i 1

AGRARIANISM IN ISRAEL'S PARTY SYSTEM'

AMITAX ETZIONI Unioersity of California, Berkeley

ylrr agricultural sector of Israel's Jewish population is not very Ia r~ r_c~ ;2 xver- ( 3 c.less the role of agriculture in the political Ue of the cocin- is ~ , ? *& .;nost importance. Seven of t l e sixteen members of the present cabkc: :Jul,

'.,'!; i are members of kibbutzim (colleceve agicult-xai settlements j . ?-xnty- , gf the seventy-five Jewish members who sunport zhe government

.. the 120-member Knesset {Israel Pariiament j are members 02 Icibb ; ~oshoei-ovdirn ( co-operative agricultura: settlements ) . David Ben-Gurion,

, \r3el 's outstanding leader, who is the P r h e hlinister and hIinistex of . j , icnce, retains his affiliation with a kibbutz and dcclves himse2 to be an . . -ric~Jtural labourer. Recentiv, for examde, he relinquished all F i official :. sinons and left for G: year and a h a 2 :J do agicultual wcrk in a kibbutz

Israel's pioneering frontier area, the Negev. The Minister of Finance, the :!:rector General of the Minis ty of Defence, and the S e c r e t q General of tbe .. i ,stadrut ( Federation of Labour )-Cree cf Israei's key positions-consider :..cmselves members of kibbutum and take pride in t-l-ieii past as agricultural ..!)ouieis. The Chief of Staff of the Israel Defence Forces, a most popular figure- . .:it the vnuth of the c o u n y , \vas born arid raised ~II a co-operathe a@- *-alnira~ settlement, and his father, himseE a i m e r , is a xember of fie ~;nesset

..\ t k d of ail the kibbutzim and most of &e m o s h e i - o v h are connected ..'.;I: Mapai (the Israel Labour pq;:!, which is the p5ncipl partner it. the !..m dominant coditions in Israel: h e government, the executive ot *be '..:vish Agency, and the executive comrriittee cf fie Histadrut. The poIicy of ',i.qx; is influenced to a great extent by the coliective sector,' and many of ' \ Ie3?zrs 2nd active rne&,czs came iicii, i l i a sector in the not: very distant p;lst

'This is a revised edition of a paper abnxttd tc !he round-table of the I n t e r n a t i d >:~cal Science Association, Geneva, 5e;lt., 1056. It w;is untten when I was a graduate .!I[ and research assistant at tbe Hebrew Uci..rsitl;, Jerusaicm, and I am indebted nfcssor Benjamin &in for !is commr'2!?j, u~hich heiped me ,considerably. For the 721 backpound of democrarj in Isrzel ZS ai an2I;sis of the political parties of tbe '.:?. seeLB. Akzin, "'e Rcle of Pk&Pj in Is:arh Democracy," Jounvll of Poblcr,

- 1 , . 193.5. 'Ihs paper deal; with Jewish azriculture only. -4rib agriculture in Israd and cal life are so fziamentally dii3e:en: from Jewish ipcu l tu re that they wprrpDt

' .v ;It Dw. 31, 1951, the Jewish population in Israel &talled 1,526,009, distributed u .ws: urban, 1916i,0Si); nual, 360,837; in special !iomes for immigrants, 4,342. The

.... population 06 360.637 was distributed as folloyd: mshccot (agxicu!tural settlements ' un private Jwnership ), 61,610; m u s h c e i - d i m "( co-operatiye agricultural settlements), . -'. libbu?i.,im (collective sgricultural settlepients), 76,115; other kinds, 133,082, io- ..!IC spwial kinds of mosiaacim and n;i;cr!jarot (new inmigrants' settlements) d :, rrantc5 camps. (Israel Staiistical YeurbocZ. no. 6, 1555-8.)

kibbutzim and moshvei-ovdim tol-ther constitute what is generdy referred b 'collective sector" of Israel's aericulzure, as distinct from the "private sector" p u p d

. . .

. .I,

a '-;l.~ate discussion.

-.

3

r aesiEns mrrnhrtr t~

gers oi the hrm-dw..' :ds. 1Irrnhrn dr!irin. k-lenve. etc. also ap;.. r of the hranch v :T :

n betwren the nJmlr! culnr work-priiip. I I ion of cnntrol in !?!

364 \I70dd it be tme, then, to say that an agrarian group has seized the:

of government in Israel and is leading her in the direction of a pli~ will suit its owm interests? Here we have to differentiate behvecz two ?tr During the pre-state (pre-1946) period there was no such seizure, bu! was a marked accord behveen the general interests of the Yishuv (th; community in Palestine) as a whole and the interests of what has g a d emerged as the principal agrarian group-tbe group of collective settler In the years since the establishment of the state of Israel this harmon, been considerably reduced. Agrarianism appears increasingly as a pr;. group, and at the same time there is a noted decline in its over-all i& and importance. But whereas this decline is rather rapid in the soda’ economic life of the country, it is not yet serious within the political SF At the present moment, therefore, a temporary gap exists between &e economic sign$cance of Israel’s agricultural sectors and their political p r .

