Michal Shamir

Collective Identity and Electoral Competition in Israel

Comparative electoral research suggests that issue voting has increased and that the ability of social cleavages to account for voting patterns in most advanced industrial democracies has declined. In Israel, only the first of these generalizations holds. The capacity of social cleavages to structure the vote has been maintained along with our overall ability to explain the vote. Based on longitudinal analysis of electoral cleavages between 1969 and 1996 and on an analysis of the 1996 election, we argue that this pattern is driven by issues involving identity dilemmas that have become increasingly important in structuring the vote. Such dilemmas amalgamate policy issues and social allegiances, while reinforcing existing cleavage structures. Focusing on the 1996 election we probe the meanings of internal and external collective identity concerns in Israeli politics, their considerable overlap, and their translation into political choices.

Why Politicians Are More Tolerant: Selective Recruitment and Socialization Among Political Elites in Britain, Israel, New Zealand and the United States

In this article, we present data showing that national legislators are more tolerant than the public in Britain, Israel, New Zealand and the United States. Two explanations for this phenomenon are presented and assessed. The first is the selective recruitment of Members of Parliament, Knesset and Congress from among those in the electorate whose demographic, ideological and personality characteristics predispose them to be tolerant. Although this process does operate in all four countries, it is insufficient to explain all of the differences in tolerance between elites and the public in at least three countries. The second explanation relies on a process of explicitly political socialization, leading to differences in tolerance between elites and their public that transcend individual-level, personal characteristics. Relying on our analysis of political tolerance among legislators in the four countries, we suggest how this process of political socialization may be operating.

The Political Context of Tolerance: The United States and Israel

This article extends recent work on political tolerance to a cross-national context. In it we argue that a content-controlled measurement strategy is ideal for cross-cultural research, and we examine the dual processes of target group selection and of deciding the extent to which one tolerates target groups, once they are selected. We argue that the first process is rooted in concerns of social adjustment, and the second in externalization and object appraisal. This leads to a certain set of predictions, which we modify slightly when we combine this social psychological theory with a cross-national research design, one we ultimately label a modified most-different-systems design. The same individual level model is estimated on the U.S. and on the Israeli data, and the results suggest that although the social and psychological processes underlying political tolerance are very similar in the two contexts, there are significant political differences between the two nations which do affect the impact of individual-level variables on tolerance.

Are Western Party Systems “Frozen”?: A Comparative Dynamic Analysis

Party systems have been perceived for a long time as highly persistent, stable, “frozen” subsystems of the polity. This dominant view has been put forward most eloquently by Lipset and Rokkan (1976) and has been adopted and adapted by others since. This article challenges this view by studying 19 Western party systems over their entire history. I show that in terms of party systems fragmentation, ideological polarization, and instability of the vote, most systems cannot be regarded as stable. Party systems have not been “defreezing” in the last few years; they have never really been frozen.

Jews and Arabs in Israel

This article explores the patterns of political tolerance and intolerance among Jews and Arabs, patterns that are largely structured by the broader conflict. The two groups are characterized by “focused intolerance.” Both groups are generally intolerant, and the targets of their intolerance are highly concentrated and provide a mirror image of one another. The Arabs overwhelmingly select targets from among Jewish right-wing groups, and Jews select theirs from among Arab left-wing groups. Intolerance usually arises from perceptions of extreme threat, but it may be mitigated by a strong belief in the norms of democracy and minority rights. The Israeli context provides for the requisite threat but does not encourage the counterbalancing support for abstract norms that can be applied directly to the conflict at hand.

Political Intolerance among Masses and Elites in Israel: A Reevaluation of the Elitist Theory of Democracy

This study of political tolerance focuses on the political elites in Israel. It is based on elite and mass surveys and on a case-study analysis of the response of the Israeli political system to the entrance of two new outgroups in the 1980s. The results raise doubts as to the general application of elitist theory of democracy on three counts: First--in particular in situations of high threat and objection--the political elite does not seem to differ much in its attitudinal tolerance from the general public, yet nonpolitical elites do. Second, politically partisan calculations enter the decision-making process and produce dynamics of intolerance rather than tolerance. The political elite groups did not restrain each other, but rather cooperated in limiting more groups. And third, the moves to limit political groups were the affair of the elites, even though there was widespread intolerance within the public.

Competing Values and Policy Choices: Israeli Public Opinion on Foreign and Security Affairs

Value hierarchies structure peoples position on specific issues when values are in conflict. This general proposition is tested using surveys of Israeli public opinion on issues relating to the Israeli-Arab conflict. Value priorities are shown to be politically and ideologically structured, and not random, with certain value combinations more prevalent and more enduring than others. Most importantly, we establish that peoples value hierarchies significantly structure policy preferences and changes therein. The more salient or acute the value conflict, the greater the correspondence between hierarchy and preference. This value trade-off approach presents a picture of Israeli public opinion which is very different from that usually portrayed: of a population firmly supporting a Jewish majority in their state, with a very strong desire for peace. The values of land and democracy are shown to be much less important.

A Decade Later, the World Had Changed, the Cleavage Structure Remained Israel 1996—2006

The defining challenge for Israel since 1967 has been the future of the territories captured in the Six Day War and the population living in them. With the stalemate festering and the salience of the conflict very high, the conflict with the Palestinians has become the major cleavage dimension in Israeli politics. Building on the multidimensional conceptualization of cleavage, we argue that despite the occurrence of many, dramatic, changes, the cleavage structure has not changed in the past decade, and the 1977 realignment is still in place. The primary cleavage is a full and consistent interlocking cleavage. Its potency, and the quality that permits it to achieve this overarching position, is associated with its expression of underlying collective identity dilemmas, which combine external and internal dimensions. Collective identity concerns, more readily than others, produce full cleavages and are likely to dominate and endure, overriding other issues. The establishment, positioning and success of Kadima in the 2006 elections are explicated within this framework.

Candidates, Parties and Blocs Israel in the 1990s

The Israeli party system, its parties and its voters, have undergone tremendous change. From a stable dominant party system through a competitive two-bloc system, it finds itself in the 1990s in a state of dealignment, with weakening parties, loosening party ties, fragmentation, growing volatility and frequent turnover in government. The combination of electoral reform, which instituted direct elections of the Prime Minister, new voting groups, and international shifts exacerbated in Israel the processes which characterize all Western democracies. While the party system and the parties are in disarray, candidates, issues and the political blocs of left and right grow in importance.

The Impact of Persistent Terrorism on Political Tolerance: Israel, 1980 to 2011

How do persistent terrorist attacks influence political tolerance, a willingness to extend basic liberties to ones enemies? Studies in the U.S. and elsewhere have produced a number of valuable insights into how citizens respond to singular, massive attacks like 9/11. But they are less useful for evaluating how chronic and persistent terrorist attacks erode support for democratic values over the long haul. Our study focuses on political tolerance levels in Israel across a turbulent 30-year period, from 1980 to 2011, which allows us to distinguish the short-term impact of hundreds of terrorist attacks from the long-term influence of democratic longevity on political tolerance. We find that the corrosive influence of terrorism on political tolerance is much more powerful among Israelis who identify with the Right, who have also become much more sensitive to terrorism over time. We discuss the implications of our findings for other democracies under threat from terrorism.