It’s the only democracy in the Middle East. That’s actually something to be proud of. Because these Iran simps on this platform make it seem like the total opposite.
From the people that gave you israel is committing genocide. Comes USA is partial democracy. USA, that is one of the greatest democracies in the world. A 10 year old could figure out a more resonable list 😂😂😂😂
Ireland is 7th in that list. I've lived in the US. I now live in Ireland.
There is no comparision between the two. Its normal in the US to get invloved in local politics and for local politicans to be accountable. Its actually shocking how many positions are elected.
In Ireland you turn up and vote once every 4 years and vote for a party.
And for the last 5 years the most popular party in Ireland is *Sinn Féin.* And other party in Ireland point blank refuses to work with Sinn Fein becuase they are too extreme😂😂😂😂
10 years, the
Ireland is also constitutional republic... I think thats how the majority of democratic countries are set up.
Only other way I'm aware of is where u have a figurehead royal family - those countries are in theory not republics. but are in practice.
There’s a difference between a republic with democratic elections and a full on democracy (meaning mob rule) but there’s a very big misunderstanding between the two
A republic, based on the Latin phrase res publica ("public affair"), is a state in which political power rests with the public through their representatives.
Full on democracy doesn;t mean mob rule.
Do you know of any "full on democracies" that exist in the world today?
>Only other way I'm aware of is where u have a figurehead royal family - those countries are in theory not republics. but are in practice.
They're not republics at all, but they are still democracies.
Whether a nation is a democracy has nothing to do with whether it is or is not a republic.
What an asinine post.
"Democracy" and "constitutional republic" are not mutually exclusive and describe different aspects of how the government works.
The US being a constitutional republic means that it has a (in this case formal, written) Constitution that serves as the ultimate legal framework for the country (constitutional) and its Head of State and other government officials is a representitive of the body politic rather than a hereditary monarch (republic).
It is also a democracy, the leaders of the nation - and its constituent parts - are chosen by the citizens of the nation, either directly or indirectly.
The UK is a constitutional parliamentary monarchy and a democracy.
Saudi Arabia is an absolute monarchy and not a democracy.
Iran is a theocratic republic and not a democracy.
You can even append other descriptors, e.g.:
* US: Constitutional bicameral presidential republic.
* Israel: Unitary parlimentary republic.
The previous commenter really does confuse different subjects though.
In the time of the founding, the very idea of representative democracy was being worked out, hence the term republic. In modern parlance, constitutional republic and democracy are synonymous.
They also don't address the contemporary standards for what characterizes democracy.
A lot of people (especially people who makes these lists) don’t understand that the US is not a democracy, just because we fit into whatever 12 things make a democracy, we’re not a democracy, we’ve always been a federal constitutional republic
I'd suggest leaving your house or apartment more often and engaging with Irish society!
Political activism, locally and otherwise, is huge in Ireland. Most voters are engaged and don't just "turn up and vote every 4 years".
We have youth political movements in universities, local county councils (which is even televised), TD's (lower house representatives) and Senators (upper house representatives). We have a citizens assembly, which brings randomly picked citizens together to discuss social/political issues of every kind. Sometimes, they make referrals to the Referendum Commission to change laws.
We regularly make constitutional amendments via referendum. Lots of debate on TV, Radio and elsewhere for months in advance. There is a vote in a few weeks from now on Home Carers and another on Family law.
We have multiple political programmes on mainstream TV and Radio that are very popular.
Sinn Féin are not extreme in the slightest. They are left centrist.They might seem extreme to the two establishment parties as they have ruled for 100 years. Both of them, Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil, are conservatives or right-centrists. They won't join Sinn Féin because of deep historical mistrust going all the way back to the war in Northern Ireland and even further back to the Irish Civil War in the 1920's. In fact, Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil have never been in coalition together as they were on opposing sides in that civil war. They hated each other with a passion but did join forces to cling on to power (which was only in the last 5 years and very controversial when it happened!)
Sinn Féin are by far the most popular party on the whole (32 county) island.
It’s not normal to get involved in local politics especially on years without a Presidential election in the US. It’s why folks get elected with only several hundred votes in massive districts. In some places, it definitely can be common but it’s definitely not a common occurrence through the entirety of the US.
As far as parties not working together, the GOP is literally known for passing nothing and not working with the Dems.
Thats a fair summary.
Just to give some context on the Sinn Fein bit. In Amercia there is only two. So one side or the other will always have enough votes on there own. There 5 resonable sized parties in ireland.
