Tel Aviv is not Cairo or Athens

צילום: Dudi Vaaknin // Professor Avraham Diskin.

The spark that ignited the protest is like the sparks that ignited the town squares in Cairo and Athens. Professor Avraham Diskin

At the entrance to the Mamilla pedestrian mall, near King David Street, stands a large statue of King Zedekiah, the last king of the Kingdom of Judah during the First Temple period. In chains, blinded, his hands spread wide in a gesture of despair and bewilderment, the king has been returned 2,600 years after his exile and placed facing the walls of the city that he once ruled. Elsewhere, in a foundry in Jerusalem, a statue of Herzl is now ready. It will be placed on the terrace of the building in Jerusalem where he stayed when he came to meet Kaiser Wilhelm II, the emperor of Germany.

Both of these statues are the work of Professor Avraham Diskin, a world-renowned expert in political studies. One gets the impression that the connection between past and present, between the Bible and Zionism and between Judaism and democracy comes naturally to Diskin, who is in the process of publishing a new textbook about the fundamentals of civics, "Regime and Politics in Israel." The book will help pupils prepare for their matriculation examinations. This is the first time in many years that a renowned expert of his stature has written a textbook for the matriculation examinations.

According to Diskin, the social protests currently flooding Israeli cities, for better or worse, are an excellent lesson for all of us. We met on the Ninth of Av, which is a day of mourning and remembrance on the Jewish calendar, in order to talk about destruction, protest and democracy.

What are your thoughts on the social protests of the past several weeks-

First, they are an expression of real distress. I have children who are the same age as the protesters. They and their partners both work full time, spend nearly half of their salaries on rent, and hold no hope of ever buying their own apartments. This is inconceivable.

Nevertheless, the people who are in the greatest distress Arabs and the Haredim are not really participating in the protests. In my building, most of the residents live in two apartments that also serve as a hostel for rehabilitating homeless people. It is good to live there. I am constantly reminded that I could have been where they are. You get addicted to alcohol or drugs, or you lose your job and get divorced. Anyone could be in that situation. People like that aren't at the protests.

Right now, if the protesters are right when they say that theyre both right-wing and left-wing, religious and secular, Arabs, poor people and members of the middle class, they cant say These are the things that need to be fixed in a unified way because each group has its own positions, and these positions contradict each other.

There have been complaints that the protest is turning into a political movement against the current government. What do you think-

As I said, the protest reflects real suffering, but the protest signs and the harsh slogans criticizing the prime minister also bear a political component. The demonstrators identities, as individuals and as groups, coupled with the knowledge of where their funding is coming from, hints at political involvement.

In the short term, it appears that the protests have a political influence, but paradoxically, what is happening now actually serves the current government. Were not seeing a significant transition from a right-wing bloc to a left-wing one. One the other hand, the Labor Party and Meretz are growing stronger at Kadima's expense. In addition, the weak identification with the protests, on the part of Kadima leadership, could push some of undecided voters, currently choosing between Likud and Kadima, entirely toward the right-wing bloc.

At first, the leaders of the protest compared Rothschild Boulevard to Tahrir Square. Are these protests similar-

The spark that ignited the protest is similar to the sparks that ignited the town squares in Cairo and in Athens. Were talking about the Facebook generation, genuine distress and the involvement of political elements. Nevertheless, there is a huge difference. In the Arab countries, were talking about dictatorships that have been oppressing their people for many years, and a population faced with terrible economic suffering. But in Greece, were talking about the collapse of the new economic order, which threatens to throw the population into deep distress even while the economy is very problematic. This is all very different from Israel.

The response to the protests is also different. Our governments response is extremely soft, and rightly so. It recognizes that some of the claims are just, and refrains from unnecessary and violent conflict. In this context, one need only mention what has been happening in London over the past week.

Unwise Criticism

Another claim that has been made against the protests is that the protesters are a bunch of spoiled kids. Margalit Tzanani was practically assassinated by the media for saying that. Why arent we seeing poor people at the protest-

The majority of the protesters are young and middle-class. For the most part, they are educated people who work for a living. While it is true that there has been an increase in the standard of living, which has found expression in the unwise criticism about "sushi-eaters," the economic disparities have been expanding gradually and the lack of housing is an existential and basic necessity.

Those who live from hand to mouth and concentrate on surviving dont go to demonstrations. But those who have failed in the struggle to survive are liable to engage in more extreme activities. The Arabs and the Haredim have a great deal in common, and their identification with the young people on Rothschild Boulevard is very much in doubt.

At the beginning of the protest, its goals were vague. After approximately four weeks, what have the protesters accomplished-

Despite the "papers" that were recently presented (outlying the protesters' goals for the government) it is difficult to point to clear operational goals. As far as housing is concerned, it is obvious that we can't ask for immediate solutions, such as enacting laws that existed when the state was established. Property will not be expropriated using laws such as the Tenant Protection Law. The state won't seize control over "abandoned property" or rebuild transit camps.

The radical left-wing are among the people brainstorming solutions, and the chance that they will accomplish their goals is nil.

I heard repeated announcements, even from officials from the Meretz party, about supporting the free market while preserving the welfare state. Incidentally, not even neo-liberals deny the principles of the welfare state. We need only mention Jabotinskys famous "five mems" (five Hebrew words that start with that Hebrew letter:

mazon

--food,

maon

--dwelling,

malbush

--clothing,

marpeh

--medicine,

moreh

--teacher) or the support for a negative income tax from Milton Friedman himself.