The Canadian J o u m l of Economics and Political Science

I. THE PRE-STATE (YISIIW) P E X ~

The social and political life of the pre-state period (1878-1948) war tingushed bv the influence of one dominant set of values: the Zionist !de which e d l e d agricultural, physical, and productive work Zo3iSt t.- described the Jews in the diaspora as a minority of the middle c~asses, eqc in marginal or tertiary occupations, such as bade, free professions, and colIar work. The solution of the Jewish problem was envisaged as the es2’: ment of a complete Jewish society in Palestine, a society which wou!: self-sufficient in all its economic and social funciions. The establishp. such a society would necessitate the transfer of Jews from the terti? y to the secondary and primary sector, and, in particular, to ap’cll1:rne *

central slogan was “reverse the occupational pyramid,” which -KL ais0 L

“productivization.” An immense prestige was attached to aL@culture: other work and particularly any urban occupation, was regarded as infr

Ap’culture was preached also by the Socialists, who since 1904 have p:. an ever increasing role and, since 1916, a central role in the Yishuv and : leadership. They have created two new social forms, the kibbutz mrl moshav-ovdim. which combine Zionist pioneering va!ues with Socialist 1’:- Because of the agricultural character of these social institutions (no r kibbutz or moshav-ovdim has yet been established), the prestige of this : “just,” way of life came to be attached also to agriculture.

Because the period \vas ”idealistic” in character, political life was in.: nated with these pioneering and Socialist values, and the pol i t id hierg was largely built on its affinit), to them. As a result, during the last &* years before the state, collective agriculture constituted the strongest and: crystallized group in the Yishuv and it emerged victorious in the strug‘

. 3For a full comparative study of the pre-state (Yishuv) and Israeli society. SW ’ Eisenstadt, The Absorption of Immigrants (London, 1954); and Akzin, “%e E;’ Parties in Israeli Democracy,” 515-17. See ako N. Benhvich, :mael (New York I@+

. . 5 .

7 -

‘nosition and Structur;

.ring the pre-state da 2 i m , moshvei-ovdjn - s fully only to kih 3, whereas the mod

a1 life was in7 I political hierx ring the last tL- ' strongest and t- s in the strug+

Agrarianism in Zssaers Party Sy- 563

, .,. : ,: .. .._., _._. ".r:ders-heads of political and other institutions and party ' . -.* . . . . . . . -2cruited from the pioneering sector, that is, mainly hnn

.. I ' ~ . 1 -ic:i!--,:... ?-%e moral superiority of this group was recognized by

' '011 io 'i:ese ideological factors, there were other factors that helped .,..:!c the collective agricultural group to its pre-eminent position in . . -:?ciety, x ~ d hence also to the top of the political hierarchy. In the, .:;.;;e. liie agizul tural settlements served as the principal means of l-.:n; jewih land-holdings ..in Palestine and thus of broadening the

. . ,?A: h i s oi the Yishuv. The renewed Jewish settlement of Palestine. ~: 11 187W2 with the establishment of a few scattered holdings, and it zr2Jually expanded by the establishment of additional agricultural and

. :.id sedements throughout the country. When the mandate over Palestins ;?nierred on Great Britain, the proposed international boundary between ::ne aad Sjiia was redrawn so as to include three Jewish agricultural :: 5 d i c h had been established in the far north of the country. The present . boundaries of the state of Israel, except for the Negev and tend e, are almost identical with the limits of the Jewish agricultural settle-

. h e second place, the agricultural settlements served as the major base . m s depots for the Jewish underground forces that were raised by &e ,v ::..'hen its development and growth caused tensions between the Jews :,r~Ss and between the Yishuv and the British mandatory government.

I hgmah constituted the principal component of the underground forces. -.P factors, both of them connected with what might be called the .TI policy" of the Yishuv, increased the prestige of the collective a @ d -

- ' wtdements. The establishment of each new agricultural settlement .- cn!argement or consokdation of an existing kibbutz or moshavovdim :c.:xded as a national achievement. A considerable part of the national

invested during this period in Palestine by Jews, was invested io !:tiire, and the pick of the Jewish youth who immigrated into Palesline :!it diaspora, as well as of the second-generation settlers in the ~ ~ l l t r l f ,

.J to these settlements.

.iiture were Iargelv the same. This identity of interests, as we have seen, :iunded on the congruence of the predominant values and the political

of the Yishuv with the values and economic needs of the collective . . v n t s . Thus agiculture was elevated to its pre-eminent position in the :'s political life without arousing the antagonism of other social groups, u. trade unions and the urban middle class,

,TI-.' . A _ . t i p -:.<.- - .... iuv as well as by a large segment of Jews abroad.

-. :> in the pre-state period.

. +> uie final analysis, the interests of the Yishuv and those of collective

.~ -. . -. . .

