Another proof of the crisis of democracy carried on fake news. Political science researchers from Tel Aviv University remind us that until recently it was not acceptable for the opposition to refrain from cooperating with the government even on agreed issues, this according to them is another symptom of Israel's decline in the democracy index
Are we considered the best of the election systems? When will we, the citizens of Israel, run out of patience with the political system? And did the last opposition exaggerate, or did it simply do its job? In preparation for (another) visit to the polling station, Dr. Yael Shumer and Dr. Alon Yekter from the School of Political Science and International Relations at the Gershon Gordon Faculty of Social Sciences, share their insights with us.
To what extent is the situation we are living in in recent years in Israel, of elections with such high frequency, unique? Does this also happen in other countries?
"Until the last series of elections, Israel was not a record player in going to the elections. On average, we went to elections every 3.3 years. The 4 election systems and the approaching fifth have changed the picture, led Israel to the bottom of the ladder and indeed point to a process of institutional-political-social-and leadership crisis. We 'achieved', in the negative sense, countries like Portugal, Iceland, the Netherlands and Japan, which were characterized by a shorter period between elections," says Dr. Schumer. "However, when comparing to other countries, it should be remembered that the maximum legal time between one election and another is different. In Australia, for example, it is three years and in Great Britain five. And of course you cannot compare parliamentary regimes like Israel to presidential regimes like the USA where the election date is fixed", she adds.
"One of the key insights in recent political science research, especially after the strengthening of populism in Europe and the years of President Trump's term in the US, is that the greatest danger to democracy comes from within, from within the system itself. However, since the collapse of the USSR, Western democracy has remained the only legitimate form of government. There were those who saw this as the victory of absolute good and the end of days (political scientist Francis Fukuyama excitedly called it "the end of history"), but over time, the old threat was replaced by a new threat: the continuous erosion of the system and its rules by those who participate in it, explains Dr. Alon will complain
According to him, one of the main problems is the erosion of the accepted rules of the game, in particular the willingness to share power with political rivals, to respect other branches of government and not to break the rules after losses. "The crisis in Israel since 2019 is a clear example of such erosion. The frequent election campaigns and the unwillingness to compromise reflect an attempt to change the rules of the game after a loss. In other places, such as Poland, Hungary and even the USA, such measures later expanded to actual restrictions on the institutions of government by the government, including restraining the courts, weakening the opposition, harming civil rights, restricting the free press and civil society institutions, and more. Happily, Israel is still far from there, however, the continuation of governmental instability and disrespect for the rules of the game could seriously erode the public's trust and legitimacy in the democratic system, and pave the way for a more significant dismantling of its components."
In this sense, according to Dr. Yekter, the Israeli crisis is indeed unique, but it joins similar trends throughout the Western world: Trumpism and the storming of Capitol Hill in the US, Britain's withdrawal from the European Union, the rise of populist and anti-democratic forces in Europe, and more, which express a real crisis in democracy the West and the need to study and understand the problems that lead to this and the possible solutions.
"A world without a government is governed by the laws of the jungle where the strongest wins. In other words, as long as the government is present-absent, the harm is significant, especially in disadvantaged populations that need assistance in the face of groups with great economic and political power."
Sounds like a pretty bleak situation. But does this have real effects on us, the citizens of Israel?
"The answer is yes, and the consequences are acute: damage to the public's trust in the democratic regime, difficulty in managing the government ministries due to the turnover of ministers and the uncertainty that characterizes the system, the extremism of the division between the sections of the people, and more," says Dr. Schumer. "The loss of trust in the political system and the democratic regime is mainly expressed in the feeling of disconnection between the people and their leaders, which is increasing, the worsening of polarization and the lack of root treatment of fundamental problems in the country. We received a sad example of this situation only recently with the unwillingness of the opposition to pass the Metro Law, which was supposed to create the legal infrastructure for starting one of the largest and most expensive projects in Israel - the construction of a subway in Gush Dan. The inability of the political system to deal with the housing crisis, the transportation crisis, the cost of living and the rate of inflation, the crisis of the education system, and more, may lead to a decrease in voter turnout. In the Department of Political Science we research and investigate the causes of crises of this type and their consequences. For example, the social reasons for a fractured society with increasing polarization, the institutional reasons for the election system and governance in Israel such as the Knesset dissolution laws, the connection between not passing a budget for the dissolution of the Knesset and going to early elections, or even leadership-personal factors (for example, the head of the opposition Benjamin Netanyahu, who is willing to sacrifice norms of political culture for the benefit of one goal - the overthrow of the government)".
"The crisis in the education system, the lack of standards in the health system, the climate crisis - all of these pose immediate challenges and their treatment cannot wait," adds Dr. Yekter. "These problems require an active government to manage them, and it is enough that no decisions are made for several years to damage the standard of living of the country's citizens in the long term. As political philosophers recognized as far back as the 17th and 18th centuries, a world without government is governed by the laws of the jungle where the strongest wins. In other words, as long as the government is present-absent, the harm is significant, especially in disadvantaged populations that need assistance in the face of groups with great economic and political power."
"The absolute rejection of compromise by those who are not in the government dismantles the basic idea of multiple voices and collaborations, and instead produces a polarized and paralyzed system as we see today"
Since the current government was formed, the opposition has made it their goal to overturn any coalition legislation, regardless of the ideology or representation of the voters. Is this normal?
"Legally it is correct, but politically and culturally, I don't remember an opposition that behaved this way," says Dr. Shumer.
"On the one hand, it should be said that it is legitimate and acceptable for the opposition to oppose and fight the government's policy, hoping to win back power. To a large extent, this is a fundamental principle of democracy. On the other hand, the problem arises when the opposition breaks the rules of the game. For example, in the last Knesset, the opposition refused to participate in the Knesset committees, which have an important role in the Knesset's oversight of the government. It refused to recognize the legitimacy of the government and often did not cooperate even on issues with broad consensus," says Dr. Yekter.
"Israeli democracy is governed by the proportional-representative system, in which the seats in the parliament are divided according to the relative number of votes each party received in the elections. As research in political science teaches us, this method produces a system with many small and medium-sized parties, which allows representation for many voices and social groups (and this is different from majoritarian methods, such as in the USA, where there are two large and powerful parties but lack significant representation for small minority groups). The plurality of voices and parties in Israel does indeed increase representation, but it also requires compromises and cooperation between the various players. In fact, this is one of the virtues of this method and the reason why many researchers recommend it to divided countries like Israel. The absolute disqualification of a compromise on the part of those who are not in the government dismantles this basic idea and instead produces a polarized and paralyzed system as we see today", he concludes.