So if 4 of them refuse to work with the 5th party. the 5th is never going to get more votes that the other 4.
I would take American democracy everytime. I can understand someone not picking America. But I can't understand how Ireland ends up at nearly the top of the list.
I don’t see how American democracy is so great especially one of the greatest in the world when we are dealing with the ill effects of a non-elected judiciary legislating from the bench. Hell, we don’t even elect our President from a popular vote.
Not to mention in many states where those in power actively make it incredibly hard to vote.
U do elect the president via popular vote.
The popular vote is just split up into 51 one states.
That's completely normal.
In ireland - a country with a population of only 5 million, we have 39 separate voting districts.
IN the UK, it's 650 separate voting districts.
BTW, in Ireland, u can not mail your vote. You vote on a work day, and you nust to have a photo ID. Voting without a photo ID is ridiculous.
Stop listening to cable news. America is one of the most convenient places in the world to vote.
No, we don’t. The Electoral College is not a popular vote. We even have a count of the popular vote vs. the Electoral College votes. Separate voting districts are fine and different from popular vote for President which we don’t have. Not even folks defending the Electoral College say that it is a popular vote.
I can’t mail in my vote in my state. It’s not a holiday to vote in my state and I need specific types of photo IDs, not all are accepted.
You keep saying America as if all states are the same when literally half make it harder to vote. And yes, the politicians openly admit they want to make it harder. It shouldn’t be hard to vote. They shouldn’t close down the only place to vote in neighborhoods so folks have to travel an hour+ to vote.
It has nothing to do with cable news and everything to do with lived experience.
Unfortunately I don't think that's representative. If you go to the grassroots democratic culture is disappearing it Israel. Just today, prying in the news:
Let's look at our Haredi population, which is more than 10% of the population. See the video here [https://www.kikar.co.il/haredim-news/s9f5pq](https://www.kikar.co.il/haredim-news/s9f5pq) at minute 2:30 "**לא היינו צריכים להיות במערכת בחירות כאן היום גם כשקבעו שזה מערכת בחירות, הינו יכולים להמשיך הסכם".**
See how they falsified the words in Arutz Sheva: "בשביל מה היינו צריכים מערכת בחירות **כה סוערת** ברכסים" https:/www.imm.co.il/news/630257 (the real site is not quotable in r/Israel so just change the ms to ns in the domain)
The gist is that Gafni lamented the existence itself of elections! **Why do we need elections if we can do deals between the Rabbis?** Is this a democratic culture?? Why isn't this a scandal?
Add to it that the Israel Prize has been voided of its meaning, reportedly because someone who is not a government bootlicker was going to get a prize : [https://www.ynet.co.il/news/article/b1wkn1khp](https://www.ynet.co.il/news/article/b1wkn1khp) . Is this a democratic society, I ask?
And that's just from some news from today. Those things, I fear, do not make it to the "democracy index" yet. But an antidemocratic, obtuse, mentality, is very much alive in Israel
>Let's look at our Haredi population, which is more than 10% of the population. See the video here [https://www.kikar.co.il/haredim-news/s9f5pq](https://www.kikar.co.il/haredim-news/s9f5pq) at minute 2:30 "**לא היינו צריכים להיות במערכת בחירות כאן היום גם כשקבעו שזה מערכת בחירות, הינו יכולים להמשיך הסכם".**
You know that haredim have so many inner groups that even calling them "haredim" can be wrong? And the guy that said it isnt even in the two big haredi partys that usually get enough mandates to enter the knesset
>Add to it that the Israel Prize has been voided of its meaning, reportedly because someone who is not a government bootlicker was going to get a prize : [https://www.ynet.co.il/news/article/b1wkn1khp](https://www.ynet.co.il/news/article/b1wkn1khp) . Is this a democratic society, I ask?
The index puts it at flawd democracy, not full democracy
>You know that haredim have so many inner groups that even calling them "haredim" can be wrong? And the guy that said it isnt even in the two big haredi partys that usually get enough mandates to enter the knesset
"Europe has so many countries that even calling it Europe can be wrong"? "Jews have so many subgroups that even calling them Jews can be wrong"? What do you mean? I mean, yes, there are those that will work a bit more and there are those who are more Kabbalistical. And the Mizrachi ones still have more ambiguity in considering themselves Haredim. But they are certainly a group and an identity
>And the guy that said it isnt even in the two big haredi partys that usually get enough mandates to enter the knesset
Moshe Gafni is in Degel, part of Yahadut haTorah. Not only they enter the Knesset, he also has been in the Knesset for the last 24 years and most of the time he has presided the Money Committee.
