 |
| In memory of Asher and Yaakov |
Conversing with Israeli's about a one or two state solution can be a minefield. Those who want democracy-for-all are conflicted by the nature of Israel's neighbors, autocrats leading parliaments committed to religious ideologies just like the Palestinian Authority. For the past 16 years the major democracies have granted this Authority a no-election free-pass because its leader, Mahmoud Abbas, risks losing power to even more radical ideologists.
Israel's' democracy-idealists are further conflicted by the fear they may be uprooted from their beloved homeland by a non-Jewish majority in a hypothetical single democratic state. Their concern is presently reflected in the behavior of the Palestinian Authority who will not tolerate Jewish representation in its government.
With no sign of peace the 40 year status quo is untenable and people on both sides continue to loose life in the tit-for-tat war against terror. Israel's romance with a democratic ideal may become intolerable and increasingly to blame for the ongoing loss of life. One must ask whether Israel's democratic idealists have come to accept loss of Jewish life as collateral in much the same way Muslim terrorists embrace their martyrs?
The modern view of Israel's Jewish historical democracy is nearly always flawed, ignorant of the facts. Its ancient Jewish democracy was always governed by religious elders that comprised the main body of its legal and enforcement authority. Transfer of authority was autocratic through Semicha, or 'Standing' granted by incumbents to new authoritarians. One of today's arguments for judicial reform, by Israel's present government, is that its Justices have embraced authoritarianism, under a democracy that no longer resembles the indigenous framework that once tolerated it.
Crosslinking risk to homeland, ongoing terror and the democratic ideal uphold the status quo. Like the well known business triangle, you can get something 'cheap' and 'good', but not 'quick', any two, but three cannot be logically connected. As a result Israeli's are begin to conclude that no-risk to homeland and peace is preferable to the foreign democratic ideal. Social and political change is resulting from Israel's seismic demographic shift. Innovative forms of government will ultimately enable Jewish sovereignty over its homeland and security for people in a government framework that moves the status quo toward a better outcome for all.
Israel's Electoral College presently oversees the periodic election of senior Rabbinical leaders from its hundreds of liberal and conservative communities in cities nationwide. With constituent support it can demand and deliver an elected upper house to Israel's Knesset that will yield two important requirements: 1. Ensure Jewish sovereignty in its system of government and 2. Permit the modernization of some of the nations ancient religious laws. In such a case representatives from any ethnic background may be elected to the lower Knesset, but only Rabbinical leaders may be elected to the upper Knesset where they would authorize bills exclusively introduced and drafted by the lower Knesset.
The novel combination of this hybrid-authoritarian democracy would enable Israel to offer its aliens permanent residency and after qualifying, ultimately citizenship. This would embrace the majority of people trapped by the corrupted autocrats occupying Israel's land from the Shomron to Gaza under the Palestinian Authority and Hamas. Israel would finally be freed from its two-state quagmire and from the double standards of foreign governments and idealists that hold it to account.
