The Crisis of Democracy and the Problems of Israel

Abstract. The article examines the negative phenomena in the social life of developed Western countries caused by the crisis of democracy. Two mutually supporting phenomena causing the crisis are identified: the strengthening of the executive power – a class of irremovable, unaccountable and uncontrolled by society professional managers and the increase in their social base – economically passive social groups living on social benefits. The growth of public expenditure caused by this entails an increase in the tax burden and public debt, which leads to a loss of incentives for investment, capital flight and economic stagnation. Approaches that could neutralize the crisis phenomena are proposed: limiting the terms of office in the executive power, relationships with the executive power based on a social contract with measurable goals, the possibility of early termination of the powers of the executive power if milestone goals are not achieved.

The world is going through hard times: long, albeit sluggish wars in Eastern Europe and the Middle East, an approaching recession in the global economy, as a consequence of:

· ongoing wars,

· the desire to live beautifully beyond one’s means, on credit, encouraged by populist governments,

· the formation and strengthening of a social class of professional politicians and managers who do not forget about their own well-being at this feast of the beautiful life.

The entire set of these circumstances, in our humble opinion, is caused by the imperfections in the functioning mechanisms that have accumulated even in the most advanced democratic societies, which can be conditionally called a crisis of democracy.

Democracy arose as a way of organizing public life based on collective and equal participation in the adoption and implementation of decisions that require approximately equal, natural and simple collective efforts. That is why it was so successful in the first steps of social development, for example, in primitive military democracies. As the old Soviet song goes: …if there is one joy for everyone – there is one misfortune for everyone… And as soon as public life became more complicated, differences in abilities, skills, productivity and the volume of available material and spiritual goods appeared, democracy, in full accordance with human instincts, transformed into fundamentally different forms of organizing public life at different levels – from patriarchal families to monarchies and oligarchies, …some people have war, others have their own mother… The revival of democracies at the dawn of modern times was caused by the fact that in initially free cities or those liberated from the power of large feudal lords, communities of free private businesses were formed, initially approximately equal in economic strength and self-organizing to solve common urban problems in order to make the work of businesses and life in the city more reliable and comfortable. As the economic power of artisans, merchants, and then manufacturers and bankers increased, this “third estate” intercepted political power from the feudal lords on a national scale, turning absolute monarchies into democracies, either in the form of constitutional, essentially “decorative” monarchies (as in Great Britain) or by eliminating monarchies altogether, and at the same time the monarchs (as in France). And then, on the rise: the emergence of a new noticeable demographic and economic force in society sooner or later led to its inclusion in the democratic process (workers, women, racial, national, religious and other minorities): it is easier and cheaper to include it in an established system than to fight it with the force of repression. The revolutions of the 18th – 20th centuries proved this with all due clarity. Together with the expansion of the social base of democracy, the influence of the state on the redistribution of economic and social benefits also increased, and, therefore, its economic power. And this, in turn, led to the formation and strengthening of a new social, economic and political force – professional government officials, appointed, practically irremovable and not accountable to the citizens of the country. The growth of the political power of this force, conventionally called bureaucracy, is based on:

· expansion of the volume of social benefits distributed among the economically weak strata of the population,

· growth in the number of economically weak strata due to weakening incentives to work, as well as the influx of external migrants due to the availability of free social benefits,

· expansion of the bureaucratic layer itself and the volume of benefits distributed in their favor.

The economic basis of this power is a dual source – the growth of current taxation and the growth of public debt – the tax burden of future generations. Thus, the growth of bureaucracy hinders the development of businesses, especially small and medium-sized innovative ones, becoming a permanent factor in the deterioration of the economic situation.

The strengthening and irremovability of bureaucracy has other negative consequences associated with age psychology: a deterioration over time in the reaction to changes requiring intervention, an increase in the influence of personal, family, clan factors on the adoption of socially significant decisions, corruption, etc. It is enough to recall the facts of the initial and final stages of a political career.

These, in our opinion, are the most characteristic and striking manifestations of the modern crisis of democracy, observed to varying degrees in all developed democracies: the USA, Western Europe, Israel, etc.

The crisis of democracy in Israel, having the same source, contains additional circumstances that both complicate and facilitate, paradoxically, its overcoming. The first include the absence of a constitution, the incompleteness and contradictory nature of the basic laws, the mosaic nature of the ethno-confessional structure that persists and sometimes even intensifies along with aliyah, the diversity of political experience brought from the diaspora, the political and economic influence of Israel’s main ally – the United States, the negative attitude of “progressive public opinion” towards Israel. The second, first of all, include the consolidating significance of an external threat and the unity of the army and the people. It seems that understanding the above-mentioned causes and sources of the crisis of democracy, as well as the development of measures and the implementation of political actions to overcome it, is gradually occurring in the most powerful democracy in the world – the United States, as evidenced by the election of D. Trump as President. Regardless of how and how this process ends in the States, very favorable conditions are now emerging not only for a successful and radical completion of the fight against Islamic extremism in Israel’s environment, but also for overcoming the crisis of democracy in Israel by limiting the power of the bureaucracy. There is reason to believe that these two tasks are more interconnected than it might seem at first glance. In particular, it can be assumed that the duration of the current military campaign is due not only to its complexity (when has Israel ever had an easy war?), but also to the desire to preserve the current cabinet for as long as possible.

It would be an unforgivable mistake if Israel did not take advantage of such a favorable moment.

General approaches to solving the problem of limiting the omnipotence of the bureaucracy are more or less known. These include:

· term limits in power (currently applied to the highest executive power in a number of countries, it makes sense to discuss the expansion of this approach to wider contingents of the unelected administrative apparatus),

· the introduction, similar to a contract for the performance of work in civil law, of a social contract between the executive power and voters, with the recording of measurable socio-economic and political goals and deadlines for their achievement,

· the possibility of early termination of the powers of the executive power if milestone goals are not achieved through a referendum.

Of course, there is a huge gap between general approaches and practically acceptable solutions, but it can be overcome through national discussion and political will. I urge those interested in the corresponding development of events to take part in the discussion.

E. Sirota, PhD, Professor.

04/05/2025.

If you care about the future of Israel and want to change life in Israel for the better, join us.

The “Civil Compass” association (amechad.info)

Facebook: amechad israel

https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=61554755348135

Facebook group:

https://www.facebook.com/groups/2053580788428074

Our group on Telegram:

https://t.me/amechadinfo