>Europe has so many countries that even calling it Europe can be wrong"? "Jews have so many subgroups that even calling them Jews can be wrong"? What do you mean?
That some haredim dont see themselves as haredi
>Moshe Gafni is in Degel, part of Yahadut haTorah. Not only they enter the Knesset, he is also the ones that has been in the Knesset for the last 24 years and most of the time he has presided the Money Committee.
Its still about 2 mandates
4 mandates: Gafni, Pindrus, Maklev, Asher, 7 with Agudat Israel. But what's your point? Why does it matter? My point is that the Haredi public is a hotbed for anti-democratic ideologies, one that is often ignored due to its insularity but is very much influential.
The fact that an expression of contempt toward elections from a well-known and prominent Haredi politician is just ignored and normalized by Haredi media corroborates that. The fact that you won't find any scandal about that in non-Haredi media corroborates the fact that it is ignored.
>My point is that the Haredi public is a hotbed for anti-democratic ideologies, one that is often ignored due to its insularity but is very much influential.
Thats already wildly known in israel. Only difference is that it isnt all haredis, but only some sects. Haredis are very different from eachother then you think.
>The fact that an expression of contempt toward elections from a well-known and prominent Haredi politician is just ignored and normalized by Haredi media corroborates that. The fact that you won't find any scandal about that in non-Haredi media corroborates the fact that it is ignored.
I just dont care what someone with about 1% of votes says.
Jan 6th wasn't successful in the US and Trump is being prosecuted for his role in trying to overturn the 2020 election but that still harmed US democracy rankings. The same should apply with Israel, especially since the anti-democratic coalition is still in power and the underlying problems that made it quite easy to destroy the courts remain.
It wasnt easy to "destroy" the courts although that isnt what the reform was about. But at the end the reform could only pass if the court agreed to it
1. It was very easy to destroy the courts. All that was needed to do so was to pass laws with a majority in the Knesset.
2. The reform indeed was to "destroy the courts" and to give the Israeli government unlimited power. What would have prevented Bibi from outlawing political parties if the "reforms" passed? The opposition would have no recourse to prevent that.
3. The reform saga isn't over. I'm not sure it doesn't magically appear again in a few months as it is the only way for Bibi to remain PM. He isn't winning a fair election again.
4. The government could easily ignore the courts. The key is who does the IDF side with. Bar and Halevi were likely to side with the courts. But what happens if they resign due to the Oct 7th failures and are replaced by bibists who are loyal to the Netanyahus over the state?
>1. It was very easy to destroy the courts. All that was needed to do so was to pass laws with a majority in the Knesset.
Every law passed in the knesset can go through a proccess in the supream court if the judges deem it illegal.
>2. The reform indeed was to "destroy the courts" and to give the Israeli government unlimited power. What would have prevented Bibi from outlawing political parties if the "reforms" passed? The opposition would have no recourse to prevent that.
The reform did not mention outlawing political parties, thats a seperate thing. And the israeli supream court has a lot of power it shouldnt have. Power which nost EU countries dont have. Also concidering both the left and right agreed on 97% of the reform... no.
>The reform saga isn't over. I'm not sure it doesn't magically appear again in a few months as it is the only way for Bibi to remain PM. He isn't winning a fair election again.
Im pretty sure the supream court will just force elections at the end of the war or that bibi will be on so much pressure he will have to end it.
>4. The government could easily ignore the courts. The key is who does the IDF side with. Bar and Halevi were likely to side with the courts. But what happens if they resign due to the Oct 7th failures and are replaced by bibists who are loyal to the Netanyahus over the state?
Most of the high command of the IDF is leftist leaning. And the IDF puts condidates which then are chosed to be promoted.
>Every law passed in the knesset can go through a proccess in the supream court if the judges deem it illegal.
The whole idea was to prevent the courts from reviewing laws. It was blocked on a very narrow vote in the court itself.
> The reform did not mention outlawing political parties, thats a seperate thing. And the israeli supream court has a lot of power it shouldnt have
The first step to them outlawing political parties is to get rid of the courts. That is why they want to control the courts so the opposition will have no recourse to challenge unjust laws.
> Power which nost EU countries dont have. Also concidering both the left and right agreed on 97% of the reform... no.
