.

Why do you care so much?

Why does the world care so much about the internal policies of teeny tiny Israel?

It's really bizarre.

Actually every single nation in the world has it's own unique cultural take on racial/ethnic/religious social classifications.

That's because people are social animals and very complex.

If you think Israel's are strange look at the Dominican Republic.

Look at how Brazil classifies race compared to the USA.

But few people are interested in such things.

Teeny tiny Jewish majority Israel continues to fascinate so many to an absurdly IRRATIONAL degree.
Should Jews be flattered or angry about such unbalanced attention compared to every other thing going on in the world?

FIne by me. Israel classifies Christianity - a religion - as an ethnicity. Is there any reason for classifying a religion as an ethnicity? So I guess I'm asking whether Israel's unique cultural take in doing so is something that might explain aspects of National Identity that in tern might help to understand state policies/actions. So sure, different countries have different classification systems - and a key to understanding the countries in question (in this case Israel) is understanding the reasons for the classifications. They're not just plucked out of the air.

[Ulysses G.]

Israel classifies Christianity - a religion - as an ethnicity. Is there any reason for classifying a religion as an ethnicity?

Because it can be either one and most Israelis are secular, so it applies to Jews as well. You don't have to believe what is says in the Bible to be a Christian or a Jew.

An ethnic group or ethnicity is a socially defined category of people who identify with each other based on common ancestral, social, cultural or national experience.[1][2] Membership of an ethnic group tends to be defined by a shared cultural heritage, ancestry, origin myth, history, homeland, language and/or dialect, ideology, symbolic systems such as religion, mythology and ritual, cuisine, dressing style, physical appearance, etc.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_group

[Seastallion]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

So if you're an Christian Arab, how would one's "ethnicity" be recorded? What if a Christian ceased to be a Christian and converted to Islam - would their ethnicity be changed and then recorded differently on 'government records'.

What government records are there that record Christianity as ethnicity? Seems a mighty strange way to classify things. Maybe atheism is an ethnicity also along with Buddhism and Zoroastraism.

Why do you care so much?

Why does the world care so much about the internal policies of teeny tiny Israel?

It's really bizarre.

Actually every single nation in the world has it's own unique cultural take on racial/ethnic/religious social classifications.

That's because people are social animals and very complex.

If you think Israel's are strange look at the Dominican Republic.

Look at how Brazil classifies race compared to the USA.

But few people are interested in such things.

Teeny tiny Jewish majority Israel continues to fascinate so many to an absurdly IRRATIONAL degree.

Should Jews be flattered or angry about such unbalanced attention compared to every other thing going on in the world?

FIne by me. Israel classifies Christianity - a religion - as an ethnicity. Is there any reason for classifying a religion as an ethnicity? So I guess I'm asking whether Israel's unique cultural take in doing so is something that might explain aspects of National Identity that in tern might help to understand state policies/actions. So sure, different countries have different classification systems - and a key to understanding the countries in question (in this case Israel) is understanding the reasons for the classifications. They're not just plucked out of the air.

And there's the crux of it; the reasons for the classifications.

For most countries, it's for social reasons such as identifying low socio-economic groups to target for assistance in education, for example, or simply statistics.

For Israel, especially in light of it's intention to become a Jewish state, the reasons are to identify for purposes of discrimination. Jews are entitled to stuff that non-Jews are not.

[Ulysses G.]

Jews are entitled to stuff that non-Jews are not.

VERY little. The sole legal distinction between Jewish and Arab citizens of Israel is that the latter are not required to serve in the Israeli army. Of course, you can find minor issues to nit-pick about, but that is true of minorities in most democracies.

[Neurath]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

Israel classifies Christianity - a religion - as an ethnicity. Is there any reason for classifying a religion as an ethnicity?

Because it can be either one and most Israelis are secular, so it applies to Jews as well. You don't have to believe what is says in the Bible to be a Christian or a Jew.

An ethnic group or ethnicity is a socially defined category of people who identify with each other based on common ancestral, social, cultural or national experience.[1][2] Membership of an ethnic group tends to be defined by a shared cultural heritage, ancestry, origin myth, history, homeland, language and/or dialect, ideology, symbolic systems such as religion, mythology and ritual, cuisine, dressing style, physical appearance, etc.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_group

You have to believe in a Christian god to be a Christian. Ask a Christian. A Western Atheist is not a Christian - at least I hope not.

