this post was submitted on 05 Jul 2026
304 points (98.7% liked)

World News

57074 readers
1417 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] tate@lemmy.sdf.org 7 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Israel doesn't have a constitution.

[–] Rat_in_a_hat@lemmy.ca 16 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (3 children)

It doesn't have a "document constitution" it has a political constitution that is based upon precedence. That precedence being set by the high court.

So when the High Court decided that self determination in Israel is reserved only for the Jewish population, thereby enshrining the right to settler colonialism and they've enshrined apartheid into their Political Constitution.

https://www.loc.gov/item/global-legal-monitor/2021-07-27/israel-supreme-court-affirms-constitutionality-of-basic-law-israel-nation-state-of-the-jewish-people/?__cf_chl_f_tk=0MP_7BrWw3SqwpsimgtRVku71L0qxGunHaAQL7rtVHs-1783304970-1.0.1.1-ueujDHnBqCJSUwC3Zc176Q7zFcR6zkAhIBzY7ohLGnc

[–] tate@lemmy.sdf.org 7 points 1 week ago (2 children)

There are other ways to talk about this. We don't have to torture these words into pretending to be something they are not.

High court precedents are not the the same thing as a constitution because they are not above all branches of government. They are of one branch.

[–] ohulancutash@feddit.uk 14 points 1 week ago

You’re doing the “torture” here. A constitution is a set of rules or precedents which establish the legal basis for a state. It can be a set of rules in a document like the French constitution, or it can be the sum total of legal precedent and convention like the British constitution. Historically, most constitutions have been the latter.

[–] Rat_in_a_hat@lemmy.ca 12 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

You're applying a USA understanding of government to a completely different government structure because you want there to be an actual document called "The Constitution".

But that's not the case here. Either way, we can also take your point further, because a "Constitutional Crisis" can also apply to different branches of government getting into institutional conflict with each other. Since, as we know, legalese likes to use Latin etymology.

The word "constitution" comes from Latin "constitutio," meaning a regulation or order, via Old French "constitucion," and originally referred to laws or customs established by authority. It entered English in the 14th century with meanings including laws, physical makeup, and the structure of a state.

Either way, it's still a Constitutional Crisis and very valid terminology to use.

[–] homura1650@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago

Israel's founders didn't sit down one day and come up with a new form of non-constitutional democracy.

They convened an assembly back in 1949 to draft the constitution; and that assembly simply failed to do so. The plan was to establish the Knesset (parliament), and kick the can of writing a constitution to them. The Knesset also never finished the job, instead passing a patchwork set of basic laws. It wasn't until 1995, that their Supreme Court unilaterally asserted that basic laws formed a quasi constitution (a position that they did not start entertaining until the early 90s).

It is true that Israel is not the only country that has stumbled into this system. However, it is a small club. Within that club, what sets Israel apart is how young it is. This is not merely a historical curiosity yet. The tensions that prevented them from forming a constitution in the first place are still alive and well. And, they do not have the generations of precedent needed to provide the clarity that a real constitution can.

[–] tacoplease@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

So they're actually only a little better than a religious theocracy like Iran. Different processes and paths but similar results.

[–] Rat_in_a_hat@lemmy.ca 8 points 1 week ago (1 children)

That's a very layered statement to respond to and depends on personal weighted values that I can't adequately answer.

Not in the defense of Iran's theocracy because there's no defending it and they openly say that they're a theocracy, but more about perspective:

Israel claims to be secular and equal, yet -

  • marriages can only go through religious council (to maintain apartheid and "blood purity" as literally described by their politicians).
  • requests to open schools, civil societies, non-profits, etc. by anyone who isn't Jewish Israeli are rejected (so effectively there's reliance on Israeli Jewish institutions for many things from jobs to education to civil support)
  • if you're in an Arab neighborhood or town it is heavily under-served and the police purposefully turn a blind eye towards criminal activity (sometimes catch and release when they discover what neighborhoods the criminal is active in)
  • religious minorities experience violence and hate (both subtle and obvious) and have little to no recourse for justice.
  • their expansionism and colonialism is heavily fueled by religious zealots - so the supposedly secular state is enacting genocide for religious zealots but also claims to be secular.

So it's hard to determine if it's a little bit better. Some might argue it's worse.

[–] tacoplease@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Nonetheless, it's essentially a theocracy. Iran vs Israel is allegorically like Abel and Cain, sharing the same root source but with enough differences to want to kill each other.

[–] Rat_in_a_hat@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 week ago

I think framing it in religious terms is a bit too dismissive and lacking in depth. It's the exact framing that Israel has perpetuated on purpose so western audiences could be dismissive or find it too complicated to care about.