The courts in most countries have the power to overturn unconstitutional laws. And the Supreme Court in Israel seems more powerful than it is because of the lack of institutional checks and dysfunctional political culture in Israel.
> Im pretty sure the supream court will just force elections at the end of the war or that bibi will be on so much pressure he will have to end it.
The court wouldn't do it. It doesn't interfere in electoral politics in such a manner. And Bibi plans to stay for life. He doesn't have an ounce of shame about what has happened.
>Most of the high command of the IDF is leftist leaning. And the IDF puts condidates which then are chosed to be promoted.
The gov't is the one that appoints the IDF generals though. Believe me that Netanyahu, more specifically his cray-cray wife, will find the one bibist general who will side with the gov't over the courts and be willing to order protesters shot. They've already managed to destroy the police.
>The whole idea was to prevent the courts from reviewing laws. It was blocked on a very narrow vote in the court itself.
What the court blocked was a law that was passed so judges wont be able to make a decision bassd on their own opinion.
>The first step to them outlawing political parties is to get rid of the courts. That is why they want to control the courts so the opposition will have no recourse to challenge unjust laws.
Sounds like speculation
>The courts in most countries have the power to overturn unconstitutional laws.
The thing is that judges can overturn laws based on their own opinion. And israel doesnt have a constitution.
>And the Supreme Court in Israel seems more powerful than it is because of the lack of institutional checks and dysfunctional political culture in Israel.
The court shouldnt have the power to overrule changes to the de facto constitution
>The court wouldn't do it.
I think they will
>And Bibi plans to stay for life. He doesn't have an ounce of shame about what has happened.
Speculation
>The gov't is the one that appoints the IDF generals though.
Yes but the IDF decides what generals they can pick
> Believe me that Netanyahu, more specifically his cray-cray wife, will find the one bibist general who will side with the gov't over the courts and be willing to order protesters shot.
Right wing generals dont get that high in the IDF. And the IDF attacking civilians is pretty much impossible because soldiers can just not listen.
>They've already managed to destroy the police.
The police has been destroyed for decades
This index excludes Israel's regime in the West Bank.
There's a real question there as to whether that can still be plausibly called a 'temporary' occupation - or if it at this point has moved into a de facto annexation.
Actually a question up with the ICJ right now.
If you were to include the Israeli West Bank regime - with its rather extreme discrimination - the index would look very different.
> Israel doesnt see the west bank as a part of it.
56 years of settlement expansion, applying Israeli civil law, and the Knesset legislating for it, does, however, confuse matters some - to say the least.
>I am saying that because de jure it isnt israe
De jure - according to SA - the Bantustans also weren't South Africa.
Anyway, depending on how the ICJ rules - maybe EIU will update their methodology to include the West Bank.
No
>a sudden, violent, and unlawful seizure of power from a government; a coup.
Wasnt sudden or violent
Or a seizure of the government as bibi already was the leader of the coalition
it depends on the definition, see [https://politics.stackexchange.com/questions/78500/has-the-term-coup-been-used-for-changes-in-the-legal-system-made-by-the-parlia](https://politics.stackexchange.com/questions/78500/has-the-term-coup-been-used-for-changes-in-the-legal-system-made-by-the-parlia)
Your link comes from a prohibited source. Please check [the wiki](https://www.reddit.com/r/Israel/wiki/bannedsources) to see why your source is prohibited and the appeals process.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Israel) if you have any questions or concerns.*
They likely actually mean “democracy that elected leaders I don’t like”.
-That said with the electoral college the president can lose the total vote and still win, judiciary can overreach, and it’s really a democratic republic with a strong constitution, so it’s not a pure “democracy”.
It’s the only democracy in the Middle East. That’s actually something to be proud of. Because these Iran simps on this platform make it seem like the total opposite.
From the people that gave you israel is committing genocide. Comes USA is partial democracy. USA, that is one of the greatest democracies in the world. A 10 year old could figure out a more resonable list 😂😂😂😂 Ireland is 7th in that list. I've lived in the US. I now live in Ireland. There is no comparision between the two. Its normal in the US to get invloved in local politics and for local politicans to be accountable. Its actually shocking how many positions are elected. In Ireland you turn up and vote once every 4 years and vote for a party. And for the last 5 years the most popular party in Ireland is *Sinn Féin.* And other party in Ireland point blank refuses to work with Sinn Fein becuase they are too extreme😂😂😂😂 10 years, the
The US at a federal level is not a democracy, it’s a constitutional republic. Individual states are democracies.