[Ulysses G.]

You really think everyone is all those Churches believes what they are being told? I never did, but there was no way to be 100% sure and I still considered myself a Christian culturally. LOTS of people fit into that category.

Edited March 29, 2015 by Ulysses G.

[Neurath]

Well, each to their own. But there's no such thing as a Christian Muslim or a Muslim Christian. To classify a Christian as a Muslim because they were brought up in, say, Iran is decidedly perverse. There's your difference.

The wikipedia entry you quoted above would clearly define "Palestinian" as an ethnicity - and consequently the increasingly successful attempt to remove them from the Israeli occupied parts of the West Bank as Ethnic Cleansing.

[Ulysses G.]

You are mixing up your own fantasies up with Wikipedia entries.

[Seastallion]

You really think everyone is all those Churches believes what they are being told? I never did, but there was no way to be 100% sure and I still considered myself a Christian culturally. LOTS of people fit into that category.

Consider yourself a Christian culturally....but not ethnically? What was your argument about "ethnicity"?

[Ulysses G.]

I don't consider myself a Christian at all. I did when I was a child. However, I would not being classified that way for a census, ethnically or culturally.

Edited March 29, 2015 by Ulysses G.

[Thorgal]

For me, with the results of latest elections, I would describe Israel as an ethnic theocratic republic.

Nothing more...

And surely, not a democracy !

Your day-to-day knowledge of Israel is grievously lacking.

Most Israelis are secular and not religious. There are neighborhoods that could be described as "theocratic", say the Mea Sharim neighborhood in Jerusalem, as well as some conservative Muslum neighborhoods. But for the most part, the majority of the population is secular and in opposition to the religious right. Religion may be used for ethnic identity, and used to exclude others, but certainly its usage for theocratic purposes is severely limited. Even Netanyau is secular for Christ sake.

Democracy in Israel may have limitations, but there has long been vigorous political debate, often acrimonious debate between parties. And the political parties in Israel represent a far greater spectrum of political thought than does the political debate in most western countries, including the US. At the other end, in contrast, we have Thailand, which has nearly universal suffrage but absolutely no real political discourse (apart from perhaps exiled academic Giles Ungpakorn and his lonely voice in the UK), the difference between the parties in Thailand is simply who gets the biggest piece of the pie. So which country one chooses to be representative of "democracy" is highly subjective, with faults to be found everywhere. In the end, to declare one nation to be a democracy and another to be not be a democracy, as a simple yes/no answer, is doomed to get one nowhere.

Some folks have difficulty grasping the difference between a Jew as a socio-cultural entity, and Judaism as a religion.

But Israeli governement refers clearly in their Declaration of Independency to their Prophets. Which is forbiden to be remembered for others as Nakbah Day.

Perhaps most Israeli's are secular, like you've mentioned, but I would suspect a more 'Marrano' (1492-Spain) like trend which explains the Israeli Jews profound religious ties to Judaism in politic and social life even if they have an average secular behaviour. The fact that they went back to immigrate to Israel has also a religious character.

The ethnic factor in my post refers to the unbalanced political favouritism of Israeli governement. In fact there's no 'Right of Return' stipulated in Israeli constitution laws for the non-Jewish minorities.

Furthermore the republic has always been, mostly, composed by ex-military Prime Ministers who defended for ages a non-two state solution.

Back to Arafat and Begin, who were historically close to a two-state solution ended up with the assasination of Begin. Not really a democratic solution...

The rest is the existence of a non political progressive state with a political status quo as back in 1948...

Edited March 29, 2015 by Thorgal

[Thorgal]

Correction to my previuous post : Back to Arafat and Rabin, who were historically close to a two-state solution ended up with the assasination of Rabin. Not really a democratic solution...

[Seastallion]

Correction to my previuous post : Back to Arafat and Rabin, who were historically close to a two-state solution ended up with the assasination of Rabin. Not really a democratic solution...

