Interest Groups and Political Change in Israel

Chapter 1. A Theoretical Framework

Chapter 1 zyxwvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWV A Theoretical Framework A typical response of an Israeli to a proposed study of interest group development in Israel is, "But how can you study interest groups? There aren't any." Indeed, the comment reflects the conven­ tional wisdom about Israel that ideological political parties have permeated the system, subordinating interest groups and shaping all other institutions. A view prevails that the electorate has been unim­ portant in decision­making and that associations of citizens have felt powerless. Parties seemed to exercise such pervasive influence that one observer remarked, "Israel can be regarded as an example,zyxwvutsrponml par excellence, of the Etat partitaire or Parteinstaat'.'1 Observers have commented and focused their analyses almost exclusively upon Israel's many parties, for these parties were intri­ cately involved in establishing and developing the state. The few political analysts who paid any attention to interest groups understood the groups as playing secondary roles and holding positions sub­ ordinate to parties. All the parties were believed to operate similarly. Moreover, observers expected that the multi­party arrangement would continue because rather than coalescing into broad governing and opposition entities, most parties sought to preserve some political benefits by participating in coalition governments. Therefore, it seemed inconceivable to citizens and observers alike that individuals or groups could rise to challenge the parties or would consider mount­ ing a challenge desirable. This static conception of party­group relations in Israel requires reevaluation. Indeed, changes may be discerned, especially in interest group development, but also in the realm of parties. Groups have exerted influence upon parties, several autonomous groups have arisen, cause groups have grown, and several parties have coalesced. Stirrings of change started during the first decade of Israel's indepen­ 1 INTEREST GROUPS AND POLITICAL CHANGE 2 dence. A closer look reveals that not all parties had identical attributes or behaved uniformly. Later literature on Israeli politics has not dealt with these new occurrences, particularly the rise of interest groups, in any substantial way. Even recent analyses emphasize parties. Concentrating on the development and behavior of interest groups and dealing systemati­ cally with many of the changes in Israel's political system, this book fills a void in the study of Israel's politics. Before proceeding, a defini­ tion of interest groups as used in this study is required. Interest groups may be defined as organized groups of persons sharing particular concerns and impacting upon the political process by requiring policy­ makers to respond to their demands in some way. I refer to citizens' groups which make demands upon government, and not to institu­ tional groups such as the military or civil service bureaucracy whose members are organized together to perform functions in society other than interest expression. While focusing on interest groups, I want to explore the extent to which the view of Israel's politics as dominated by ideology and party is accurate, to what extent that system prevailed or may have changed through time, and if it changed, how and why. This is a study in political change that focuses on the relationship between interest groups and parties in Israel and the effect of these groups and parties upon the decision­making process. With its emphasis on groups, systems, and change, this study significantly advances political science interest group theory. Although interest groups as a valuable and valid research area has progressed since David B. Truman prodded political scientists to tran­ scend the notion of interest groups as aberrations, "pathological features," or undesirable phenomena on the political scene, many of the interest group studies have been descriptive and static.2 Much of the literature has only generally described traits and operating tactics of interest groups, treating them as isolated entities. Many studies have dealt with specific groups or with groups in one setting or polit­ ical system. If systemic variables are included, usually the analysis is unidirectional, observing the system's effect upon group behavior. Under the assumption that "where the power is, there the pressure will be applied,3 ‫״‬ interest group theorists usually first look at a system's structure for guidance in determining the tactics groups are likely to adopt and the targets and action arenas that they are likely to impinge upon.4 Nothing is "wrong" with such analyses, for it would be absurd to deny that institutions and structure influence interest group behavior. However, these studies do not take the next step and examine any [3.144.84.155] Project MUSE (2024-04-25...