- _ 'J'~Yifion and Structure of the Agricultural C&up

!Ing the pre-state days, agriculture was composed of three major p u p : :m, moshvei-ovdim. and moshavot. \Vhate\.er has been said thus far

nents

I

)n in the Kibbrrtz the mixed farminc I V ~ ,

iches such RS cat:!-, ;.$I

r t ive consumption :s ::. . mmunal kitchen prepnr:- .he communal dinin: hn:!. t r children during the ti::\. ,

ight. oordinator assigns mrmhrr- :he managers of thc h r . d . power needs. Xlemhcrs dc4:. ranch, sick-leave, Ctc. 3 1 ~ 0 .::: n rnsnnger of the branch w-

nunication between the ; i t l i v

the particular work-group. :ed position of control in I

mork coordinator, 2nd all 011

itive role4 nre appninrrri bv 1

eeklv ger?eral n w m h l v of i

ierallv spenkinq, thrrc i b l i? Jork situatinn and other \c*'

, the channels of cnmmnnic:it' he wo;k-:rnur, do not ariw. ie formal and informal cant

qicnificnnt event in thr Cpha ,]e communitv soon aftrr i r 1

-

1 fully only to kibbutzim, and, \jith minor resenations, to moshvei- ' v Nilereas the moshavot illusbate the obverse asuect of our thesis.

-

~ ,, A-ji,i,rrtz, Ncw York I h n n * l r

d1 life was in?? political hiera..

ring the last it- strongest and t in the strug@

!

565 . ,',!ite, 3 1 ~ 1 ; ; leaders-heads of political and other institutions and party

~ ~ , ~ ~ , ~ i ~ ~ ~ - l . . . . ~ ~ , ~ :ccr:i:d from the pioneering sector, that is, mainly h n :,,'e asriL:,.Xie. The moral superiority of this group was recognized by .:iw of th-. 'i'isbuv as well as by a large segment of Jews abroad

, J&OF 1 iiese ideological factors, there were other factors that belped ,.-t,..,te tk Alective ;?ericultur:-.! z ~ o u p to its pre-eminent position in . :\. society, a d hence &o to the top of the political hierarchy. In the, . r.:ice, &e igricultural settlements served as the principal means of

:,ins Jewkh land-holdings .in Fdestine and thus of broadening the elrid basis of the Yishuv. The renewed Jewish settlement of Palestine

. - ..i in 167682 with the establishment of a few scattered holdings, and it r r A ~ t l l v expanded by the establishment of additional agricultural and

. .... .d settlements throughout the country. When the mandate over Palestine ;;mierred GZ Great Britain, the proposed international boundary between >:le and S-y-ia was redrawn so as to include three Jewish agricultural

.e.'< d l i c h had been established in the far north of the country. The present * ~3 boundaries of the state of Israel, except for the Negev and central

. .:.?. sre 21mOSt identical with the limits of the Jewish agricultural settle .

- :, in the pre-state period. .. die second place, the agricultural settlements served as the major baser

i i m s depots €or the Jewish underground forces that were raised by &e ,v when its development and growth caused tensions between the Jews . h21s and between the Yishuv and the British mandatory government ! Iscanah constituted the principal component of the underground forces. .w: factors, both of them connected with what might be called the

.. .:n policy" of the Yishuv, increased the prestige of the collective agricul- 5tttlemeDts. The establishment of each new agricultural settlement,

-.$' enlargement or consolidation of an exisbg kibbutz or moshav-ovdim - qnrded as a national achievement. A considerable part of the national .A, invested during t h i s period in Palestine by Jews, was invested in .s;itu:e, and the pick of the Jewish youth who immigrated into Palestine

the diaspcra, as well as oi the second-generation settlers in the country, : d :o these settlements. -. !!le final analysis, the interests of the Yishuv and those of collective

dture were largely the same. This identi* of interests, as we have S-

I3unded on the congruence of the predominant values and the political : I of the Yishuv with the values and economic needs of the collective ' ments. Thus agriculture was elevated to its pre-eminent position in the .;.'s political life without arousing the antagonism of other social groups.

. G as trade unions and the urban middle class, -. . -.. . . -. . . . ~

":i'osi!ion and Structure of the Agricultural G&

' ' iring the pre-state days, agriculture was composed of three major groups: 'itzirn, moshvei-ovdim, and moshavot. IVhatever has been said thus far

' .c.s fully only to kibbutzim, and, with minor resenations, to moshvei- .J, whereas the moshavot illustrate the obverse aspect of our thesis.

..*. L1 .-.o-:P..:- ,-. .-.. 2.. I s d s Party S y q m

.

- .

6, No. 3 Fall, 195

nents

m in the Kibbntz the mixed farming tyju, ;>

iches such as cattle, ~ ~ ( J l l ~ :

-ctive consumption is aI-1 t

nmunal kitchen preparcc 3 he communal dining h3!1. 'I er children during the dav a ight. oordinator assigns memhcn .he managers of the branch power needs. I f e m h e n h i r : ranch, sick-leave, etc. a l w 37; 1 manacer of the branch WP nunication hetween the atlni the particular work-group. :ed position of control in 4

work coordinator, ani! n!1 o!'

itive roles arc appointccl hv .: eeklr general nqcrmhlv of I

ierallv speakinc, therr k li! Jork situatinn nnd other -,

, the channelc of cnmmirnicn: he work-goup c l o rint ar:+*. . ie formal 2nd informal urn: ziqnificnnt event in thr *phi

)]e communitr soon after i t 1

7 the amount of social cnnrs rork-groups in one A'ilhrrtr :

'erences result from g a p in ! :onnecting work 4tiiatictnS w n the Ki66rttz.

ig in Iarael, bee: S. N. Ei*rn*tr I , London, Routledge rnd KW

.Mr. ktzionl IS a grauuaLc SLUU~... -.- .------- - ' Il;r.cr*ity of California, Berkeley. This paper was written when ' \ \ a \ a Rraduate student and research-assistant at the Hebrew ' t l ~ r . v r \ i t y , Jerusalem. :icknorvledgement is given to Dr. Y. Garber- i .:~:IIII~ for very helpful criticism of earlier draftr of this paper. I h e George C. Homans, The H u m a n Group. New York, Har- '.i.lrI Ilracc and Company, 1950, esp. p. 417.