All the evidence points to Arafat having been assassinated too. Nobody is pointing fingers, though

[phrodan]

For me, with the results of latest elections, I would describe Israel as an ethnic theocratic republic.

Nothing more...

And surely, not a democracy !

Your day-to-day knowledge of Israel is grievously lacking.

Most Israelis are secular and not religious. There are neighborhoods that could be described as "theocratic", say the Mea Sharim neighborhood in Jerusalem, as well as some conservative Muslum neighborhoods. But for the most part, the majority of the population is secular and in opposition to the religious right. Religion may be used for ethnic identity, and used to exclude others, but certainly its usage for theocratic purposes is severely limited. Even Netanyau is secular for Christ sake.

Democracy in Israel may have limitations, but there has long been vigorous political debate, often acrimonious debate between parties. And the political parties in Israel represent a far greater spectrum of political thought than does the political debate in most western countries, including the US. At the other end, in contrast, we have Thailand, which has nearly universal suffrage but absolutely no real political discourse (apart from perhaps exiled academic Giles Ungpakorn and his lonely voice in the UK), the difference between the parties in Thailand is simply who gets the biggest piece of the pie. So which country one chooses to be representative of "democracy" is highly subjective, with faults to be found everywhere. In the end, to declare one nation to be a democracy and another to be not be a democracy, as a simple yes/no answer, is doomed to get one nowhere.

See - this is where the self-delusion comes in. The acrimonious debate takes place between parties that are agreed on one thing - denying others the vote.

It's a joke - wake up to the hypocrisy.

Let me confirm what I think is your position.

Because Israel does not allow non-Israeli citizens living in West Bank and Gaza (and presumably many more "Palestinian" Arab non-Israeli citizens living all over the world) to vote in Israeli elections, their government structure does not qualify as a democracy.

If that's your opinion, fine. but I think it's up to Israel to decide only it's own citizens can vote just as any other nation.

If instead you are suggesting that Arab Israeli CITIZENS are denied the vote in Israeli elections ... that's obviously totally wrong.

Nonsense - Israel has enacted laws ensuring that Palestinians married to Israelis are denied the vote.

How would you feel about someone being legally married and landed in the US being denied citizenship and voting rights based upon ethnicity? It's an absurdity and indefensible.

[Jingthing]

Nonsense - Israel has enacted laws ensuring that Palestinians married to Israelis are denied the vote.

How would you feel about someone being legally married and landed in the US being denied citizenship and voting rights based upon ethnicity? It's an absurdity and indefensible.

You are getting into a granular detail.

I assume you're talking about an Israeli citizen marrying a non-Israeli citizen and the question of the non-Israeli citizen's voting rights/citizenship rights?

If there is discrimination based on Arab ethnicity in such situations, I would of course oppose it and see it as a case which shows something we already know. Israel's democracy is not perfect.

But it seems to me you are making grand general assumptions based on special case about which I am not really familiar with. If you think it's on topic to get into such detail with some some supporting information, fine, but I don't.

The greater truth is that Arabs who ARE Israeli citizens DO have voting rights.

Edited March 29, 2015 by Jingthing

[Thorgal]

Law of return is for Jews only.

If this law would be applied correctly on all minorities, there would for instance be more Israeli Arabs than the actual +/- 20% who are legitimized.

A crucial turning point for the Israeli elections with actual small population of +/- 10 million citizens.

Another example of un-democratic application of political strategy and ideology...

Edited March 29, 2015 by Thorgal

[Ulysses G.]

Too bad that. There is no right of return for Jews in the many Arab countries that stole their belonging and threw them out. They can take in their own Muslim brothers in return.

[Jingthing]

Jews are a tiny world minority.

There is only one nation state with a majority Jewish character -- Israel.

Of course the right of return in Israel is for Jews only.

DUH!
So much irrational hostility towards Jews having dominance over that one tiny nation.

We know the reason ...

Of course, hopefully the Palestinians will realize their own national state SEPARATE from the state of Israel ... and in that case of course Palestine would presumably be welcoming all those in the world that identify as Palestinian Arabs to their nation. Jews ... they won't want any Jews at all, their leaders have said as much.

Edited March 29, 2015 by Jingthing