The Florentine Republic and Yisraeli Democracy

 

This article was written by Bat-Zion Susskind-Sacks and Roger Froikin

One of the courses that I attend, “Renaissance and the Birth of the Modern World,” discusses the birth of the Florentine Republic in the 16^th century. In researching the subject, I came across the following analysis, by Mark Jurdevic in Humanism and Creativity in the Renaissance, of that entity:

“Political conflict in Florence from the age of Dante to the republic of 1527–30 tended to revolve around and between two competing visions of the republic and two consequent political languages: the one aristocratic, closed, and exclusive, and the other popular, broad-based, and inclusive. For the aristocrats, who most frequently competed amongst themselves for influence and power, politics was rooted in informal private patronage: personal and neighbourhood ties of dependence and obligation, marriages and friendships and the informal distribution of favours." For a moment, as I was trying to focus on the topic of the lecture, I had a déjà vu sensation. It felt as though the author was describing modern day Yisrael.

In my distress, I shared my thoughts with my dear friend, Roger Froikin. Unsurprisingly, he agreed with me.

This article is a joint effort by both of us to shed more light on the subject.

Encyclopedia Britannica defines “Democracy,” the Yisraeli form of governance, as: “a form of government based upon self-rule of the people and, in modern times, upon freely elected representative institutions and an executive responsible to the people…. in their equal right to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”

The term “Republic,” for many of us, suggests a form of government in which the public votes for representatives whose task is to represent their interests to the government. The term may be applied to any form of government that is not ruled by a monarch. “However,” according to Dr. Steven Zucker and Dr. Beth Harris, “Florence was a republic in the sense that there was a constitution which limited the power of the nobility (as well as labourers) and ensure that no person or group could have complete political control…” whereas in reality, as history has shown, “political power resided in the hands of middle-class merchants, a few wealthy families, such as the Medici and the powerful guilds.”

 The roots of the Florentine Republic date back to the decline of the Western Roman Empire.

The year was 59 B.C.E. The Roman dictator, Sulla, conquered the area and allotted plots of land to veteran soldiers who were loyal to him. According to some accounts, the city was founded for political and strategic reasons. These were the seeds of what later became the Florentine and other Republics or city-states, each with their own government.

Yisrael, which is much younger, was mostly settled by two groups that entered the land in the early 20^th century. One, primarily Eastern European Jewish idealists, leaning toward secularism and socialism. Later, German Jews, from a community that was quicky assimilating away from Jewish tradition, came as refugees from Nazi Germany. They had business and law experience and tended to the politically leaned left.  These people founded the socialist Kibbutzim, many of which were strategically vital points that bravely defended the People from constant threats of terrorism.

Even though, formally, Florence was a democratic republic, it was under the absolute rule of aristocratic families, such as the Medici, through their control of key institutions and the support of their patrons. Jean Bodin, a French political philosopher, offered a far-reaching definition of the term “republic.” In his canonical study of sovereignty, entitled, Six Books of the Commonwealth (1576), he defines the republic as “the rightly ordered government of a number of families, and of those things which are their common concern, by a sovereign power.”

Of course, the situation in the Jewish State is not identical to what happened in Florence, but the behavioural patterns in the development of new aristocracies in both Renaissance Florence Italy and in the young State of Yisrael are similar. This makes the two, along with a very few other examples worldwide, rather unique, and instructive.

In Florence, the pattern that evolved over time involved a small number of business families. These often competed against one another usually resulting in each family finding its business specialty, its niche, and then forming agreements among them. These were in the form of a constitution, limiting competition and conflict among them while controlling any possible rivalry from outsiders by using a combination of laws and guilds that limited who could enter what position, profession, or job. In short, these families chose to protect their wealth and their status by instituting ways to control one another and those not part of their “club.”

So here we have the pattern.  A new aristocracy built on business, not land and violence, that periodically allies itself to the landed aristocracy for approval and for help as needed in their own struggles. This new elite makes deals, contracts, constitutions to limit conflict, as well as laws designed to suit their purpose, not those of the common people they employed. They marry within their group, their club, handle conflicts by manipulating allies and even the Church, in the case of Florence, at the risk of destroying all they have built at times.

To hold and maintain its status and control, the Yisraeli elite has done pretty much what the business elite in Florence did in earlier centuries. It has acted to do whatever it could to preserve and protect its new status, which was secular, Eurocentric, even a bit hostile to religion and tradition, while holding onto many of the political and social attitudes of the European left.

As in the Florentine Republic, the Yisraeli privileged elite has established laws to protect its immunity and wealth from the competition of those “not in the club.” It has done all it can to prevent erosion of its authority and control, fighting against democratic judicial reform, and opposing political and sometimes, military, change that might open the economy to greater prosperity and participation by other segments of the community.   Even banks run by those that dissented, outsiders, were driven out of business. Business licenses were difficult to get and were available only for those that posed no real threat of competition.  Construction companies were limited in bringing in new technologies, lest they compete with established Histadrut (Labour Union) owned operations. Outsiders that wanted to invest in the nation and bring new ideas that might mean competition, were discouraged by the authorities in connection to the Histadrut, which also represented the interests of this self-appointed ruling class. 

In both, they used their power in institutions such as education while resorting to other means, when necessary, even at the expense of the city in Renaissance Florence or the state, in modern Yisrael. Unfortunately, in Yisrael, this process has been going on for some time already but has reached a point where those on top fear losing so much that they are willing to paralyze the country to prevent change.   

To be fair, we should also point out the contrasts between the two. 

Firstly, unlike the Florentine and other republics, such as the U.S.A., Yisrael does not have a constitution.

Additionally, in Florence, the new business aristocracy shared a culture and religion with the people of the city and accepted the authority of the religious leaders. It transpired most of the time, though with a bit of acceptable skepticism.

In contrast, the new aristocracy in Yisrael, has tried to shed the Jewish past and be like their European counterparts, expressing disdain and even hostility towards Jewish culture and tradition. That has become a source of conflict and division. The reaction from other population segments made it much more difficult to do what the elite class in Florence did. The Yisraeli pattern has had an additional source of social conflict compared to what developed in Italy.

Another difference is the outside threat, the wars and terrorism has caused the nation of Yisrael to pull together and not splinter along religious and ideological lines.

What is certain, though, is that as the Renaissance Florence experience shows, Yisrael could not ignore the demands of the underclass forever.

In Yisrael, this pattern is still developing. To ensure that the Jewish state becomes a true democratic republic with real equal justice and respect for all, a lot of irritations and problems must be resolved, and new policies implemented.