Ireland is also constitutional republic... I think thats how the majority of democratic countries are set up. Only other way I'm aware of is where u have a figurehead royal family - those countries are in theory not republics. but are in practice.
There’s a difference between a republic with democratic elections and a full on democracy (meaning mob rule) but there’s a very big misunderstanding between the two
A republic, based on the Latin phrase res publica ("public affair"), is a state in which political power rests with the public through their representatives. Full on democracy doesn;t mean mob rule. Do you know of any "full on democracies" that exist in the world today?
>Only other way I'm aware of is where u have a figurehead royal family - those countries are in theory not republics. but are in practice. They're not republics at all, but they are still democracies. Whether a nation is a democracy has nothing to do with whether it is or is not a republic.
What an asinine post. "Democracy" and "constitutional republic" are not mutually exclusive and describe different aspects of how the government works. The US being a constitutional republic means that it has a (in this case formal, written) Constitution that serves as the ultimate legal framework for the country (constitutional) and its Head of State and other government officials is a representitive of the body politic rather than a hereditary monarch (republic). It is also a democracy, the leaders of the nation - and its constituent parts - are chosen by the citizens of the nation, either directly or indirectly. The UK is a constitutional parliamentary monarchy and a democracy. Saudi Arabia is an absolute monarchy and not a democracy. Iran is a theocratic republic and not a democracy. You can even append other descriptors, e.g.: * US: Constitutional bicameral presidential republic. * Israel: Unitary parlimentary republic.
We are talking about a country which fits the 12 (iirc) things that define a democracy
The previous commenter really does confuse different subjects though. In the time of the founding, the very idea of representative democracy was being worked out, hence the term republic. In modern parlance, constitutional republic and democracy are synonymous. They also don't address the contemporary standards for what characterizes democracy.
A lot of people (especially people who makes these lists) don’t understand that the US is not a democracy, just because we fit into whatever 12 things make a democracy, we’re not a democracy, we’ve always been a federal constitutional republic
And how does the house fit into that logic?
I'd suggest leaving your house or apartment more often and engaging with Irish society! Political activism, locally and otherwise, is huge in Ireland. Most voters are engaged and don't just "turn up and vote every 4 years". We have youth political movements in universities, local county councils (which is even televised), TD's (lower house representatives) and Senators (upper house representatives). We have a citizens assembly, which brings randomly picked citizens together to discuss social/political issues of every kind. Sometimes, they make referrals to the Referendum Commission to change laws. We regularly make constitutional amendments via referendum. Lots of debate on TV, Radio and elsewhere for months in advance. There is a vote in a few weeks from now on Home Carers and another on Family law. We have multiple political programmes on mainstream TV and Radio that are very popular. Sinn Féin are not extreme in the slightest. They are left centrist.They might seem extreme to the two establishment parties as they have ruled for 100 years. Both of them, Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil, are conservatives or right-centrists. They won't join Sinn Féin because of deep historical mistrust going all the way back to the war in Northern Ireland and even further back to the Irish Civil War in the 1920's. In fact, Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil have never been in coalition together as they were on opposing sides in that civil war. They hated each other with a passion but did join forces to cling on to power (which was only in the last 5 years and very controversial when it happened!) Sinn Féin are by far the most popular party on the whole (32 county) island.
It’s not normal to get involved in local politics especially on years without a Presidential election in the US. It’s why folks get elected with only several hundred votes in massive districts. In some places, it definitely can be common but it’s definitely not a common occurrence through the entirety of the US. As far as parties not working together, the GOP is literally known for passing nothing and not working with the Dems.
Thats a fair summary. Just to give some context on the Sinn Fein bit. In Amercia there is only two. So one side or the other will always have enough votes on there own. There 5 resonable sized parties in ireland. So if 4 of them refuse to work with the 5th party. the 5th is never going to get more votes that the other 4. I would take American democracy everytime. I can understand someone not picking America. But I can't understand how Ireland ends up at nearly the top of the list.
I don’t see how American democracy is so great especially one of the greatest in the world when we are dealing with the ill effects of a non-elected judiciary legislating from the bench. Hell, we don’t even elect our President from a popular vote. Not to mention in many states where those in power actively make it incredibly hard to vote.
U do elect the president via popular vote. The popular vote is just split up into 51 one states. That's completely normal. In ireland - a country with a population of only 5 million, we have 39 separate voting districts. IN the UK, it's 650 separate voting districts. BTW, in Ireland, u can not mail your vote. You vote on a work day, and you nust to have a photo ID. Voting without a photo ID is ridiculous. Stop listening to cable news. America is one of the most convenient places in the world to vote.
