This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 65 | ← | Archive 69 | Archive 70 | Archive 71 | Archive 72 | Archive 73 | → | Archive 75 |
Which one of the following statements shall be included in the lead?
1. "In its
Basic Laws, Israel defines itself as a
Jewish and democratic state.
[1]
[2] Israel is a
representative democracy
[3]
[4]
[5] with a
parliamentary system,
proportional representation and
universal suffrage.
[6]
[7]"
2. "In its
Basic Laws, Israel defines itself as a
Jewish and democratic state.
[1]
[2] Israel is a
representative democracy
[fn 1] with a
parliamentary system,
proportional representation and
universal suffrage.
[6]
[7]"
{{
cite web}}
: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |dead-url=
(
help)
{{
cite web}}
: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |dead-url=
(
help)
Sammy Smooha classifies Israel in the historically-rare category of "ethnic democracy"; As'ad Ghanem, Nadim Rouhana, and Oren Yiftachel challenge the "democracy" component of that taxonomy and suggest instead the label of "ethnocracy," a somewhat less rare but still infrequent species; Ruth Gavison argues for moving the debate into explicit rather than submerged normative terms, and concludes that there is no necessary conceptual inconsistency between a state being Jewish and its being a democracy. All, however, describe the actual situation of non-Jews in Israel, in law and in practice, in similar terms. In Smooha's words, "minorities are treated as second-class citizens, feared as a threat, excluded from the national power structure, and placed under some control," while "at the same time [they] are allowed to conduct a democratic and peaceful struggle that yields incremental improvement in their status".
ששש.מ.ל (
talk)
17:45, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
The second option seems a good attempt to compromise.-- יניב הורון (Yaniv) ( talk) 18:59, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
Added options 3 and 4.
ששש.מ.ל (
talk)
22:15, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
I have reverted an edit that sought to introduce new options at the top of the discussion once it was already underway. Add new suggestions BELOW. Veritycheck✔️ ( talk) 22:18, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
CONTINUED DISCUSSION AT THE
NEXT RFC.
ששש.מ.ל (
talk)
11:39, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
Ubeidiya and Canaan deserve a mention in the lead. Open to suggestions. Makeandtoss ( talk) 21:21, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
References
Golden
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).
“ | Israel has evidence of the earliest migration of hominids out of Africa. Canaanite tribes are archeologically attested since the Middle Bronze Age, while the Kingdoms of Israel and Judah emerged during the Iron Age. Israel existed till 720 BC, and Judah remained to exist as autonomous Jewish provinces despite being conquered by various empires. The Hasmonean kingdom was established in 110 BC, and it remained independent until it became a client state of the Roman Republic in 63 BC. The Romans subsequently installed the Herodian dynasty in 37 BC, and in 6 AD created the Roman province of Judea which lasted until failed Jewish revolts resulted in widespread destruction, expulsion of Jewish population and the renaming of the region from Iudaea to Syria Palaestina. Jewish presence in the region persisted to a certain extent over the centuries. In the 7th century AD the Levant was taken from the Byzantine Empire by the Arabs and remained in Muslim control until the First Crusade in 1099. However, it fell to the Ayyubids in 1187, and the region was later controlled by the Mamluk Sultanate and the Ottoman Empire. During the 19th century, national awakening among Jews led to the establishment of the Zionist movement in the diaspora followed by waves of immigration to Ottoman and later British Palestine–leading to episodes of violence with the Arab population there. | ” |
@
יניב הורון: Perhaps also (1) add "where
Judaism
originated" after "the kingdoms of Israel and Judah", (2) change "Hasmoenan kingdom" to "
Jewish kingdom" as the Hasmoneans were the dynasty, not the kingdom (but still link to the dynasty), and (3) spell out "Ottoman Syria" instead of just "Ottoman".
ששש.מ.ל (
talk)
19:58, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
I have opened an RFC for several of the Israeli cities that I think are un-encyclopedic. I appreciate input from editors at that RFC. Thank you. -- Tyw7 ( 🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then ( ping me) 14:08, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
The above discussions have shown that some editors believe that the high profile debate regarding Israel and democracy should not be made clear to readers. The only policy based argument proposed was “fringe”, yet no supporting evidence has been provided. Evey single source being discussed, even Freedom House and Democracy Index, and every reputable scholarly source and every reputable journalistic report, acknowledges the debate. Unless actual evidence can be brought to disprove that this debate is mainstream, then we should end the filibuster and fix the article. Onceinawhile ( talk) 08:24, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
In the spirit of concluding this discussion, are any editors claiming that this scholarly and media debate doesn’t exist? I get that some people wish it didn’t, but it’s there for everyone to see. To ignore the obvious does nothing but create embarrassment for our project. Onceinawhile ( talk) 12:01, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
Post made by
sockpuppet
|
---|
Many of the arguments made in favour of excluding the term "parliamentary democracy" as a descriptor of Israel in the lede were based on the notion that the Judea and Samaria Area (particularly Area C) is part of the State of Israel, which is of course inaccurate.
