Summary
A sociologist whose work on communal, ethnic and religious cleavages in Israel is the chief scholarly source for Dowty’s Chapter 7, “The Communal Split”, and a cited authority in Chapter 8 on the consociational character of religious-secular accommodation (The Jewish State: A Century Later, lines 2949-3213, lines 3214-3492, lines 3493-3580).
Details
-
Smooha is cited that, on a per capita basis, Iraqi Jews contributed to Zionism two to three times as much as Polish Jews in money and in immigrants during the Mandatory period, and that the substantial mobility of Ashkenazim was predicated on the channeling of Oriental newcomers to the lower rungs of society (The Jewish State: A Century Later, lines 2949-3213).
-
His survey of pronouncements by Oriental spokesmen, ethnic publications and programmes of ethnic election lists is quoted as showing a broad consensus with the established ideologies: the stated target is ethnic integration, separatism is out of the question, and the emphasis is on uniculturalism with minor subcultural pluralism (The Jewish State: A Century Later, lines 2949-3213).
-
His survey figures give 72 percent of Eastern Jews, but only 48.6 percent of European Jews, on the hawkish side of the spectrum as “hard-liners” or “exclusionists”. Dowty also takes from Smooha the late-1970s judgment of a striking imbalance between Eastern Jews’ material progress and their lack of political power, and the explanation that Eastern Jews favour the Likud because they see in it a means for social mobility and status attainment (The Jewish State: A Century Later, lines 2949-3213, lines 3214-3492).
-
His principal works as cited in Chapter 7’s notes are Israel: Pluralism and Conflict (1978), Arabs and Jews in Israel, vol. 1 (1989), “Class, Ethnic, and National Cleavages and Democracy in Israel” (1993) and “Jewish Ethnicity in Israel” (1994) (The Jewish State: A Century Later, lines 3214-3492).
-
In Chapter 9 Dowty quotes Smooha’s summary: “the Orientals are not-separate-but-unequal, the religious Jews are separate-but-equal, and the Israeli Arabs are separate-but-unequal”, and takes Smooha’s 1976, 1980, 1985 and 1988 surveys of Israeli Arabs as the most extensive attitude study, giving evidence of both Israelization and Palestinization, and a fourfold typology of Israeli Arabs — about 11 percent accommodationists, 39 percent reservationists, 40 percent oppositionists and 10 percent rejectionists (The Jewish State: A Century Later, lines 4025-4192, lines 4261-4325).
-
Smooha is the source of the Ethnic Democracy category Dowty discusses in Chapter 9: a system combining genuine democracy for all with institutionalized dominance for one constituent group (The Jewish State: A Century Later, lines 4261-4325).
-
Chapter 9’s completed notes rest heavily on his Arabs and Jews in Israel, vol. 2 (1992) — including the finding that roughly two-thirds in both communities believe a solution based on Israeli statehood and recognition of Arab rights as a national minority is preferable and workable (vol. 2, 112, 168), his “Arab-Jewish Relations in Israel in the Peace Era”, Israel Affairs 1 (Winter 1994), and Faisal al-Husseini as quoted in vol. 2, 412, that Palestinian spokesmen would recognize Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state if a Palestinian state is established (The Jewish State: A Century Later, lines 4423-4620, lines 4621-4980).