Besides what I said, I am certain that the wave of protest will bring about policy change in many fields such as encouraging construction, removing obstacles in the spirit of the National Housing Committees Law and increasing the supply of residential apartments. The citizens will not benefit from everything right away, but the government will be rewarded or punished in the voting booth by how much those changes have effected the population by the end of its term.

Instead of the old socialist slogans, can we talk about neo-liberal values-

Yes. The government needs to intervene in the market no matter what the policy is called. The free market must be protected, and at the same time we must fight against centralization. Back in the 19th century, the Americans used antitrust laws to fight it. If they want to help, they need to allow real competition rather than a situation where all the wealth is concentrated in a few hands. The war on centralization is one of the fundamentals of the free market, and until now we have not done enough about it.

Education for Democracy

Lets talk about your new book. Why did you feel it necessary to publish a new civics text-

The main goal of teaching civics is to educate about democracy. How do we define democracy? Civics teachers have avoided that question for years. Instead, they put the emphasis on a flawed system of democratic values that is filled with contradictions.

I decided to follow in the footsteps of Abraham Lincoln, who, in the Gettysburg Address, expressed his desire that "a government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth." To me, this statement reflects the three major elements of democracy. In democracy, the people are sovereign. Representative government is instituted by the people, and one of the government's purposes is to preserve the rights of individuals. The principle of sovereignty of the people, however, is problematic. Even completely nondemocratic regimes can declare that the people are sovereign. It is not entirely possible to hold free and fair reflections reflecting the will of the people.

In 1972, the Jewish-American economist, Kenneth J. Arrow, won the Nobel Prize for proving that every method of elections violates, of necessity, basic conditions of democracy. The question of rights is every bit as problematic. It is obvious that no right is absolute. For example, almost every law restricts the right to liberty. One of the most famous contradictions is between the right to liberty and the right to equality.

What did you see in the previous textbooks that motivated you to write a new book-

The early textbooks were filled with factual errors. The attempt to simplify leads to errors and inaccuracies. For example, in teaching students about democratic electoral methods, it is customary to describe only two methods, those of the British and the Israeli systems. They teach the pupils a series of advantages and disadvantages that both systems supposedly have.

In a practical sense, in order to analyze the advantages and disadvantages of electoral methods, you need profound knowledge of at least three fields: social choice, familiarity with the various electoral methods that exist across the globe and a familiarity with the many studies about the relationship between elections and their social consequences. Repeating the imaginary advantages and disadvantages of a mere two methods for elections does not enhance the comprehension or analytical ability of Israeli students, who are very intelligent.

What do you think of the uproar over the so-called right-wing laws that have been passed in the Knesset over the past several months-

Theres a mental block on this subject. People pretend to talk about tolerance, but in practice theres no tolerance shown toward those who represent the majority -- at least, when we are talking about majority rule that is not necessarily the tyranny of the majority. I dont lump all the laws together. For example, the bill to allow a veto of candidates for positions as judges. In most of the democratic world, judges are appointed by politicians. We are unusual in that regard. So there is no basis for the claim that this constitutes fascism.

In public discourse, the word racism is often used to describe supposed Israeli treatment of the Arab minority. What is your opinion-

In Israeli society in general, theres an extreme lack of tolerance, and it sometimes reaches the point of racism. This occurs on all levels. I think that the most disgusting manifestation is the people who masquerade as liberal and tolerant when in reality they are racist even toward those whom they supposedly seek to protect. To me, tolerance is the basis of Judaism.

I am disturbed by the artificial political dichotomy, the charge against an entire camp that it is harmful to democracy, as compared with another camp that protects democracy.

Its like name-calling. Its not factually correct. Putting a label positive or negative on any group is a sign of intolerance and anti-democratic behavior. Those labels lack all factual basis. Under extremely difficult conditions, the state of Israel managed to establish, and continues to establish, a splendid democracy that can be compared to the most well-established democracies in Europe and the United States.

This week, a new Basic Law was proposed in the Knesset: Israel as the national home of the Jewish people. Is it possible that a state can be both Jewish and democratic-

Regrettably, many people devote a great deal of time to proving the contradiction or at least the tension that exists between Israels national character and its democratic character. According to civics curricula, the goal is to emphasize what these characteristics have in common. But in practice, the opposite is what is taught.

For example, it is taught that there is a continuum with the nation-state at one end and the state of all its citizens at the other. But many of the world's most admired democracies are nation-states. Many countries have national immigration laws that mention our Law of Return. So in truth there is no conflict.

Why? Do you prefer the rights of one people over those of another-

The important thing is not to prefer one persons individual rights over anothers, even if that person is from a different nation. The law contains a clause to the effect that the system of government in Israel is democratic. In addition, the highest-ranking law that is explicated in the most extreme fashion is the Basic Law: Human Dignity and Freedom. This is the law that protects individual rights in the broadest sense.

The state of Israel was established as the home of the Jewish people. I am in favor of recognizing the rights of the Palestinians in their own states Jordan, Gaza and the Palestinian Authority. Here in Israel, they should be granted rights as individuals, but not on the national level.

This law sets forth the state of Israels raison dêtre. Otherwise, what are we doing here? Incidentally, regarding Netanyahus demand that the Palestinians recognize Israel as a Jewish state, there were those who said, "Why do we need recognition from the Palestinians? We recognize ourselves as a Jewish state." So we wrote it into a Basic Law. Anyone who is against that law opposes the State of Israels reason for existing.

טעינו? נתקן! אם מצאתם טעות בכתבה, נשמח שתשתפו אותנו

Tel Aviv is not Cairo or Athens

Professor Avraham Diskin, a well-known expert in political studies, casts his gaze over the social justice protests in Israel, saying that they are an expression of real distress, but the harsh slogans criticizing Netanyahu bear a political component.