Mamlakhtiyut , Education and Religion in the Struggle over the Mass Immigration
2007; Routledge; Volume: 26; Issue: 2 Linguagem: Inglês
10.1080/13531040701552173
ISSN1744-0548
Autores Tópico(s)Jewish Identity and Society
ResumoAbstract The replacement of the fragmented education system of party-controlled "streams" with a unified system of state education was a central goal of David Ben-Gurion's mamlakhtiyut (statism). But in his attempt to realize this goal Ben-Gurion had to overcome the strong opposition of the loyalists of the streams, who formed a powerful coalition that was supported by a majority of Knesset members. For this purpose Ben-Gurion took advantage of the fierce competition between the streams over the education of the children who came during the period of the mass immigration in the early years of independence. He pursued a deliberate policy of exacerbating the crisis to the point that even advocates of the stream system realized that it had become a severe threat to national unity and political stability as well as to vital interests of the parties involved. Notes [1] For English publications on mamlakhtiyut, see among others CitationKedar, "Ben-Gurion's Mamlakhtiyut"; CitationYanai, "Ben-Gurion's concept of Mamlakhtiyut"; Cohen, Zion and State, chaps. 11–12; CitationDon-Yehiya, "Political Religion in a New State"; CitationLiebman and Don-Yehiya, Civil Religion in Israel, chap. 4; CitationMedding, The Founding of Israeli Democracy, chap. 7. [2] Of course, adherents of mamlakhtiyut differed in the emphasis they put on its various values, and some shared only some of these values. I will elaborate on this point below. [3] See CitationElboim-Dror, Ha-hinukh ha-ivri, 2:225–310. [4] The term "consociational democracy" was applied by Arend Lijphart to deeply divided countries in which the political elites of the rival subcultures strive to avoid or restrain conflicts on fundamental issues by agreed settlements based on methods such as autonomy, proportionality and mutual veto. In Israel, as in other "fragmented democracies," these "consociational" methods of conflict resolution are widely used, particularly in dealing with issues of education and religion on an agreed basis. See CitationLijphart, "Consociational Democracy." The application of consociational and other methods of conflict resolution to the management of religious and educational conflicts in Israel is discussed in CitationDon-Yehiya, Religion and Political Accommodation. [5] See Don-Yehiya, "Cooperation and Conflict"; CitationZameret, The Melting Pot. On the mass immigration in the early years of Israeli statehood, see, for example, CitationHacohen, Olim bi-se'arah; CitationLissak, Ha-aliyah ha-gedolah. [6] Don-Yehiya, "Cooperation and Conflict," 2:526–78; CitationZameret, The Melting Pot. [7] These terms were first used by the United Front MK (Member of Knesset) David Zvi Pinkas in a session of the Knesset Committee for Education and Culture held on 28 December 1949. [8] The full report of the commission has been published in Zameret, The Melting Pot. [9] While immigrants did not work in the camp, they did work in the Ma'abarah. [10] Divrei ha-Knesset (Knesset record), 4 (1 March 1950): 908–9. [11] Protocols of Mapai's Central Committee (Hebrew) (hereafter MCC), 11 March 1951, Labor Party Archives, Beit Berl (hereafter LPA). [12] Divrei ha-Knesset, 4 (1 March 1950): 906. [13] Protocols of the Commission of Inquiry concerning Education in the Immigrant Camps (Hebrew) (hereafter, Commission of Inquiry), 40, Israel State Archives, Jerusalem (hereafter ISA). [14] Protocols of the Commission of Inquiry concerning Education in the Immigrant Camps (Hebrew) (hereafter, Commission of Inquiry), 40, Israel State Archives, Jerusalem (hereafter ISA), 33. [15] Protocols of the Commission of Inquiry concerning Education in the Immigrant Camps (Hebrew) (hereafter, Commission of Inquiry), 40, Israel State Archives, Jerusalem (hereafter ISA), 40–41. [16] Protocol of the extended forum of "Our faction in the Knesset, the Secretariat, our members in the Acting Committee of the Histadrut and our members in the Center for Education" (Hebrew) (hereafter Extended Mapai Forum), 26 January 1950, Ben-Gurion Archives, Sde-Boker. [17] Protocol of the extended forum of "Our faction in the Knesset, the Secretariat, our members in the Acting Committee of the Histadrut and our members in the Center for Education" (Hebrew) (hereafter Extended Mapai Forum), 26 January 1950, Ben-Gurion Archives, Sde-Boker, 32–33. [18] Protocol of the extended forum of "Our faction in the Knesset, the Secretariat, our members in the Acting Committee of the Histadrut and our members in the Center for Education" (Hebrew) (hereafter Extended Mapai Forum), 26 January 1950, Ben-Gurion Archives, Sde-Boker, 32–33. [19] Protocols of the Political Committee of Mapai (Hebrew) (hereafter MPC), 31 December 1950, LPA. [20] Protocols of the Political Committee of Mapai (Hebrew) (hereafter MPC), 31 December 1950, LPA [21] Protocols of the Political Committee of Mapai (Hebrew) (hereafter MPC), 31 December 1950, LPA [22] Zameret argues that "Nahum Levin and his followers implemented … the ideas of Ben-Gurion." "Zerem ha-ovdim ha-dati," 130. It seems that Zameret later changed his opinion on the subject, but this interpretation of Ben-Gurion's approach is still widely held. [23] Extended Mapai Forum, 26 January 1950. [24] Extended Mapai Forum, 26 January 1950 [25] Protocols of the Mapai faction in the Knesset (Hebrew), 9 January 1951, LPA. [26] Protocols of the Mapai faction in the Knesset (Hebrew) (hereafter Mapai Faction), 9 January 1951, LPA [27] Extended Mapai Forum, 26 January 1950. [28] Extended Mapai Forum, 26 January 1950 [29] See CitationKafkafi, "Peshet Dati"; Zameret, "Zerem ha-ovdim ha-dati." [30] Extended Mapai Forum, 26 January 1950. [31] Protocols of the Second Government (Hebrew), 29 January 1951, ISA. [32] Ben-Gurion's letter to the Central Committee of Mapai, 11 March 1951, LPA. [33] CitationMedding, Mapai in Israel, 228. [34] Ha-Po'el ha-Tza'ir 45, no. 44 (24 July 1951). [35] CitationSprinzak, "Ish ha-yashar be-einav", 78. [36] On this concept and its application to educational issues, see CitationElboim-Dror, "Eshnabei hizdamnut." [37] MPC, 31 December 1950; protocols of the Second Government, 31 December 1950. [38] A distinction should be made at this point between the "religious community" or "religious camp" and the religious parties. While the religious camp managed to keep its identity as a distinct subculture and to retain and increase its social and cultural impact, the major party of religious Zionism, the National-Religious Party (Mafdal) lost much of its electoral support and was exposed to the general process of the "decline of parties" that occurred in Israel and other Western countries. Additional informationNotes on contributorsEliezer Don-Yehiya Eliezer Don-Yehiya is Professor of Political Science at Bar-Ilan University.
Referência(s)