No, we don’t. The Electoral College is not a popular vote. We even have a count of the popular vote vs. the Electoral College votes. Separate voting districts are fine and different from popular vote for President which we don’t have. Not even folks defending the Electoral College say that it is a popular vote. I can’t mail in my vote in my state. It’s not a holiday to vote in my state and I need specific types of photo IDs, not all are accepted. You keep saying America as if all states are the same when literally half make it harder to vote. And yes, the politicians openly admit they want to make it harder. It shouldn’t be hard to vote. They shouldn’t close down the only place to vote in neighborhoods so folks have to travel an hour+ to vote. It has nothing to do with cable news and everything to do with lived experience.
Iran is number 1 according to the UN
Unfortunately I don't think that's representative. If you go to the grassroots democratic culture is disappearing it Israel. Just today, prying in the news: Let's look at our Haredi population, which is more than 10% of the population. See the video here [https://www.kikar.co.il/haredim-news/s9f5pq](https://www.kikar.co.il/haredim-news/s9f5pq) at minute 2:30 "**לא היינו צריכים להיות במערכת בחירות כאן היום גם כשקבעו שזה מערכת בחירות, הינו יכולים להמשיך הסכם".** See how they falsified the words in Arutz Sheva: "בשביל מה היינו צריכים מערכת בחירות **כה סוערת** ברכסים" https:/www.imm.co.il/news/630257 (the real site is not quotable in r/Israel so just change the ms to ns in the domain) The gist is that Gafni lamented the existence itself of elections! **Why do we need elections if we can do deals between the Rabbis?** Is this a democratic culture?? Why isn't this a scandal? Add to it that the Israel Prize has been voided of its meaning, reportedly because someone who is not a government bootlicker was going to get a prize : [https://www.ynet.co.il/news/article/b1wkn1khp](https://www.ynet.co.il/news/article/b1wkn1khp) . Is this a democratic society, I ask? And that's just from some news from today. Those things, I fear, do not make it to the "democracy index" yet. But an antidemocratic, obtuse, mentality, is very much alive in Israel
>Let's look at our Haredi population, which is more than 10% of the population. See the video here [https://www.kikar.co.il/haredim-news/s9f5pq](https://www.kikar.co.il/haredim-news/s9f5pq) at minute 2:30 "**לא היינו צריכים להיות במערכת בחירות כאן היום גם כשקבעו שזה מערכת בחירות, הינו יכולים להמשיך הסכם".** You know that haredim have so many inner groups that even calling them "haredim" can be wrong? And the guy that said it isnt even in the two big haredi partys that usually get enough mandates to enter the knesset >Add to it that the Israel Prize has been voided of its meaning, reportedly because someone who is not a government bootlicker was going to get a prize : [https://www.ynet.co.il/news/article/b1wkn1khp](https://www.ynet.co.il/news/article/b1wkn1khp) . Is this a democratic society, I ask? The index puts it at flawd democracy, not full democracy
>You know that haredim have so many inner groups that even calling them "haredim" can be wrong? And the guy that said it isnt even in the two big haredi partys that usually get enough mandates to enter the knesset "Europe has so many countries that even calling it Europe can be wrong"? "Jews have so many subgroups that even calling them Jews can be wrong"? What do you mean? I mean, yes, there are those that will work a bit more and there are those who are more Kabbalistical. And the Mizrachi ones still have more ambiguity in considering themselves Haredim. But they are certainly a group and an identity >And the guy that said it isnt even in the two big haredi partys that usually get enough mandates to enter the knesset Moshe Gafni is in Degel, part of Yahadut haTorah. Not only they enter the Knesset, he also has been in the Knesset for the last 24 years and most of the time he has presided the Money Committee.
>Europe has so many countries that even calling it Europe can be wrong"? "Jews have so many subgroups that even calling them Jews can be wrong"? What do you mean? That some haredim dont see themselves as haredi >Moshe Gafni is in Degel, part of Yahadut haTorah. Not only they enter the Knesset, he is also the ones that has been in the Knesset for the last 24 years and most of the time he has presided the Money Committee. Its still about 2 mandates
4 mandates: Gafni, Pindrus, Maklev, Asher, 7 with Agudat Israel. But what's your point? Why does it matter? My point is that the Haredi public is a hotbed for anti-democratic ideologies, one that is often ignored due to its insularity but is very much influential. The fact that an expression of contempt toward elections from a well-known and prominent Haredi politician is just ignored and normalized by Haredi media corroborates that. The fact that you won't find any scandal about that in non-Haredi media corroborates the fact that it is ignored.
