1998
DOI: 10.2979/isr.1998.3.2.253
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Questioning ?Ethnic Democracy?: A Response to Sammy Smooha

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
15
0

Year Published

2009
2009
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
6
3

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 118 publications
(15 citation statements)
references
References 4 publications
0
15
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The Israeli social scientists extensively discussed the definition of Israeli regime, but did not question its Jewish nature. Sammy Smooha (1997) defines the Israeli system as a stable 'ethnic democracy', and similarly Yoav Peled (1992) talks about an 'ethnorepubblican regime'; both see Israel as conjugating potentially opposite principles -ethnic preference and democratic universalism -but nevertheless maintaining a fair, 'liberal' balance between them (see also Dowty 1999; for a critique Ghanem et al 1998). For other scholars, the Israeli regime can be better defined as an ethnocracy (Yiftachel 2006).…”
Section: Citizenship Revisited: the Polity And Its Peoplementioning
confidence: 95%
“…The Israeli social scientists extensively discussed the definition of Israeli regime, but did not question its Jewish nature. Sammy Smooha (1997) defines the Israeli system as a stable 'ethnic democracy', and similarly Yoav Peled (1992) talks about an 'ethnorepubblican regime'; both see Israel as conjugating potentially opposite principles -ethnic preference and democratic universalism -but nevertheless maintaining a fair, 'liberal' balance between them (see also Dowty 1999; for a critique Ghanem et al 1998). For other scholars, the Israeli regime can be better defined as an ethnocracy (Yiftachel 2006).…”
Section: Citizenship Revisited: the Polity And Its Peoplementioning
confidence: 95%
“…The distinction between the procedural elements of the Israeli democracy, such as free and fair elections, and the structural ones, such as the protection of minority rights, has been highlighted in the works of Ghanem et al (1998) and Yiftachel (2006). The authors have concluded that, in Israel, nationality (Jewish identity) not citizenship is the criterion upon which individuals may claim ownership in the state (Ghanem et al, 1998, p. 256).…”
Section: Citizenship and Entry Into Israel (Temporary Provision) Law-mentioning
confidence: 98%
“…The privileged cohort outnumbers the non-privileged, so that elections can occur without disrupting the system of classification and discrimination. Scholars have advanced two labels for such states, with Israel as the central case: 'ethnocracy' and 'ethnic democracy' (Dowty, 1999;Gavison, 1999;Ghanem, 2009;Ghanem, Rouhana, & Yiftachel, 1998;Smooha, 1997). The key players in the debate over which term should be employed agree upon many of the characteristics of the 'beast' they seek to describe (Dowty, 1999, p.1;Gavison, 1999, p.3); at stake is the normative connotation of the label.…”
Section: So What Kind Of State Are We Talking About Exactly?mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Israel in practice -contravenes equality and hence does not qualify as democratic (Ghanem, 1998, p.443;Ghanem et al, 1998;Jamal, 2002, pp.424-8). In the Israeli context, they draw attention to how the Occupied Territories operate within the state, arguing that the lack of citizenship rights for Palestinians means that we cannot understand Israel as a whole to be democratic (Ghanem et al, 1998, p2, 6;Yiftachel, 1999, pp.376-7).…”
Section: So What Kind Of State Are We Talking About Exactly?mentioning
confidence: 99%