1 llr a discuunion of the concept of control in relation to the com- " ' l ' t l l f ~ ~ K. Ilavis, Hurnan Socirty, New York, T h e hlacmillan ' 4 " T 1 P ~ ~ l ! ' , 1950, pp. 61-64.

4 ' 'cr y. Garher-Talmon, "Social Differentiation in Communal "f1,,,,,t,t3." Srripfo Hierorolyrni fana, Vnl. 111, T h e Hebrew Uni-

" f ' ~ l ~ 8 Jrru~alrm, 1956.

. a Kilthiits, h'ew York, RrronSIr

In the communal shot\ers, where the gathering of rnrfnllcr. Jl

iionisr r r c q

6. work has a social character, discussions conccrnin): nark. a r c In the late afternoon, after work and shower, rnrmhcr. tnccl on big lawn, generally situated in the center of thc K i b l t u k n h again one of the main topics of conversation i.r n o & . See R. Schwartz, "Social Factors in the Development of Legal C'onIrul Case Study of TIYO Israeli Settlements," Yn!r Lncc Juurnal. I'd. No. 4 (Feb. 1954), pp. 471-490. 7. Compare to discussion of the client: .4rnitai Etzioni, "The ' ganizational Structure of Closed Educational ln*ritution* in 1 * f a . Horoard Educot ionaf Rewiew, Spring 1957, pp. 107-125-

i

P t

I 'i

9 - t i

L...... II ., -

Agrarianism in I m r s Pady System 3e : and to the struggle of Jewish workers for greater opportunities for emp1,'loymc: .

and more Jewish labour began to be employed in the noshavci a: this particuhr problem lost much of its acuteness. In this case, ag- Je,.?L I ,cricultural labourers from the collective sector represented the breac! 3atic.n: 1 jiterest as we11 as their own interests. NevertheIess, almost up to the estabi;;-l

PJrt ic~ldy during the harvesting seasons when agricultural labour bec;u;?.: &e and especially since they were considerably cheaper than Jeffi: ! :,bourers. Even moshavot that were originally established for idealistic motive.: . ::nderwent during the years a transformation of their Weltanrchauung, ca.! mnomic considerations became predominant in their policies.

For all these reasons the prestige of the moshavot was low as seen by *& .:dlective sector, and this attitude had its.repercussions on a major put c: r;ie Yishuv. The moshavot were conceived as being *reactionary"-obstructk; the establishment of a new society-and inasmuch as they did not -pi: - Irwish labour they weie presented as obstructing the Zionist cause. The2 tconomk motivation was considered irreconcilable with the pioneering cm- derations which were mainly evaluative and sometimes political in character.

The specid position of the moshavot was clearly reflected in the results d !ne stmggle for membership in the general &e. Only a few personalities rignating in moshavot achieved general recognition by the Yishuv. 'hir

':Lsre in the organized division of Jewish h'ational Fund land and Zionist Fun& UJS minor. They did not attract the young people; on the contrary, they lost :?.any of their second and third generation. Some of the sons of moshavot :.imers left for the city or took up urban occupations; some of them joined i.')butzim and moshvei-ovdim; only a minority continued the way of life af ::?IT fathers as farmers in the moshavot Many moshavot gradudy were ::.mformed h t o semi-urban settlements and township.

Tne special case of the moshavot demonstrates clearly that ColIective a@- . h e established its Clite position in the Yishuv, and also M e r e d its own

-.!crests, only because of its readiness for national service and its immediate -':dchment to the pioneering-collective, that is, the dominant, ideology. The - .h ivot were not fully integrated with these aspirations, their prestige wd '*. their influence on Jewish national politics was restricted, and their sham

' the elite and in the publicly allocated funds was minor. one of the special characteristics of Jewish agriculture in Palestine k s the "ast total absence of a permanent agricultural proletariat The kibbutzim

. i moshvei-ovdim operate on the principle of self-work, that is, all work is by the farmer and members of his family. Even though violations of

;: Principle are hown to have ockurred, it is still true that there was no for a permanent agricultural warge-worker either in the kibbutzim or

' . I ' ;!lienal labour in the form of volunteer labour camps made up of high-&$ and members of youth movements which are ideologically close'.-

-,hbbubim. Toward the close of the pre-state period certain units of tbc

- *'?' in agricultural work and in military training. Groups of young people

r I . .. . >. -, 731 .. --. -- -

gent of the state, Arab workers were employed occasionally in the moshavz*, :ne rr t s

NI in the Kibbn, the mixed farming

;Iches such as cattl. Yctivc consumption rnmunal kitchen prr :he communal dining er children during t? tiqht.