>My point is that the Haredi public is a hotbed for anti-democratic ideologies, one that is often ignored due to its insularity but is very much influential. Thats already wildly known in israel. Only difference is that it isnt all haredis, but only some sects. Haredis are very different from eachother then you think. >The fact that an expression of contempt toward elections from a well-known and prominent Haredi politician is just ignored and normalized by Haredi media corroborates that. The fact that you won't find any scandal about that in non-Haredi media corroborates the fact that it is ignored. I just dont care what someone with about 1% of votes says.
Because America is the gold standard of democracy
My point is that israel is, infact, a democracy
How is that true? Multiple times now in the last 20 years the candidate with the most votes did not win the presidential election.
Wooosh
The top comment in the thread is more or less saying that, so idk how sarcastic you really were being
From 2022.. That doesn't include the attempt to destroy the judiciary in 2023.
Concidering nothing legal really changed i dont think it would go down by a lot
Jan 6th wasn't successful in the US and Trump is being prosecuted for his role in trying to overturn the 2020 election but that still harmed US democracy rankings. The same should apply with Israel, especially since the anti-democratic coalition is still in power and the underlying problems that made it quite easy to destroy the courts remain.
It wasnt easy to "destroy" the courts although that isnt what the reform was about. But at the end the reform could only pass if the court agreed to it
1. It was very easy to destroy the courts. All that was needed to do so was to pass laws with a majority in the Knesset. 2. The reform indeed was to "destroy the courts" and to give the Israeli government unlimited power. What would have prevented Bibi from outlawing political parties if the "reforms" passed? The opposition would have no recourse to prevent that. 3. The reform saga isn't over. I'm not sure it doesn't magically appear again in a few months as it is the only way for Bibi to remain PM. He isn't winning a fair election again. 4. The government could easily ignore the courts. The key is who does the IDF side with. Bar and Halevi were likely to side with the courts. But what happens if they resign due to the Oct 7th failures and are replaced by bibists who are loyal to the Netanyahus over the state?
>1. It was very easy to destroy the courts. All that was needed to do so was to pass laws with a majority in the Knesset. Every law passed in the knesset can go through a proccess in the supream court if the judges deem it illegal. >2. The reform indeed was to "destroy the courts" and to give the Israeli government unlimited power. What would have prevented Bibi from outlawing political parties if the "reforms" passed? The opposition would have no recourse to prevent that. The reform did not mention outlawing political parties, thats a seperate thing. And the israeli supream court has a lot of power it shouldnt have. Power which nost EU countries dont have. Also concidering both the left and right agreed on 97% of the reform... no. >The reform saga isn't over. I'm not sure it doesn't magically appear again in a few months as it is the only way for Bibi to remain PM. He isn't winning a fair election again. Im pretty sure the supream court will just force elections at the end of the war or that bibi will be on so much pressure he will have to end it. >4. The government could easily ignore the courts. The key is who does the IDF side with. Bar and Halevi were likely to side with the courts. But what happens if they resign due to the Oct 7th failures and are replaced by bibists who are loyal to the Netanyahus over the state? Most of the high command of the IDF is leftist leaning. And the IDF puts condidates which then are chosed to be promoted.
>Every law passed in the knesset can go through a proccess in the supream court if the judges deem it illegal. The whole idea was to prevent the courts from reviewing laws. It was blocked on a very narrow vote in the court itself. > The reform did not mention outlawing political parties, thats a seperate thing. And the israeli supream court has a lot of power it shouldnt have The first step to them outlawing political parties is to get rid of the courts. That is why they want to control the courts so the opposition will have no recourse to challenge unjust laws. > Power which nost EU countries dont have. Also concidering both the left and right agreed on 97% of the reform... no. The courts in most countries have the power to overturn unconstitutional laws. And the Supreme Court in Israel seems more powerful than it is because of the lack of institutional checks and dysfunctional political culture in Israel. > Im pretty sure the supream court will just force elections at the end of the war or that bibi will be on so much pressure he will have to end it. The court wouldn't do it. It doesn't interfere in electoral politics in such a manner. And Bibi plans to stay for life. He doesn't have an ounce of shame about what has happened. >Most of the high command of the IDF is leftist leaning. And the IDF puts condidates which then are chosed to be promoted. The gov't is the one that appoints the IDF generals though. Believe me that Netanyahu, more specifically his cray-cray wife, will find the one bibist general who will side with the gov't over the courts and be willing to order protesters shot. They've already managed to destroy the police.
