Ahhh, democracy. It used to be that a democracy existed because of several principles (or, characteristics). Arguably, principle (characteristic) number one was, the ballot box is king.
Why? Because in a democracy all citizens are supposed to have a voice in the government--and the ballot box represents the single most powerful voice of a nation's citizens. With a secret ballot, a democracy recognizes it is the people--and only the people--who make a nation's most important decision: choosing the nation's leader.
When you have a democracy, only citizens choose their leader. That choice is not done by a cabal, or by some political hierarchy or by unelected elites.
In a democracy, the process of choosing a new leader is the national-communal political ritual. It is a hallowed moment when a nation's citizenry gather and, individually, vote in secret to select who will lead them.
Israel calls itself a democracy. That is why, on March 23, 2021, Israel's citizens went to the polls and, through ballot boxes all across the country, voted to choose a national leader. Overwhelmingly, Israelis chose current Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to be their next leader. No other politician came close to the number of votes received by Netanyahu.
There is much controversy in Israel over Benjamin Netanyahu. He is currently on trial for crimes against the State (trial suspended due to the pandemic; it will resume, in theory, next week). Most politicians campaigned against him. Most of these called for him "to be removed".
Apparently, not enough Israelis agreed. But they made known their feeling about a leader through the ballot box: they chose Netanyahu to lead them despite his trial, despite the accusations against him, and despite what other politicians said about him.
Politicians were outraged by this result. They were outraged by Netanyahu.They want Netanyahu out of office. They intend to act.
In a democracy, the ballot box is not the only characteristic that marks a nation as a democracy. It's only one part of a larger 'formula' of characteristics (including, for example, the Freedoms of speech, the press, religion and assembly, and the universal rights to fair treatment under the law--and the right to a fair trial, among other things).
Therefore, the very existence of ballots nation-wide elections do not by definition give that nation the right to call itself a democracy. Other factors must exist, too.
Some of those other factors include, for example, what happens to votes after an election. Those votes must be counted. The count must be transparent. The final tally must be agreed upon by all political Parties which participated in the election for which those votes were cast in the first place. The votes must point to a winner. That winner must be sworn in to his office.
A democracy does not exist just because a nation has such principles as regularly-scheduled nation-wide elections, freedom of religion or freedom of speech, etc. A nation becomes a democracy because of how it handles the details of those principles.
For example: (1) what happens when someone other than an election winner is installed into an elected office? (2) what happens when freedom of speech means freedom for only one kind of speech or for only one kind of news outlet? (3) what happens when the freedom of religion means freedom for only one religion--but not others? (4) what happens if the right to equal treatment by police is only for some, but not others? (5) what happens when a fair trial is available only sometimes--for some, but not all?
Would you call a nation a democracy if it redefines these principles of democracy? Democracy is supposed to be about establishing--and then protecting--a full range of rights, priviledges and freedoms for its citizens. These include the right (or priviledge) to choose a leader. How can a nation that does not protect the outcome of a ballot box--or protect citizens' rights--call itself a democracy?
The answer is, it can't. Instead, A nation that redefines "democracy" as noted just above is not about the rights/freedoms of its citizens. Such a nation is about the rights and freedoms of an elite group. That is not democracy.
Israel may call itself a democracy. But its ballot box is clearly not the first, last and only word about who is chosen to lead. In Israel, the voters' choice to lead is certainly not the final word of an election. That right seems to belong to Israel's President--an unelected official--with the help of Members of Israel's Parliament, the Knesset (a political elite) (see the essay below).
Israel may have voted. Israel may have chosen its leader through a secret ballot. But in Israel, that vote is irrelevant. Completely irrelevant. In Israel, it is possible that the voter's choice is ignored.
This is why, some six days after an election in Israel, you will typically not see a headline that says something like, "New leader continues to complete his Cabinet appointments". Instead, what you actually saw in Israel--six days after this latest election--was a headline that said: "Gantz [a failed election opponent of Netanyahu] calls on Lapid, Sa'ar [two other failed election opponents of Netanyahu] to join forces to replace Netanyahu" (here).
These politicians--Gantz, Lapid and Sa'ar--all challenged Netanyahu for Prime Minister in the March 23rd election. Some 34 other politicians also challenged Netanyahu. In that election, Netanyahu trounced all of them. Yet, here we were, six days after the election, reading that some of those trounced politicians were now actively plotting to "replace" Netanyahu!
The ballot box meant nothing! Even if this behavior is legal (which, in Israel, it is), this not how a democracy is supposed to work.
It did not matter that Netanyahu got nearly double the votes of his nearest competitor (Lapid). It meant nothing that Netanyahu got more than four times the votes of Gantz, or close to 5 times the votes of Sa'ar. What mattered was, it is legal in Israel to overturn the ballot box in this fashion.
These politicians appear eager to do exactly that. They practically salivate over that prospect.
By tolerating such post-election nonsense, how can Israel call itself a democracy? Israel allows those who lost an election to ignore the voice of the people. Israel's law allows them instead to rise up in order to overturn the ballot box--just because they don't like what the ballot box said?
That's not democracy. That's tyranny of the elite. But it is how Israel works.
This trashing of the ballot box provokes one to ask, what has been happening in Israel to other principles of democracy--to the freedoms of speech, religion and press, and to the right to a fair trial and equal treatment by police? Are these principles truly protected? Or, are they "protected' in much the same way Israel's ballot box is "protected", which is to say, not at all?
In Israel, some on the political Right, and some in Israel's religious sector, do not think their rights are protected. Some say their rights are regularly ignored. Others feel their rights are indeed trashed, mostly in small ways--but trashed nonetheless.
Is Israel's election system the only problem Israel has with "democracy"? Or, is Israel's decidedly undemocratic election system just the tip of a nasty anti-democratic iceberg?
Maybe Israel isn't the democracy it claims to be. Maybe it's time for a change. Maybe Israel needs a new kind of government, one whose values are less secular, less selfish and less ego-driven.
Stay tuned, This Jewish "democracy" drama is far from settled.
No comments:
Post a Comment