- i v s rr oordinator 3. - * _

rhe managers o i thc power nerds. l l c n h c ranch, Gck-leavr, ttc. : manager oi the hr:, nunication betwren t the particuinr work- :ed position of cont

work coordinator. an itive roles ?rc appoin' rekir cenerrll n w m l ierally spenkiny. thr. ;ork cituntinn nnd 0' the chnnncls of cnmr

he work-cronp do no! ie formal and inform

significnnt w e n t in ,]e community soon a

n the amount of foci rork-groups in onc +rences result f r0m.c :onnectinf: work sitli:l

n the Kibbutz .

. .

. !:!e moshvei-ovdim. During the harvesting seasons the kibbutzim receive

Ig in Israel, see: S. N.

" * ~ ; / J h l l t z , h'ew \'or'. 1

. ( "%round forces were stationed in kibbutzim, where they engaged alter- J , London, Rout lchv a

*hlr . btzionl IS a grauuatc ~ t u u C n . % -..- .-------- - ' tilvrrwity of California, Berkeley. ?'his paper was written when a graduate student and research-assistant at the Hebrew ' rr-ity, Jerusalem. .4cknowledgement is given to Dr. Y. Garber-

i J 1 1 1 1 ~ 1 1 for very helpful criticism of earlier drafts of this Paper. I. k c <;rorge C. Homans, The H u m a n Group, N e w 7iork, Har-

I "

' l.qbr a diwuvaion of the concept of control in relation 10 the com- $..$,,,i,,, ,cc K. s o c ~ p I y , New York, The Macmi l lan Case Stud-; of T \ Y O Israeli ~ettlement31" ','lqc

' " " ' l ' ~ f l V , 1950, pp. 61-64.

' * *~l~,l;.l,~,,** Scripta [ ~ ; P r o r o ~ y , n ; t n n a , pro]. 111, The IIebrerr Uni- ."""s Jrtu-sIem, 1956.

tlonlsr rrers'

6. In the communal shower,, where the W h C r i n F n' mr' Mark h a s a cocial character, discussions conccrnlnC """

the late afternoon, after work and sllower. lrlcm"rr' big lawn, grnerally situated in the center , O f "w ' I b b

one of the main topics of COnVCr*atlon '' '84'!',

Srhwartz, **Social Factors In the I ~ ~ ~ e l o P ~ l c n t l'r*.l'

No. 4 (Feb. 1954), pp. 471-490.

ganizational StrllCtUrc of Closed 'llrricl"i"n'

fforvard E,iuratjonnl Reait-w, Spring 1957* l'p' 1')7-12''

){race and Company, 1950, esp. p. 417.

' ',re 1'. carl,er-~almon, 4 ~ i f i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ i ~ ~ in cornmllnal 7. Compsre ro d i w s h n of the client' 't"nl'iq

It should Se noted that both kibbutzim and moshvei-ovdim are basedta the struggle of J ouned by the Jewish National Fund ( a land-holding public corporatiQ and more J&S

&at t h y are Snanced by voluntary contributions, controlled by theparticular probla mo~:ement. supported now by the state of Israel, and devised to furthelultural labourers ! !--icu:turai settlement in such a manner as to avoid misuse and spwst as well as th&

in ,md-holdinp. In the moshavot, on the other hand, ownership of of the state, h a 1

.'eivish Sational Fund or other public or private landlords. R and especially Kibbutzim' are collective agricultural settlements, organized on the prers. Even mosba

gi commm ownership of the means of production, combined with a w m e n t during the in which the community rather than the family is the predominantbmic consideratio respect of consumption and education. They are based on considerabb all these reason solidarity and on intensive identScation with Socialist and Zionist valetive sector, and kibbutzim constituted important centres of the underground forces dishuv. The mosh; secret caches of arms. They also bore the major burden of the postablishment of I

motivated policy of settlement. A great part of the Yishuv's gene& labour they u originated in the kibbutzim. which preserved an intense connection widmic motivation 7

Mo~hvei-ovdim~ are cosperative agricultural settlements, orga@edetions which werc basis of individual holdings of land and individual ownership Of be special position livestock, and most implements, and considerable co-operation in culttruggle for mem' marketing. and purchasing. The moshvei-ovdim were considered by tating in moshav oi the noup of collective agriculture. and as often as not also by thepin the organiied as second-class members. because of the relative %backwardness" minor. They did I

pioneerine acthit). and because of the existence of indi\<dualistic eq of their second elements in their co-operative structure. Their share in the Clite was r&s left for the ci minor. Their share in land, in capital allocated by various Zionist agendtzim and moshvc in manpower was also of secondary importance. Until the formationifathers as farmi state onlv 63 moshvei-ovdum were established as against 137 kibbutzitraormed into semi- During the last thirty years before the establishment of the s& special case of

moshavot pla\Fed an entirely different role. In their organizational le established i 3 they c o n f o n closely to agricultural villaqes in other countries. They mts, only because up of small fanns and medium-sized holdings (mostly orange Foment to the pro vineyards). These farmers are not Socialists; on the contrary they d v o t were not fu attached to the principles of private enterprise. -4ny cosperative ==&heir influence FC that might exist are based on purely commercial and economic factorst &lite and in the over. the moshavot did not participate fully in the Zionist endeavour t@ of the specid c a "complete society." The older moshavot employed -4rab labouren, b e total absence in effect a thin colonizing stratum employing "native" labour. Thus, thqioshveisvdim 01 contrarv to the avowed Zionist aim, which was to further a mass relby the farmer 2

