One of the questions that bother political scientists is, "Why is Israel a democracy?"
We can put aside the minority of tendentious scholars who insist that Israel is not a democracy, due to how it treats its minorities, or due to its treatment of Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza. Such scholars do not compare Israeli Arabs with American minorities, or those of Western Europe; and they do not compare Israel's policies toward the West Bank and Gaza with Americans' behavior toward Iraq and Afghanistan.
Israel scores high on scales of democracy that measure the incidence of free and critical media, political competition, peaceful transition between those who lose and those who win elections, and the access of minorities to the voting booth and parliament.
On the basis of international comparisons, Israel should not have developed as a democracy.
Few of Israel's founding generation came from places where democracy was well established. Israel's experiences since Independence have featured wars and mass immigration. Almost all of the migrants came as refugees from countries with no experience with democracy. Such pressures are used by countries to explain why they must abandon democracy for something more effective in dealing with difficult conditions.
Most of the 100 or so countries that came on the scene after World War II declared themselves to be democracies. Few of them have had anything like Israel's success in adhering to democracy.
My own explanations for Israeli democracy focus on a theme in Jewish culture and religion: the support for criticism. The theme is prominent in the Biblical prophets, who were less concerned with predicting the future than with criticizing the kings, priests, other elites, and one another. Jews view those critics as messengers from the Almighty, worthy of inclusion in religious ritual.
Jeremiah grouped other prophets together with priests as liars, frauds, adulterers, and hypocrites. He condemned their names to be used as curses by the Judeans (Jeremiah 28-29).
Amos may have been trying to distance himself from competitors when he said that he was not a prophet, nor the son of prophets (Amos 7:14).
Amos also set a standard of criticism that remains unmatched. He asserted that the Lord does not want compliance with legality, or precise observation of rituals, but justice and righteousness.
"When you present your sacrifices and offerings I will not accept them. . . Spare me the sound of your songs . . .Let justice roll on like a river and righteousness like an everflowing stream." (Amos 5:22-24)
Jesus followed the prophetic tradition with his shrill criticism of established elites. He resembled countless generations of Jewish nudniks who have not tolerated existing practices, and have made life difficult for their teachers and other contemporaries. If Jesus' disciples had not taken his lessons as the basis of a competing religion after his death, and given him the flavor of anti-Jewishness, he might have been enshrined in the Hebrew Bible as yet another prophet who expressed the ideals of those who came before him.
One sign of the prophetic heritage that appears in modern Israel is in the law that governs the State Comptroller (the equivalent of the United States GAO: Government Accountability Office). Like state auditors in numerous other countries, Israel's State Comptroller is empowered to investigate public bodies on criteria of legality, efficiency, and economy. Unlike others, Israel's State Comptroller is also empowered to examine bodies under the heading of "moral integrity."
I asked the question of "How do you explain Israeli democracy?" to Shimon Peres, when I had the opportunity to meet with him in the presidential residence. He, too, cited Jewish traditions, and put the emphasis on pluralism. Without a hierarchical rabbinate, Jews have learned about different interpretations of religious doctrine, and have been free to quarrel. Peres also cited the experience of his mentor, David ben Gurion. Ben Gurion did not come from a democratic society, but recorded his positive impressions of democracy, and its capacity to withstand severe pressure, after spending the period of the Blitz in Britain.
As in the case of other provocative questions, there is no simple answer. Among the explanations of Israeli democracy, however, may be traits of Jews that others have found difficult. We are quarrelsome and critical, and do not lightly accept authority or established conventions. Success in business, science, and the arts may also derive from the same characteristics.
Israeli politics is seldom quiet, and often contentious. We may not applaud the results of elections, or the policies that our government pursues. Our politics may not be quiet, disciplined, or pleasant, but they are democratic.
Due to spam, I do not accept comments on the blog. I do welcome comments sent to my e-mail address below.
Ira Sharkansky (Emeritus)
Department of Political Science
Hebrew University of Jerusalem
Home tel: 972-2-532-2725
Cell phone: 054-683-5325
Fax: 972-2-582-9144
msira@mscc.huji.ac.il