Looking back at the 1977 elections

Many years have passed since. Those who warned against a changing of the guard in Israel's top echelons were proven wrong. Not only did this event not hurt Israeli democracy, it made it stronger. The party in power is no longer synonymous with the sovereign power. The people of Israel have become their own sovereign. The people's endorsement of the Likud's platform was not the one-off aberration the Left's leaders had predicted.

The time that has passed since warrants some introspection, weighing what has been accomplished and what is still a work in progress. The results of these elections can be represented by three different vectors: the consolidation of Jewish presence in Judea and Samaria; the drastic changes in the socio-economic landscape; and the empowerment of many groups who had felt disenfranchised and outside the mainstream.

On the eve of the first Likud government, the Israeli population in Judea and Samaria was limited to tiny, temporary communities. "The great settlement enterprise," as Begin put it, led almost 250,000 Israelis to build their home in prosperous and developed communities. Those responsible for the political turnaround knew what is now understood both in Israel and abroad -- namely, that the settlement enterprise will shape the contours of any future political settlement.

The second change the elections introduced -- a competitive, free-enterprise and entrepreneurial economy -- has been most evident over the past decade, but is under attack in the current political climate. The red flags being hoisted on many streets represent a centralized economy where power is concentrated in one focal point, the government and its bureaucracy. This is a convoluted, red-tape economy run by the well-connected for the well-connected. The old-school economics -- new taxes to reduce the deficit and runaway government spending to the point of bankruptcy a la Greece, Spain and Portugal -- are resurgent. Irresponsible fiscal policy leads to widespread unemployment. One cannot bridge socio-economics disparities with populist rhetoric; this can only be done by increasing competitiveness and investing in education and in a fast public transit system that reaches even the most far-flung communities.

The third change is also a welcome development: The political upset allowed entire segments of society who had been marginalized for 30 years to stand tall. They, would no longer accept being relegated to "second-class Israel." The ruling party sidelined them and labeled them as such. They were not allowed to partake in the state's government or in the decision-making apparatus. They were courted for their votes on election day, but they were denied proper integration in Israeli society. New immigrants from Middle Eastern countries and veteran immigrants from Europe; Irgun and Stern Gang fighters and those who had been part of the Beitar youth movement felt that their honor had been restored.

But more work lies ahead. The U.S. system for appointing top administration officials has not been adopted in Israel. What failed to take place during the 1977 spring has been perpetuated ever since. Why is an acceptable norm in Washington scorned at here? The elected public echelon should be able to pursue its policies with a senior bureaucracy that supports it, in accordance with the law and the Civil Service Commission's statutes.

The burgeoning dialogue in 2012, on the precipice of a likely change in the system of government, should take this into account.

Ofir Akunis (Likud) is deputy Knesset speaker.