RIP Israeli Democracy

ori

Repair Guy
Retired Moderator
Joined
Dec 17, 2005
Messages
16,547
Location
Baden-Württemberg, Germany
I am usually very supportive of Israel - but this is a sad sad day even while I am confident that the High Court will ultimately reverse this:
:sad:

http://haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1054867.html said:
Israel bans Arab parties from running in upcoming elections

Israel on Monday banned Arab political parties from running in next month's parliamentary elections, drawing accusations of racism by an Arab lawmaker who said he would challenge the decision in the country's Supreme Court.

The ruling by parliament's Central Election Committee reflected the heightened tensions between Israel's Jewish majority and Arab minority caused by Israel's offensive in the Gaza Strip. Israeli Arabs have held a series of demonstrations against the offensive.

Parliament spokesman Giora Pordes said the election committee voted overwhelmingly in favor of the motion, accusing the country's Arab parties of incitement, supporting terrorist groups and refusing to recognize Israel's right to exist. Arab lawmakers have traveled to countries listed among Israel's staunchest enemies, including Lebanon and Syria.
0.gif
Advertisement
The 37-member committee is composed of representatives from Israel's major political parties. The measure was proposed by two ultranationalist parties but received widespread support.

The decision does not affect Arab lawmakers in predominantly Jewish parties or the country's communist party, which has a mixed list of Arab and Jewish candidates. Roughly one-fifth of Israel's 7 million citizens are Arabs. Israeli Arabs enjoy full citizenship rights, but have suffered from discrimination and poverty for decades.

Arab lawmakers Ahmed Tibi and Jamal Zahalka, political rivals who head the two Arab blocs in parliament, joined together in condemning Monday's decision.

"It was a political trial led by a group of Fascists and racists who are willing to see the Knesset without Arabs and want to see the country without Arabs," said Tibi.

Together, the Arab lists hold seven of the 120 seats in the Knesset, or parliament.

Tibi said he would appeal to the high court, while Zahalka said his party was still deciding how to proceed.

Pordes remarked that the last time a party was banned it was the late Rabbi Meir Kahane's Kach Party, a list from the 1980s that advocated the expulsion of Arabs from Israel.

:( its a bad sign when democracy gives way to fear and incitement (note: as always neither side is free of blame - but I do not expect the Arab parties to give up their goal of a free Palestine until and unless there is a peace accord with the non-Israeli Arabs - so as I said its a sad day).
 
Well that distinction makes their stance a bit less stupid.

More than a bit, I think.

Not allowing groups to hold office that desire to destroy the state kinda makes sense to me.

But thats me.
 
Their laws are secular, it's only a "jewish state" because of the flag, right? It's not like being kosher is mandatory.

1. What does "as a Jewish state" mean?

2. What changes would make them not a Jewish state?

(Serious questions; I dunno the answers.)

Also, I'd like a source for that distinction.
 
Do the Arab parties really refuse to recognize Israel's right to exist?
ROFL!
More than a bit, I think.

Not allowing groups to hold office that desire to destroy the state kinda makes sense to me.

But thats me.

What if it's just her husband who belonged to that group?
 
More than a bit, I think.

Not allowing groups to hold office that desire to destroy the state kinda makes sense to me.

But thats me.

MMMh I need to clarify there.

It's the Arab groups' stance that is a bit less stupid.

- wanting to destroy the state that allows you to exists as a political party = stupid.
- wanting to change the state so that it's not a Jewish state is pretty stupid also, but a bit less so. If it were true that Israel had in its constitution something that states its a Jewish state, and I was a Israeli Muslim Arab, I would have a case to try and change the constitution, for instance. That's what politics is about, after all.
Of course if the favored means of changing the constitution is blowing yourself up in civil places... then we're back to full stupid.

And like Ecofarm, I'm actually curious as to what a "Jewish state" means.
 
Well that distinction makes their stance a bit less stupid.
of course - all three of them have in their platforms that Israel should cease to define itself with a Jewish character and that there should be a Palestinian state alongside it - its nothing new and not really surprising either.
As a note on the background the arab parties have become more radical in their demands recently and started to support even violent demonstrations within Israel that have at times caused Israel to be split into two halfs with the rioters blocking the main north/south routes - which has caused bad blood on the jewish side of politics since they regard them even more than before as a fifth column. This is as much a result of the stalling peace process as of the increasing integration of moderate arab politicians into the major parties leaaving the Arab ones with mostly the radicals.
And a little over a year ago the leader of the largest of the three resigned his seat in parliament after making numerous unauthorized trips to arab states (visiting a state with which Israel is in a state of war without authorization by the government is illegal and akin to treason under Israeli law) - which again increased the cleft between the arab and the jewish side of politics. It is one of the reasons I guess why this passed - its no excuse though. I am extremely disappointed by this decision.
 
More than a bit, I think.

Not allowing groups to hold office that desire to destroy the state kinda makes sense to me.

But thats me.

Parties advocating the peaceful transition or dissolving of the state, or part of the state, should be legal.

Tougher question.

Does your wife influence you?

Absolutely not. Should she try, it'll be double sandwich duty.
 
Parties advocating the peaceful transition or dissolving of the state, or part of the state, should be legal.

I am not so sure I agree with that either.

If the group wants to disband the state in order to set up a dictatorship (or islamic theocracy, etc. etc.), even peacefully....shouldnt be allowed.

Seems self-defeating to me to allow their participation.

Just because they are seen as 'peaceful' is not in-of-itself a reason to allow the opinion to be legally represented.
 
I'm not talking about Arab countries, but Arab political parties in Israel. It's not a given they all hate Israel.

I assumed you were kidding, pretending to conflate "arab party" with (say) "Hamas" in order to highlight racism in other people's views.
 
Given our civil war, you can understand Americans being squeamish about supporting the dissolution of the country.

I really need my questions 1. and 2. answered to understand/comment :(

And again, I'd like a citation regarding this distinction. It could be flat-out refusal to recognize existence.
 
I am not so sure I agree with that either.

If the group wants to disband the state in order to set up a dictatorship (or islamic theocracy, etc. etc.), even peacefully....shouldnt be allowed.

Seems self-defeating to me to allow their participation.

Just because they are seen as 'peaceful' is not in-of-itself a reason to allow the opinion to be legally represented.

Seems a moot point though... Arab parties aren't going to make a majority government in Israel soon. Though... population trends....
 
I am not so sure I agree with that either.
You should, though. Remember, it's the state that determines what 'advocating for the dissolution of the state' means. I could quite reasonably argue that Libertarians in America argue for the dissolution of the state. Should they be prevented from participating in elections?
 
I think I'm cool with parties advocating cessation/dissolution being legal.

Is that the same as not recognizing the existence of?

I could quite reasonably argue that Libertarians in America argue for the dissolution of the state.
I don't think so. They want smaller government, not anarchy.
 
Back
Top Bottom