Jews td Palestine to take up physical labour and other primary ocmpinciple arc kro so as to correct the imbalances in the occupational structure of Jewish $for a permanen However, due to the increase of tensions. between the Arabs and tb moshvei-ovdim

~ - 4 ~ ~ ~ a recent study of kjbbutzim and their structure, set: J. Garber-Talmor.hd labour in th ' .Dderentjation in Collective Settlements" in Scn'pta Hierosolymiiom, 111 ( Jerusalefl'ck and member sand H. Infield, Cooperatioe LiLY'ng in Pdesiine (New YOrk 1w).

, c ~ c . n t ~ , " Brlfish j o ~ r ~ l of Sociology, 1951; and Ami Assaf. Moshoei-Odim Vround forces w ! Li agriculhIrd

1 i i ! I 3'

I js makiv vested in individual farmers, but in some cases it is vate&&rly during & i

son moshve,-ovd jm see: J. Garber-Talmon, "Social Differentiation in &mmWd3''tzim

(Tel-Aviv, 1954) (Hebrew).

c-.

- L I-.L-.-.d-.A.-------b~ ---- * u u u c ------ --

368

who intend to form a kibbutz often Serve a bvo-year apprenticeship in aa r,ofiv is h b b u t r and thus consbtute an important labour factor. All these vUr, sources of manpower are of a temporary nature, and do not create a tp ra~el to &e ~

a@cultural wage-earner. iishment oft); \losh\-ei-ovdim utilize these sources to a somewhat more m t e d ex-. ,+.occupation

Since the land is owned by the Jewish National Fund, an). possibillt fie accumulating several farm uhts in one hand is eliminated, and as a resu]. farm unit rekains small and is gauged to the possibilities of one farma . private a his famdv. In times of crisis, such as prolonged ihess , the principle of m, dualistic help among the members of the moshav-ovdim is acted upon. integrated in In the mosha\-ot, which are based on the principle of private e n t q parties. ne ~

there is no limitation on the size of individual holdings, and there *e to the , meciium-sized farm units. No ideological barrier to the use of hired 12' , e any ~

exists. Durbc the picking SeaSon there is need for a considerable numbc Seen fi, seasonal woriers. Severtheless, even in the moshavot no Je\\<sh agrid- , re , proletanat came into existence, if we include in the meaning of that ). . and, alaoug a@cultural labourers who wander from one place Of employment to aOc :miMed superic according to the seasons of the year, and hands who five permanently r , he and farm. The labour problem was solved in the moshavot in the following u. e and the ' e ~ First. a subs+abal number of small farms even in moshavot can be xv. T,) are not by the owner a!one. Secondly, until the 1930's the moshavot used to e r a'considerable number of Arab labourers (there w a s an a @ m l m d prolet 4 Ydeibe of fw in the .bab cectori. Thirdly. many members of the early kibbutzim SF 1 such imp long F n o d s of ap?renticeship in moshavot, thus functioning in the up; t hue. &,d ,

of tem?orq. a.ericultural labourers, until they established their own s r + - of these mexts. In add&&. during the first few years of their settlement on the '.t over by the and before the. x7ere consolidated, many young k i b b u m and moshvei+r:l ther in used to s e d some of their members to do "outside work" as a e d - 1 ?nom.c, labocrers in nelghbouring moshavot. Finally. a few scattered a e c d . I . ~ ~ ~ ~ , most of labourers 15 ere t O be found in the moshavot. However, it would be futi i Israel inquire into t i e pohtical influence of the agricultural proletariat in prel 4 ,bsh that task da\.s. because as a group it was non-existmt t;bhhed e x t a

The C a d i o n Jourrd of Economics and Political s h

. >p

and

jbre and in

1 2 of the new in: i .d czmps ( m a t'd by C O I I ~ X ~ ~ ~ J.of the agrari;

Since the ertblishment of Israel in 1948, tendencies which were dr! discernible in the later prestate period, and especiallv in the thirties 9. urban sector, i occurred in i

forties, have grou-n rapidly. Israeli society is undergoing a change in v..'iL which is e v ~ d e ~ c d by a general weakening in the intensity of its

cas, but their a

mlecti\.e-pioneefiing values have been declining.

to values in general and by an increasing severance of political action

11. TEE STATE OF Lsran, Chunges in Values and So&2 Stnrdws

lm, and moshl

ese changes h ideological amchment. The clear domination and the great

vaIues are now becoming prominent. transformed into groups which are mainly particular interests. The collective agricultural group is DO longer an

n i t r n i t i

-

i rlrrltin

I \re C; ' * i r t Hrrt

: I I l l 1 C ~ U I I I I \ * .(

.iubpanv*

c 9 .+c* y '*ttlrni-nt * v ) * I ~ c , JI

ii :;mtian*ism in Israets Party System 569 . :re md ~!rn:_;ic. q:i . i ' f ls;c: importance is acknowled~ed by all and whose w