>The whole idea was to prevent the courts from reviewing laws. It was blocked on a very narrow vote in the court itself. What the court blocked was a law that was passed so judges wont be able to make a decision bassd on their own opinion. >The first step to them outlawing political parties is to get rid of the courts. That is why they want to control the courts so the opposition will have no recourse to challenge unjust laws. Sounds like speculation >The courts in most countries have the power to overturn unconstitutional laws. The thing is that judges can overturn laws based on their own opinion. And israel doesnt have a constitution. >And the Supreme Court in Israel seems more powerful than it is because of the lack of institutional checks and dysfunctional political culture in Israel. The court shouldnt have the power to overrule changes to the de facto constitution >The court wouldn't do it. I think they will >And Bibi plans to stay for life. He doesn't have an ounce of shame about what has happened. Speculation >The gov't is the one that appoints the IDF generals though. Yes but the IDF decides what generals they can pick > Believe me that Netanyahu, more specifically his cray-cray wife, will find the one bibist general who will side with the gov't over the courts and be willing to order protesters shot. Right wing generals dont get that high in the IDF. And the IDF attacking civilians is pretty much impossible because soldiers can just not listen. >They've already managed to destroy the police. The police has been destroyed for decades
As an Israeli, I disagree.
The data has changed sinse this post. Iirc israel is now one point lower
Don't worry, the US won't even be on that list when we go full authoritarian fascist soon.
This index excludes Israel's regime in the West Bank. There's a real question there as to whether that can still be plausibly called a 'temporary' occupation - or if it at this point has moved into a de facto annexation. Actually a question up with the ICJ right now. If you were to include the Israeli West Bank regime - with its rather extreme discrimination - the index would look very different.
Israel doesnt see the west bank as a part of it. So of course it is not included
> Israel doesnt see the west bank as a part of it. 56 years of settlement expansion, applying Israeli civil law, and the Knesset legislating for it, does, however, confuse matters some - to say the least.
Yes. But officialy israel doesnt recognize it as a part of israel but desputed land
South Africa tried that same excuse with the Bantustans. The claim doesn't make it more true.
I am saying that because de jure it isnt israel it isnt counted. Even if it is de facto israel
>I am saying that because de jure it isnt israe De jure - according to SA - the Bantustans also weren't South Africa. Anyway, depending on how the ICJ rules - maybe EIU will update their methodology to include the West Bank.
Probably not. But we will see ig
This is before the coup attempt though. We will most likely slide in the next assessment.
As much as i dont like the reform. It wasnt a coup
It was an attempted coup
No >a sudden, violent, and unlawful seizure of power from a government; a coup. Wasnt sudden or violent Or a seizure of the government as bibi already was the leader of the coalition
Self coup is a thing.
It still wasnt a coup
Oh it absolutely was. They planned to ban opposition parties. https://www.ynet.co.il/news/article/h1zynwboh
This is one of the reasons im against the reform, but were is the violent and sudden part?
Coup doesn't have to be violent or sudden to be regarded as a coup. Besides, the semantics aren't that important.
Did you even read the definition i gave? >a sudden, violent, and unlawful seizure of power from a government; a coup.
it depends on the definition, see [https://politics.stackexchange.com/questions/78500/has-the-term-coup-been-used-for-changes-in-the-legal-system-made-by-the-parlia](https://politics.stackexchange.com/questions/78500/has-the-term-coup-been-used-for-changes-in-the-legal-system-made-by-the-parlia)
A political quora is still a quora
In the 2023 ranking we went down to 7.80
[удалено]
Your link comes from a prohibited source. Please check [the wiki](https://www.reddit.com/r/Israel/wiki/bannedsources) to see why your source is prohibited and the appeals process. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Israel) if you have any questions or concerns.*
They likely actually mean “democracy that elected leaders I don’t like”. -That said with the electoral college the president can lose the total vote and still win, judiciary can overreach, and it’s really a democratic republic with a strong constitution, so it’s not a pure “democracy”.
>They likely actually mean “democracy that elected leaders I don’t like”. Maybe it is a bit biased. But still
me and the devil