Status of territories occupied by Israel in 1967#Israeli judicial decisions:
|
Below is a preliminary list of published scholars who describe the “ethnic democracy” vs “ethnocracy” debate. This list clearly includes some very notable individuals, with credentials which do not allow for them to be waved away because one would rather this debate didn’t exist.
Unless it can be shown that this debate is somehow not notable or not mainstream, it must be described in the article. Sources for the above are in an earlier thread.
Onceinawhile ( talk) 20:02, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
I suggest that a concrete proposal, giving WP:DUE weight to all viewpoints, be hammered out here. Preliminary discussion can happen in the normal informal way, but adding the section (or not) will probably require an RfC. Kingsindian ♝ ♚ 07:16, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
Option 1 of the
last RfC was formulated as:
"In its
Basic Laws, Israel defines itself as a
Jewish and democratic state.
[1]
[2] Israel is a
representative democracy
[3]
[4]
[5] with a
parliamentary system,
proportional representation and
universal suffrage.
[6]
[7]"
It was supported by nine (9) editors (
Icewhiz,
Sokuya,
יניב הורון,
Ynhockey,
Jonney2000,
Calthinus,
OtterAM,
Shrike, and I), and opposed by three (3) editors (
Onceinawhile,
Veritycheck, and
Seraphim System).
The arguments back and forth have been going on for many days now. The personal opinions of individual scholars - it seems - will never be included in the lede. However, their critiques of some of the civil liberties in Israel are echoed by both Democracy Index (DI) and Freedom House (FH), which are recognized by the overwhelming majority of the editors in the RfC as the most reliable sources on the subject. That's why I'm now proposing a compromise to settle this dispute once and for all. It includes a footnote shotrly explaining the positions of DI & FH, as well as the Encyclopedia Britannica source - put forward in the RfC - adding the term "multi-party" (which is also supported by DI & FH) in front of "representative democracy":
"In its
Basic Laws, Israel defines itself as a
Jewish and democratic state.
[1]
[2] Israel is a
multi-party
[8]
representative democracy
[fn 1] with a
parliamentary system,
proportional representation and
universal suffrage.
[6]
[7]"
{{
cite web}}
: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |dead-url=
(
help)
{{
cite web}}
: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |dead-url=
(
help) Cite error: The named reference "freedomintheworld2018" was defined multiple times with different content (see the
help page).
Duoble 07 (
talk)
19:41, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
Support seems like a workable compromise proposal to me.-- Calthinus ( talk) 19:44, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
Oppose: I'm sorry, but I don't think this is satisfactory. The sentence in question is about the political system, not about ongoing issues in society nor about the level of "freedom" in the country. Discussion of these belong elsewhere on Wikipedia. OtterAM ( talk) 20:07, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
proclaimed capital is Jerusalem, although the state's sovereignty over Jerusalem has only partial recognition.
This is questionable phrasing and does not in fact echo the sources used. 'partial recognition ' is a question-begging description of less than a handful of 196 nations. One might tweak to 'the state's assertion of sovereignty', but sovereignty is counterfactual, given Ian S. Lustick 's never to my knowledge controverted 'HAS ISRAEL ANNEXED EAST JERUSALEM?' Middle East Policy Volume 5, Issue 1, January 1997 pp.34-45 Nishidani ( talk) 09:51, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights are part of the
Districts of Israel
[7] (where the same civil laws apply) and are included in the official
CBS
statistics
[8]. I'm not sure what else is required for "soverignity".
Duoble 07 (
talk)
10:38, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
The sentence needs to address the fact that it is the East Jerusalem section that is disputed. So "...although the state's sovereignty over East Jerusalem lacks international approval." I used approval rather than recongition because Israel is clearly sovereign in East Jerusalem (in the sense that it excercises power) but this sovereignty has not been approved by the international community. Telaviv1 ( talk) 14:17, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 65 | ← | Archive 69 | Archive 70 | Archive 71 | Archive 72 | Archive 73 | → | Archive 75 |
Which one of the following statements shall be included in the lead?
1. "In its
Basic Laws, Israel defines itself as a
Jewish and democratic state.
[1]
[2] Israel is a
representative democracy
[3]
[4]
[5] with a
parliamentary system,
proportional representation and
universal suffrage.
[6]
[7]"
2. "In its
Basic Laws, Israel defines itself as a
Jewish and democratic state.
[1]
[2] Israel is a
representative democracy
[fn 1] with a
parliamentary system,
proportional representation and
universal suffrage.
[6]
[7]"
{{
cite web}}
: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |dead-url=
(
help)
{{
cite web}}
: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |dead-url=
(
help)
Sammy Smooha classifies Israel in the historically-rare category of "ethnic democracy"; As'ad Ghanem, Nadim Rouhana, and Oren Yiftachel challenge the "democracy" component of that taxonomy and suggest instead the label of "ethnocracy," a somewhat less rare but still infrequent species; Ruth Gavison argues for moving the debate into explicit rather than submerged normative terms, and concludes that there is no necessary conceptual inconsistency between a state being Jewish and its being a democracy. All, however, describe the actual situation of non-Jews in Israel, in law and in practice, in similar terms. In Smooha's words, "minorities are treated as second-class citizens, feared as a threat, excluded from the national power structure, and placed under some control," while "at the same time [they] are allowed to conduct a democratic and peaceful struggle that yields incremental improvement in their status".
ששש.מ.ל (
talk)
17:45, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
The second option seems a good attempt to compromise.-- יניב הורון (Yaniv) ( talk) 18:59, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
Added options 3 and 4.
ששש.מ.ל (
talk)
22:15, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
I have reverted an edit that sought to introduce new options at the top of the discussion once it was already underway. Add new suggestions BELOW. Veritycheck✔️ ( talk) 22:18, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
CONTINUED DISCUSSION AT THE
NEXT RFC.
ששש.מ.ל (
talk)
11:39, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
Ubeidiya and Canaan deserve a mention in the lead. Open to suggestions. Makeandtoss ( talk) 21:21, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
References
Golden
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).
“ | Israel has evidence of the earliest migration of hominids out of Africa. Canaanite tribes are archeologically attested since the Middle Bronze Age, while the Kingdoms of Israel and Judah emerged during the Iron Age. Israel existed till 720 BC, and Judah remained to exist as autonomous Jewish provinces despite being conquered by various empires. The Hasmonean kingdom was established in 110 BC, and it remained independent until it became a client state of the Roman Republic in 63 BC. The Romans subsequently installed the Herodian dynasty in 37 BC, and in 6 AD created the Roman province of Judea which lasted until failed Jewish revolts resulted in widespread destruction, expulsion of Jewish population and the renaming of the region from Iudaea to Syria Palaestina. Jewish presence in the region persisted to a certain extent over the centuries. In the 7th century AD the Levant was taken from the Byzantine Empire by the Arabs and remained in Muslim control until the First Crusade in 1099. However, it fell to the Ayyubids in 1187, and the region was later controlled by the Mamluk Sultanate and the Ottoman Empire. During the 19th century, national awakening among Jews led to the establishment of the Zionist movement in the diaspora followed by waves of immigration to Ottoman and later British Palestine–leading to episodes of violence with the Arab population there. | ” |
@
יניב הורון: Perhaps also (1) add "where
Judaism
originated" after "the kingdoms of Israel and Judah", (2) change "Hasmoenan kingdom" to "
Jewish kingdom" as the Hasmoneans were the dynasty, not the kingdom (but still link to the dynasty), and (3) spell out "Ottoman Syria" instead of just "Ottoman".
ששש.מ.ל (
talk)
19:58, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
I have opened an RFC for several of the Israeli cities that I think are un-encyclopedic. I appreciate input from editors at that RFC. Thank you. -- Tyw7 ( 🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then ( ping me) 14:08, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
The above discussions have shown that some editors believe that the high profile debate regarding Israel and democracy should not be made clear to readers. The only policy based argument proposed was “fringe”, yet no supporting evidence has been provided. Evey single source being discussed, even Freedom House and Democracy Index, and every reputable scholarly source and every reputable journalistic report, acknowledges the debate. Unless actual evidence can be brought to disprove that this debate is mainstream, then we should end the filibuster and fix the article. Onceinawhile ( talk) 08:24, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
In the spirit of concluding this discussion, are any editors claiming that this scholarly and media debate doesn’t exist? I get that some people wish it didn’t, but it’s there for everyone to see. To ignore the obvious does nothing but create embarrassment for our project. Onceinawhile ( talk) 12:01, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
Post made by
sockpuppet
|
---|
Many of the arguments made in favour of excluding the term "parliamentary democracy" as a descriptor of Israel in the lede were based on the notion that the Judea and Samaria Area (particularly Area C) is part of the State of Israel, which is of course inaccurate.