?ship in an dd.t . ?,.ric?jv is ac!.lnitt~! by mro:t; mmeover it is becoming a powerful interest -11 these w b 4 ,. ' *

create a VPe r. ?:!&el to .h c h q e i~ values a structural change is taking place.' Ths shment nf :5c state has resulted in the great expansion and developm-

' limited *.- n* pOSSibilib p. ,. n e Sap wid.ens between the collectivist sector on the one hand and the d as a r e d 5. . .;;zcntzia and ihe professions on the other. The importance cf bade uniont one farmer 2 . . L & . Piivate Zj?l:culture in the moshavot is legitimized by the inweasingly

ncjple of muh, . s . ; d ~ d i ~ t i ~ va?uss, and for the first time after a long Serva l it has become :,, Ifitegrated in t!!e social structure. hiany moshavot are linked with right-

<\-ate enterpm - ' . - :? parties. 'rne pre-state Yishuv was a society in which an evident priorfty ~

{ there are s r . .'qiven to the collective agricultural group, which in its turn strove to of hired 1abC- ,.,:e any group, such as the moshavot, which did not accept its values and

Table number L .jC:ship. Seen from this point of view, the position in present-day Israel \ish a!$dtiz-. zgre 'noma]." There is an abundance of groups struggling for political ag of *at te- ,:T and, akhough certain groups have a relative advantage, not much of ment to anot;.:. . .jmitted superiority of collective agriculture is left ~ ~ m ~ ~ ~ Y ::,e rise a d growth of new groups (such 1s the bureaucracies of the civil foflowing wa!' : can be work ) are cot the sole reason for the decline in the prestige of coD&m used to em€:. :]mal proleta-, i-rfeitu-e of h c t i o n s of the former elite group. Agriculture no longa jbbu- Sen! . I . such :in importart role in "foreign a f h i r s , " and army camps are not 7 in the capa::. ,.'.,Sutzin. And although some functions of local defence are left in tba g1ei.r own setr. li of these settlements, the major responsibility for defence has b

on the 1z . 3 over by the army. Moreover, collective agriculture does not

- as a $ d w * a@cdtL-

ruld be futile' ria! in pre-st

I occupational groups, among them the c i d senrice a d a p r o f a & d

-

.- and &e re@= m y , w&ich have important functions to fulfil in &

h r e aud in its a c h d importance. The reverse of this phen0m-n is _ -

i moshvei-oif,i- . oher sector in the implementation of h e "ingathefig of &e dq*-'---- - -

-conomic, social, and cultural absorption of the hundreds of thousands of -:;rants, most of whom came from under-developed countries-a cenW

>f Israel today. In the pre-state period, special formal organization b -.:$ish that task was not particularly important, but the state of Israel 2hlIished extensive bcreaucratic organizations for the p u r p o ~ e . ~ A majm- - . - .

' n of the new immigrants was absorbed in cities, to\mships, and -ally i e d camps (maabuot). Only a fraction of the post-state immigration WPI :Led by collectivist agriculture (see Table I}. However, although the 5 of the agrarian sector as a whole was numerically greater &an that

' .. urban sector, it has to be borne in mind that a substantial part of this 4.e- occurred in immigrants' camps and settlements. These are located fa 4:ess, but their agricultural activities are far from determined. K i b b u m .:.im, and moshvei-ovdim have absorbed altogether some 100,ooO immi.-.- -. .~

' ds against 400,000 who went into cities and towns. h e changes had their impact on the relative decline of tbe a-

were aka: the thirties a: zhange in va!r ;)i jts attach? 5cal action f r f r dit power of ?' .ahtic econoc

'

6, No. 3 Fall, 19s

ments

3n in the Kibbrrtr the mixed farming type, 11

nches such as cattle, pouItr rctive consumption is a l a I, mmunal kitchen prepare ai

rhe communal dining hall. 1' er children during the day 91

light. oordinator assigns mrmhrn the managers of the branrhr power needs. hiemherz k c i r i :

ranch, sick-leave, etc. alw 37:. ! manager of the branch wn nunication between the drn the particular work-Crcidp. I :ed pozition of contro! in 1:

work coordinator, 2nd nl l 0th itive roles are appointrd !w 3.

eekIv general awmhlv oi :i ierallv speakinp, thcrc is l i t t vork situation and other Cwi

the channels of cornmunicn!I: he work-qmup do nnt arice, ?!

i e formal and inform1 m l t r

siqnificnnt event in the v i l r

)le community soon after it

n the amount of social conw rork-groups in one R i l h u t s ai

ierences result from gap* in 1 )

:onnecting work r;ituntii~n* wit n the Kibbutz.

!

?-

tlUlllD1 z ,=*e, .C.r..

6. In the communal showers, where the gather:nR of mcdrcr* rftt work has a social character, discussions concerning n o f k arc h r l In the late afternoon, after work and shower, rncmlrrr*

O n I'

big lawn, generally situated in the center of the h'fbhuf i+ nhr' again one of the main topics of conversation i * \\ark. K. ' Schwarrz, "Social Factors in the Development o f h K a l c-'unlrul: r-ise Study of T w o Israeli Settlements," Yair r + w JourRa'r \'"!

-Mr. Erziont i a I 1;niversity of California

w a s a graduate stud [:niversity, Jerusalem. A I'almon for very helpful 1. See George C. Horn court Brace and Compar 2. For a discussion of tl mwity, see K. Davis, h company, 19S0, pp. 61-6'

3. See T. Garber-Taln Settlements." Scripta H i v t r y i t y , Jerusalem, 1956.

i dl- - I__ &

Ai? 372 one year of his army service h an agriCultUd S e ~ ~ e ~ e n t . Although this

in agricultural settlements, and their members, after the completion Of t.. compulsory senrice, have even established new agricultural settlements of t. own, some of them in the arid southern Negev.

The Conadinn Journal of Economics and Political S C i m a

nst the k i b b u a r . r vision is not as yet fully operative, a good many units (called n o h l ) do iost. his time the

’,! member of the ,cation. After &e -Cwed, but it is m, :I.ovdim, as &e m

Changes in the Composition of the Agrarian Gtmrp ioming mort? POW=

3,rnicultural proleb of the agrarian group as a whole, but they have also d e c t e d its various now for such a pro], groups in diverse ways. 6 3 the main an intm

The moshavot, most of them organized in the Farmers’ Federation, L ..el the need has int reached full legitimization. With the establishment of the state, their sp I* for export, and fo relations vith the .kab sector ceased. The ascending economic vdues Jeers of vegetables, this social frame\\ ork of individualistic agriculture based on private entep. 9011 point. hfonocul The political isolation of the moshavot was overcome by linking thm: ! which are produa \\-ith the General Zlonist p*.lo They have not thereby achieved peat -#maIorganization a nscance. because this party comprises other crystallized groups, such *<ever7 the fact thai t Israel Slanufacturers’ Association, importers and exporters, and merchants, e-mthtes a probk landlords, \vhose interests do not always coincide with those of farma I *e new immigrant growers. ged for whom only i

-4s explained earlier, the kibbutzim were most severely struck by the gcr XCtion and tooh we] causes \vhich affected the position of Israel’s agriculture. Most of the t, J*SeSS the necessary fi

that were \\ith&amm were taken away from kibbutzim. The fallen prr :;Pendent farmers. 11 \vas mainly theirs. .4nd last but not least: the mass immigration which C_ -31% these new immig from ‘‘under-de\..e]oped” countries did not Gt into their collectivist way of. . at had never and relas’\elv few irn=igants were absorbed by the kibbutzim. The mo? J corne agn’culturd 1; o,rdh, on &e other hand. were successful in increasing their members 4 3dbJjties and hazards settlements considerably through the absorption cd immigrants. At the ti1116 bas emerged. The la1 state was established. there existed 137 kibbutzim and by the end of 1955 + ’%e% move from cc number had risen by 86, whereas to 61 moshveisvdim in 1948 not less f hwesting, and 19s were added in the same period O€ timeu I fa in seasonal work

Just as, for hitorlcal reasons, agriculture as a whole retzins a dispropr i-se the principle of se] atel? strong p a t i o n as compared with its declining social and economic pc 1 J!lged to transgress it., SO &e Idbbut! movement is over-represented as compared with the moi- * ! the idle labour fo ovdim. only four of a contingent of twentysix agrarian supporters oi 4 3ie itself, as a part of governmental coalition in the Knesset are members of moshvei-ov& 1 idbhshment of the sta the sixteen-member cabinet, t\vo have an attachment to kibbutzim a n d * of an agricultural pro more are members of kibbutzim and may be looked upon as their repre‘ i?oljh’cal a u e n c e . Li tives, &ereas there is not one minister who is a member of a moshav+ 1 J1arlj’ like those who a This disproportion served as the background for a serious clash which are politically pass place recently \\<thin the ranks of hlapai (the Israel Labour party) ~4 Orientation. They a the mosha\,-ovdim movement ( a great majority of which belongs to If h t or left-wing parti( insisted on the appointment of one of their members as 3iinister of Agrim *f but are individually

+ than organizing hem: ’OFor a description of the various political parties mentioned bereinaft-, see qhey are absoIutely w i ~

separate organization. “The Role of Parties in Israeli Demwacy.” 1 1 Israel SiutrLircal l’earbook, DO. 6, 18558

The changes in Israeli society and values have not only altered the pot.

‘Mr. Etzioni is a grac i7niver*it.v of ~ a ~ i f o r n i a hc \\as a graduate stud

niverlity, Jerusalem. A[ r a h m ~ for very helpful

1. See George C. Homa Court Brace and Cornpan 2. For a diqcuwion of th Corrpany, munity, see 1950, K. Davis, pp. 61-64 H

klernents .” Srrrptn Hirr ‘ l r ~ i t y , Jerusalem, 1956.

f 3. See E’. