Or, perhaps, the "backsliding of democracy" is just something that progressives complain about whenever they lose power.
If Israeli Supreme Court justices were appointed by its government -- which is not actually the law being proposed, but nevermind -- that would make it like the USA. If its ability to override legislation were curtailed -- by, say, rules of standing -- that would make it like the USA. On the matter of overriding the court with a simple majority, I'd agree that's a bad thing, but my understanding is that it's applicability is heavily circumscribed (I'm still against it, but I have a sense of proportion).
Changes to state-owned media and such are equally reasonable, given the progressive hegemony there. There's no whisper, as far as I know, of affecting private media (something that was not the case under left-wing governments).
The lawlessness of the Bedouins, the ultra-Orthodox and the Settlers are wildly disparate phenomena and largely overstated in this essay. There are, for example, effective "no-go zones" among the Bedouins, but not among the other two groups.
Note, by-the-way, that none of this improved under the previous left-of-center government.
As for the terrible problem of the Israeli left having lost clout among the electorate, it's not because the populace has become jingoistic. It's because the left failed spectacularly with Oslo and then Gaza, and has since been unable to admit to its failures or correct its course in any way.
President Herzog has called on the sides to meet and discuss compromise -- and has been vilified for it by the left -- not because of any plans announced by the new government but because of the catastrophizing response of the left to the new government's plans to, you know, govern.
If by "current development" you mean the proposed limitations on the power of the judiciary, I support it because I grew up in the US and think its system is a good one. Israel's used to be very similar, in practice, but has become warped since Aharon Barak's "Judicial Revolution". I'd like to see it move back towards the American system.
The USA system has many flaws but what you are supporting in practice is reducing the rule of law in favour of arbitrary and unconstitutional behaviours.
If only I had a dollar for every time Persuasion wrote an essay about how Democracy is in Danger Because People I Don't Like Were Elected and Pursue Policies I Don't Favor
As I just spelled out, actual opposition to democracy is not the criteria Persuasion uses for deeming someone "anti-democracy." The fact that they might occasionally be incidentally correct by other more reasonable standards is neither here nor there.
My comment was on @Unsents comment. He doesn't discuss Israel, but regarding Israel, a) I'm not sure what's meant by an "ethnocracy" and b) I don't know why Israel wouldn't be considered a democracy, given that all citizens get to vote and hold office and are equally protected in their civil rights. It would be great if more Mid-eastern countries had that; I'd happily give up on Israel's distinction.
Ethnocracy = special rights for members of certain ethnic group, and that one's opinions and arguments are not individual since the idea is that a whole ethnos is supposed to think the same
Israel does not have equal rights for all citizens, as in the case of many Israeli Arabs.
Democracy is much more than voting. The core of democracy is conversation. It is very hard to participate in conversation and speeches in Israel as a Palestinian.
Israel is the state of the Jewish people, yes. That doesn't prevent its non-Jewish citizens from enjoying full rights. And what in the world does this have to do with everyone thinking the same?! I find it hard to believe that that's part of the definition, and in fact neither of the definitions at dictionary.com mention anything like that (as it happens, neither of them remotely describes Israel, either).
Please list the rights that Arab citizens do not have and Jewish citizens do.
I don't know what "the core of democracy is conversation" means, but whatever it means, Israeli Arabs have representation in the Knesset and in all the professions (excepting, I suppose, the rabbinate).
Why are you writing such things when there is enough evidence that Israel as a state is not committed to securing all rights for all of its citizens?
You are behaving either as an ignorant person or someone who has not followed the news for the last several years, or as a person who knows the situation but still ignores due to stupid and tribalist behaviours.
The rise of Trump came immediately after the first Black President. The rise of Ben-Gvir and company came immediately after the first Arab party in an Israeli governing coalition. I doubt that either one is coincidence.
Basically, Israel is in the direction of becoming an ethnocracy . It happens when focus on ethnicity and religion becomes more important than rational values and the recognition of the individual as a person who makes own opinions, reason and arguments
Or, perhaps, the "backsliding of democracy" is just something that progressives complain about whenever they lose power.
If Israeli Supreme Court justices were appointed by its government -- which is not actually the law being proposed, but nevermind -- that would make it like the USA. If its ability to override legislation were curtailed -- by, say, rules of standing -- that would make it like the USA. On the matter of overriding the court with a simple majority, I'd agree that's a bad thing, but my understanding is that it's applicability is heavily circumscribed (I'm still against it, but I have a sense of proportion).
