Nationalistic-Religious Ideology and Civic Education: the Israeli Case

Israel has unique features, which can be added to the factors that are reinforcing nationalist ideologies in the west. Nationalist and fundamentalist tendencies are intensified against a background of a strong presence of terror, a large national-native minority and nationalist-religious parties with anomalous political power; add to these the absence of: a constitution, consensus over the character of the State as Jewish and democratic, agreed borders and an Israeli nationality; and consider also the growing weakening of supervisory mechanisms and the loss of belief in a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The conflict between the two opposing ideologies in Israel, nationalist-religious and liberal, has been transferred – in the absence of any decision over national hegemony – to a decision over educational hegemony, with politicization of civic education; the only lesson that is studied from a uniform, mandatory syllabus for most sectors, is facing the complexity of the discourse over shared citizenship and has effect on shaping young people's attitudes. In the construction phase of the nation (1948-1990), the emphasis in civic education was on national education, authoritarian patriotism and imparting knowledge to be memorized. The murder of the Prime Minister of Israel by a nationalist (1995), was the trigger for the adoption of the global liberal discourse in education. The Kremnitzer Report (1996) shaped a liberal ideology and global citizenship: the emphasis was on pluralistic approach, individual and minorities rights, critical thinking, discussions of dilemmas and civic involvement. The syllabus (2011) and study books were shaped accordingly. The counter-response to liberalism comes from two national groups that have been empowered by the liberal discourse: the Arab minority claims that the liberal model is purely rhetorical in an ethnocratic reality, demands recognition of a Palestinian nationality and in absence of power, engages in constructing subversive alternatives: a binational state, a state of all it's citizens). The nationalistic-religious public claims that the liberal model is not suitable for Israel: it damages the Jewish national ethos, patriotism, belonging and solidarity. Moreover, they refuse to grant equality to threatening elements: the Arab minority, non-Orthodox streams of Judaism, and the LGBTQ community. Consequently, they demand a unique democratic model adjusted to the needs of the Jewish state. In 2015 the nationalist-religious party had control of the Ministry of Education. Since the liberal ideology remained obligatory in the syllabus (2011) and The Nationality Law, that it promoted, was approved only three years later, practices such as exclusion, indoctrination and compulsion were used to assimilate a new 'nationalistic-religious democracy' model (camouflaged as 'national-cultural democracy') into civic education. 'Ethnic-national state' replaced ‘Jewish and democratic state’, democracy was restricted to 'majority decision' while excluding the Palestinian minority from designing the common good. Justifications were introduced for Israeli sovereignty over the occupied territories and for preserving the religion in the public sphere. Teaching was limited to receiving information and memorizing dictated content. The attempt to impose the nationalistic-religious model has aroused intense opposition in civil society, both Jewish and Arab, and the reactions are endangering national security in Israel.