Status of territories occupied by Israel in 1967#Israeli judicial decisions:
|
Below is a preliminary list of published scholars who describe the “ethnic democracy” vs “ethnocracy” debate. This list clearly includes some very notable individuals, with credentials which do not allow for them to be waved away because one would rather this debate didn’t exist.
Unless it can be shown that this debate is somehow not notable or not mainstream, it must be described in the article. Sources for the above are in an earlier thread.
Onceinawhile ( talk) 20:02, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
I suggest that a concrete proposal, giving WP:DUE weight to all viewpoints, be hammered out here. Preliminary discussion can happen in the normal informal way, but adding the section (or not) will probably require an RfC. Kingsindian ♝ ♚ 07:16, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
Option 1 of the
last RfC was formulated as:
"In its
Basic Laws, Israel defines itself as a
Jewish and democratic state.
[1]
[2] Israel is a
representative democracy
[3]
[4]
[5] with a
parliamentary system,
proportional representation and
universal suffrage.
[6]
[7]"
It was supported by nine (9) editors (
Icewhiz,
Sokuya,
יניב הורון,
Ynhockey,
Jonney2000,
Calthinus,
OtterAM,
Shrike, and I), and opposed by three (3) editors (
Onceinawhile,
Veritycheck, and
Seraphim System).
The arguments back and forth have been going on for many days now. The personal opinions of individual scholars - it seems - will never be included in the lede. However, their critiques of some of the civil liberties in Israel are echoed by both Democracy Index (DI) and Freedom House (FH), which are recognized by the overwhelming majority of the editors in the RfC as the most reliable sources on the subject. That's why I'm now proposing a compromise to settle this dispute once and for all. It includes a footnote shotrly explaining the positions of DI & FH, as well as the Encyclopedia Britannica source - put forward in the RfC - adding the term "multi-party" (which is also supported by DI & FH) in front of "representative democracy":
"In its
Basic Laws, Israel defines itself as a
Jewish and democratic state.
[1]
[2] Israel is a
multi-party
[8]
representative democracy
[fn 1] with a
parliamentary system,
proportional representation and
universal suffrage.
[6]
[7]"
{{
cite web}}
: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |dead-url=
(
help)
{{
cite web}}
: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |dead-url=
(
help) Cite error: The named reference "freedomintheworld2018" was defined multiple times with different content (see the
help page).
Duoble 07 (
talk)
19:41, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
Support seems like a workable compromise proposal to me.-- Calthinus ( talk) 19:44, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
Oppose: I'm sorry, but I don't think this is satisfactory. The sentence in question is about the political system, not about ongoing issues in society nor about the level of "freedom" in the country. Discussion of these belong elsewhere on Wikipedia. OtterAM ( talk) 20:07, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
proclaimed capital is Jerusalem, although the state's sovereignty over Jerusalem has only partial recognition.
This is questionable phrasing and does not in fact echo the sources used. 'partial recognition ' is a question-begging description of less than a handful of 196 nations. One might tweak to 'the state's assertion of sovereignty', but sovereignty is counterfactual, given Ian S. Lustick 's never to my knowledge controverted 'HAS ISRAEL ANNEXED EAST JERUSALEM?' Middle East Policy Volume 5, Issue 1, January 1997 pp.34-45 Nishidani ( talk) 09:51, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights are part of the
Districts of Israel
[7] (where the same civil laws apply) and are included in the official
CBS
statistics
[8]. I'm not sure what else is required for "soverignity".
Duoble 07 (
talk)
10:38, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
The sentence needs to address the fact that it is the East Jerusalem section that is disputed. So "...although the state's sovereignty over East Jerusalem lacks international approval." I used approval rather than recongition because Israel is clearly sovereign in East Jerusalem (in the sense that it excercises power) but this sovereignty has not been approved by the international community. Telaviv1 ( talk) 14:17, 8 August 2018 (UTC)