The United States has managed to maintain its democracy for close to two hundred and fifty years. If we just return to those necessary values of collective responsibility and try to unite the divisions that have spread between the sectors, maybe we too will be able to keep the democratic and free third house alive.
More than two thousand years ago, the red-haired king watched a woman bathing on the roof of her house. His passion burned in him to the point of pain, and he took her as his wife, while he sent her husband to die on the battlefield. He was not bothered about the fairness of the matter. There was no reason for him to worry either. The king's duty was not to his subjects. Just the opposite - they were obliged to take care of his safety. Human and civil rights were nothing more than a passing illusion, and they found no real justification in the real world. Two thousand years and more have passed with the wind, and today we find ourselves in a society that has set as its goal the concern for the rights of each and every citizen in it, whether he is the president of the country or whether he is the beggar in the market. How did we get to this situation? And how can it be ensured that future generations do not violate it and return to the more common state of dictatorship?
In order to stand on one of the origins of the free society, we must move again into the past, to the 18th century, where the English philosopher John Locke (as distinct from the character in the 'Lost' series of the same name) laid the foundation for the existence of the state and the free society. His teaching is long and complex, but it can be summarized in one central principle, freedom and equality, which appears in the American Declaration of Independence: "All men are created equal, and endowed by the Creator with certain rights that cannot be denied."
We also mention the principle of equality, and already the scorn of the misfits and the girders, the fools and the blind is rising to the sky. "How can you claim that we are equal?" They cry out, "And from the moment of our birth we came into the air of the world damaged in body and soul." But the equality we are talking about in the free society is equality before the law. The law in society must apply to all people equally, and not discriminate any of them for better or worse.
The second element of civil rights is freedom. In a free society, all citizens are entitled to freedom of choice: freedom of religion, freedom of conscience and freedom of action. Sound simple? Not so. We will examine a situation, for example, in which I am interested in the bun you are holding in your hand. According to the definition of freedom of choice so far, it turns out that I am allowed to forcefully take it from you if I so wish. After all, a free man is selfish. If this is the decision I will make, I have the right to carry it out. And from here the road to absolute anarchy is short, in which the verse 'man to man wolf' is fulfilled. The powerful controls, because he is able to rob others of their property and their freedom, thereby increasing his own freedom.
It is easy to see that the principles of freedom and equality in themselves are not enough to define a free society. In fact, we must limit the individual's freedom to a certain extent, and his right to make certain choices that harm others. Be careful, of course. We do not want to chain individual freedom until it disappears completely. Just the opposite: we want to limit the freedom of one person only to prevent harming the freedoms of other people in society. This is why the laws exist in society: they limit the freedom of the individual, but allow everyone else to live without fear, thus increasing the freedom of action, thought and choice of all people in society.
In Jewish literature we can see that at least one sage already stood by a similar principle. When a certain gentile wanted to join the Jewish people and learn the Torah, the old man approached Hillel and asked, "Please teach me the whole Torah while I stand on one leg." Hillel said to him, "What is hateful to you, do not do to your friend. And the rest, go out and learn." If we want to preserve a free society, then the most important principle that we must teach our children is similar to Hillel's metaphor with a slight correction - "If your own freedom is important to you, do not harm the freedom of others."
And again - sounds simple? Obvious? Definately not. If we do not take care to educate our children to respect others and their freedom, the free democratic state can disappear within a generation or two. We will examine, for example, the current situation in the State of Israel today in general, and in the ultra-orthodox sector in particular. A part of the ultra-Orthodox public demands that they have the freedom to educate their children to study Torah and Gemara, but without teaching them about the country in which they live. A child who successfully completes such an education system at the age of 18 will be invited to vote in the elections and determine the nature of the country. It is likely that he will also fulfill his right to vote, but will do so without having acquired a true understanding of the importance of freedom in a democratic society.
What will such a young man do, who believes that his way is the only truth? He will use the democratic system as a weapon to increase his private freedom, or the freedom of the sector to which he belongs, without considering the other sectors or the rules of the game of the free society. In fact, there is a danger that since a large part of the ultra-orthodox public chooses to educate their children in this way, and its share in the population is constantly increasing, the country will change its free and democratic nature within a few dozen years, and will turn into a theocracy in which the citizens transfer the freedom to decide important decisions to the rabbis alone. And here, out of society's desire for absolute freedom, we got a society where individual freedom is severely limited.
In order to prevent such a situation, the citizens in the ideal free society are supposed to acquire an education in their childhood that will give them the virtues of tolerance and respect for others. To this end, one of the most important institutions exists, if not the most important, for preserving the virtue of good citizenship in a free society. This is the education system, which mainly includes elementary, high and middle schools.
The Jesuits already said that, "Give me a seven-year-old boy, and I will give you the adult." Mimera is similar to that of the Catholic priests, and does not necessarily stem from a purer intention. The education we experience largely shapes our character, our personality and the way we see and interpret the world around us. A child who understands that the role of democracy is to preserve his freedom, will surely agree to give up a small part of his private freedom and play by the rules of the game of the free democratic society. All this, with the aim of maintaining all the other freedoms he enjoys. And in this way will also lead to general freedom.
The education system has another important role in imparting the ability for self-directed and independent learning, the virtue of learning, reflection and skepticism. In a free society, the small citizen goes to the polls to determine the future of his country. To this end, he must regularly keep up to date with the news of the world and the country, exercise a critical sense of judgment to know what to accept and what not, and decide how he should act, vote and demonstrate. In fact, in a free society the 'anarchist' citizen is the most important resource - he is the one who is not ready to accept empty promises, does not believe in authority figures and insists on questioning every leader. It means that corruption disappears from public services, and that the leaders change their customs and ways in order to win the support of the public and stay in power. In order to create such an educated and opinionated citizen, there is a need for an education system that emphasizes the value of free thought and incessant self-criticism.
good and beautiful Let's assume that all people in Israeli society went through such a series of education in their childhood. Are we guaranteed that they will consider another? The answer, unfortunately, is negative to the point of minus-infinity. After all, the heart of man is evil from his youth. We all always want to be freer than those around us. When we are faced with decisions that may harm society as a whole, but help us, many will choose their own good, or the good of the sector to which they belong. And since the Knesset is full of ordinary people, who represent society as a whole, it is not improbable to assume that in extreme cases they will succeed in passing laws that will limit the freedom of action of certain sectors (for example, Arabs). How can we stop the deterioration to such a situation?
A reasonable initial solution can be found in the 'Federalist' documents, which present the basis of the United States Constitution. The authors of the documents suggested that the more small parties and small groups there are in the US Parliament, the more fights there will be in the House of Representatives. The parties will quarrel among themselves, they will fight over trifles, and it will be very difficult to coalesce around one position. For this reason, it will also be difficult to form a large enough majority to pass laws that would harm certain minority groups.
How can it be ensured that there will always be many parties in the parliament? One of the ways is to set a low blocking percentage for Knesset elections. That is, to decide that even if only one or two percent of the people vote for a certain party, it will be entitled to send its representatives to the Knesset. In the State of Israel, the percentage of obstruction stands at three percent, and we indeed witness a large number of small parties pulling in opposite directions at every opportunity.
[As a side note, it is interesting to note that in the United States there are only two major parties, the Republicans and the Democrats, but they are divided into dozens of factions within themselves.]
This solution, which involves the legislative authority and the institution of the Knesset, works well but it is not perfect. A large number of small parties and factions will also cause difficulty in leading quick or long-term moves that are necessary for society as a whole. Because of this, the free state treads on the edge of the open sword in a constant attempt to reach a union - a coalition - between the parties in the Knesset that will enable the passage of current laws. On one side of the blade there is the danger that the parties will unite to create an overwhelming majority that can enact tyrannical laws. On the other hand, if the parties are too divided, chaos and anarchy will paralyze the country's legislative system. To try to prevent a situation of total anarchy, the president is obliged to choose after the elections the prime minister who has the greatest chance of uniting around him a large number of parties or voting voices. In order to prevent a situation where many parties unite to pass laws that harm the minority, the legal institutions are obliged to monitor the laws and make sure that unequal laws are not passed, unless there is an indisputable contribution to the free society as a whole.
The court, therefore, is also responsible for the equality of the citizens before the law and against each other. It also promotes the good citizenship virtue of 'do unto your fellow that which is hateful to you', as it enforces the egalitarian laws of the land. The work of enforcement itself makes sure that the citizens know their limits and their rights. Without proper enforcement, society deteriorates again into a 'man to man wolf' situation. If the citizens do not feel that they are equal before the law, they will lose faith in the free society and the collective responsibility they must have towards others in enacting new laws. After all, why should I worry about another, if he is worth more than me before the law?
Let us summarize, then, the discussion of the good virtues and the institutions that preserve them in a free society. First and foremost, every person should feel a collective responsibility towards the freedom of the whole, which will help him achieve his own individual freedom. Every citizen must be informed and updated on the events of the country and the world in order to reach the right decisions that will help him navigate society to a place that will preserve the freedom of the individual and the whole. The educational institutions should inculcate these virtues in every child, as a primary wall against the collapse of the free society. As a second line of defense, the legislative institution has the duty to include in its ranks a wide variety of opinions and groups, so that every citizen knows that he is adequately represented in the country. Last but not least, the most desperate line of defense (which some would say we have reached in Israel) is based on the intervention of the courts in the legislative and judicial process, with a similar goal - to instill in every citizen the knowledge that he is equal before the law and to preserve his faith in the free society.
All of these, without exception, preserve and protect the free society. On the day when public trust in these institutions is finally lost, Israeli society will face a deep crisis, from which it may emerge after shedding its free democratic symbols. This gloomy future is not bound by reality. The United States has managed to maintain its democracy for close to two hundred and fifty years. If we just return to those necessary values of collective responsibility and try to unite the divisions that have spread between the sectors, maybe we too will be able to keep the democratic and free third house alive.
12 תגובות
There is no separation of powers in Israel!
There is a direct connection between the executive authority and the judge, to the point of biasing judgments in favor of the state in lawsuits by civil servants in labor courts against their employer (mainly in lawsuits by Shin Bet and Mossad employees)
It turns out that the USA is just a collection of pretentious imitations of much older and nobler infrastructures of thought and thinking that were first imported from Europe after many crises...but with other fantasies and pretensions that are also refuted or strengthened in the hours of the tests of time.
In any case, the legal system there in part includes a board of trustees from different sectors that allow additional consideration of the "special" judicial system.
And in addition: between what is written on the Zero Convention, which advocates equality... and between what is done on the ground, the gap is like the distance between the heavens and the earth.
On the US-style separation of powers:
This separation is good, but not complete. Although the executive branch (the president) and the legislative branch (the Senate and Congress) are apparently elected independently, there is a clear connection between them because each party runs candidates for both branches. In this way, the president can stir the cauldron of the legislative authority, and influence it to legislate as he wishes. Also, the president is the one who appoints the judges of the Supreme Court, and there is nothing to prevent him from acting according to his heart's inclinations here as well.
The American Constitution, in my opinion, is the most important document written about the physical and spiritual freedom of man. A country without a clear and stable constitution is a country where the citizen is subject to the whims of every rabbi. Without a constitution, the law changes according to the momentary needs of panelists and their coalitions.
Makhlouf: "Khazars"? "Second Temple Jews"? - Your words reek of anti-Semitism of the worst kind - it is the internal hatred that is encouraged by all kinds of "rabbis" and that will end in an internal conflict that may lead to the end of the country. I'm amazed that anyone listens to this kind of nonsense. In fact, you are using terms that our worst enemies use. And I'm not surprised...
The USA = a bad example... the country is still waiting for the USA with all kinds of economic methods that generally make people equal and less equal. That being in front of the law is not enough. We need real equality between people. to see a person at eye level. To lift people who are down out of a desire for a better world and not to show off. What's more, there are good elements in our history, the real Zionism, not today's, it believes in man, that there should be a model state here - where everyone lives a creative life and there are no classes. I don't think that the USA can be seen as an exemplary democracy and to be punished is a bit of a shrinking mind... to close the mind and not let a great vision break through. Also, many bad things happen in the world because of the quasi-democratic democracy of the USA.. and it is very annoying to read a text by a scientist who supports the USA.. a little sad..
The Jesuits already said that, "Give me a seven-year-old boy, and I will give you the adult." There is a saying in our sources that expresses the same thing - Enoch taught the boy according to his way (according to his interpretation in Petah, the beginning of his way and not according to his way) also because Yezkin will not depart from her.
Oh, what happened, the king 2000 years ago married her... well then what?
The fact that someone saw himself as omnipotent does not mean that such a regime is wrong!
As if today more terrible things are not done by "the common people".
to Roy Cezana,
Your vision seems to me to be a slippery slope on the way to nowhere. Unfortunately, I cannot elaborate here, but it is important for you to know that although you are convinced that you know how to secure the future of humanity, from the side your security seems a little pathetic. See fit to remove the beam from your own eye before you rush to remove the toothpick from your brother's eyes.
Mr. Makhlouf, keep your far-fetched ideas to yourself. They already did an experiment on us once. And another little thing: the Palestinians are the masters of this land like the moon is made of yellow cheese (this is just to put things in perspective).
I don't think that Hidan is the right platform for such an article, and if so, allow me to spread my vision, the vision of one country for three nations, one country for three cultures
The authentic Jews are descendants of Second Temple Jews
The new Jews are descendants of the Khazars
And the masters of the land, who have held on to the land for the past hundreds of years, that is, the Palestinians
One country that recognizes the merits, the physical and the spiritual of the three cultures will be just, and deserves to exist for many years to come
On the importance of the separation of powers:
I heard talk about the need for a constitution for Israel.
Who says there is no constitution for Israel? There is a constitution, and it is called the High Court. High Court precedents are law for all intents and purposes. Look for those who oppose the legislative power of the High Court and you will find those who oppose the constitution.
If I'm not mistaken, the opponents are mainly among those populations whose representatives in the Knesset receive high power leverage through what is known as "the tongue of the scales", we mean: a small faction representing a relatively small public of voters manages to achieve material and other achievements for its voters in exchange for its promise to support some of the coalition parties and vote against parties In the opposition - even though their ideology has no interest here or there. Because of their indifference to the political lines of the major parties, they tend to favor the highest bidder.
The current system of governance, which enables the dynamics of the "tongue of scales", is fundamentally flawed. With this method, the people elect the legislative body, and from that moment the circus begins. The legislative body makes up of itself the executive body - the government. The fight for the government is apparently between two large parties or two large blocs, but the ones that determine the composition of the government are the smaller scale parties. This is how it happens, for example, that at the head of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, a ministry that takes care of the entire population of the country, you can often find a representative of a small party that has a very narrow interest.
As mentioned, the same parties on the scales are also the ones that oppose the constitution - and their taste is clear.
The current system of government, in which the legislative body makes up the executive body from within itself, fosters the system of balance. As long as there is no separation between the legislative authority and the executive authority, this improper phenomenon continues and with it other improper phenomena. The way to eliminate them is to change the system of government and separate the authorities. The role of the Knesset is to legislate and to legislate only. not to form governments. The role of the government is to carry out and carry out only. not make laws.
The difference between the legislative authority and the executive authority, in two words, is the "what" and the "how". Parliament legislates slowly and thoughtfully, and the government executes the law quickly and efficiently as it decides. If the government chooses an extreme and distorted way, the court is called to intervene. If the government is ineffective, the parliament intervenes and legislates guidelines for it. In proper separation of powers the three authorities, the legislature, the executive and the judiciary, are directly elected by the people and do not form coalitions with each other. In the system of government in Israel there are two major deviations from the proper separation between the authorities: one, the one discussed above, is the absence of a boundary between the legislative and executive authorities. The second, less prominent but no less wrong, is the interference of the legislative-executive authority in the affairs of the judiciary. Although the judges are appointed by the president of the country, in the current system the president is elected by the Knesset. One of the government ministries is the "Ministry of Justice" whose duties are to intervene in the appointment of judges and to dictate to the court how to rule when the government has an important side in the discussion.
Fortunately for the Judiciary, the judges are usually chosen from a group of highly educated people that covers to some extent the flaws. However, this good fortune is not the property of the executive authority where people are elected to the position according to a purely party key.
In conclusion (temporary): in order to correct the distortions that exist in the State of Israel, we need to act to separate the three authorities. The quiet way to do this is from within the method itself. The supporters of the idea will form a party that will run for the Knesset with this platform. Due to being new and small, her faction in the Knesset will be forced to use the balance sheet method, but this time the improper technique will be used to promote a positive interest desired by the majority of the people.
U.S? democracy?
"Freedom is the basis of a democratic state" - Aristotle.