Changes to state-owned media and such are equally reasonable, given the progressive hegemony there. There's no whisper, as far as I know, of affecting private media (something that was not the case under left-wing governments).
The lawlessness of the Bedouins, the ultra-Orthodox and the Settlers are wildly disparate phenomena and largely overstated in this essay. There are, for example, effective "no-go zones" among the Bedouins, but not among the other two groups.
Note, by-the-way, that none of this improved under the previous left-of-center government.
As for the terrible problem of the Israeli left having lost clout among the electorate, it's not because the populace has become jingoistic. It's because the left failed spectacularly with Oslo and then Gaza, and has since been unable to admit to its failures or correct its course in any way.
President Herzog has called on the sides to meet and discuss compromise -- and has been vilified for it by the left -- not because of any plans announced by the new government but because of the catastrophizing response of the left to the new government's plans to, you know, govern.
To make a long story short, you support the current development in Israel only because you are anti-left or?
If by "current development" you mean the proposed limitations on the power of the judiciary, I support it because I grew up in the US and think its system is a good one. Israel's used to be very similar, in practice, but has become warped since Aharon Barak's "Judicial Revolution". I'd like to see it move back towards the American system.
The USA system has many flaws but what you are supporting in practice is reducing the rule of law in favour of arbitrary and unconstitutional behaviours.
And if you could detail how, I could respond. For that matter I'd be interested in hearing the "many flaws" of the US system.
Well, I guess that you have read the articles here on Persuasion or?
If only I had a dollar for every time Persuasion wrote an essay about how Democracy is in Danger Because People I Don't Like Were Elected and Pursue Policies I Don't Favor
You do realise that politicians and parties who are against democracy and promote ethnocracy can also get elected?
As I just spelled out, actual opposition to democracy is not the criteria Persuasion uses for deeming someone "anti-democracy." The fact that they might occasionally be incidentally correct by other more reasonable standards is neither here nor there.
I am not sure what you mean. If one is against democracy it means that one is anti-democratic
Agreed. Also, when these things happen to left-wing governments (like Peru, from what I read), it's somehow never a sign of any larger trend.
Agree on what? Israel is on the way of becoming an ethnocracy. That means that the argument of Israel as the only democracy in the Middle East is lost
My comment was on @Unsents comment. He doesn't discuss Israel, but regarding Israel, a) I'm not sure what's meant by an "ethnocracy" and b) I don't know why Israel wouldn't be considered a democracy, given that all citizens get to vote and hold office and are equally protected in their civil rights. It would be great if more Mid-eastern countries had that; I'd happily give up on Israel's distinction.
Ethnocracy = special rights for members of certain ethnic group, and that one's opinions and arguments are not individual since the idea is that a whole ethnos is supposed to think the same
Israel does not have equal rights for all citizens, as in the case of many Israeli Arabs.
Democracy is much more than voting. The core of democracy is conversation. It is very hard to participate in conversation and speeches in Israel as a Palestinian.
Israel is the state of the Jewish people, yes. That doesn't prevent its non-Jewish citizens from enjoying full rights. And what in the world does this have to do with everyone thinking the same?! I find it hard to believe that that's part of the definition, and in fact neither of the definitions at dictionary.com mention anything like that (as it happens, neither of them remotely describes Israel, either).
Please list the rights that Arab citizens do not have and Jewish citizens do.
I don't know what "the core of democracy is conversation" means, but whatever it means, Israeli Arabs have representation in the Knesset and in all the professions (excepting, I suppose, the rabbinate).
Why are you writing such things when there is enough evidence that Israel as a state is not committed to securing all rights for all of its citizens?
You are behaving either as an ignorant person or someone who has not followed the news for the last several years, or as a person who knows the situation but still ignores due to stupid and tribalist behaviours.
Representation is not = equal rights, per se.
The rise of Trump came immediately after the first Black President. The rise of Ben-Gvir and company came immediately after the first Arab party in an Israeli governing coalition. I doubt that either one is coincidence.
Basically, Israel is in the direction of becoming an ethnocracy . It happens when focus on ethnicity and religion becomes more important than rational values and the recognition of the individual as a person who makes own opinions, reason and arguments
I'm writing such things because they're true. So far you have provided no evidence, much less "enough".
Representation is not equal rights (although there's an obvious connection) which is why I mention both.
I read most articles at Persuasion and certainly the ones that concern Israel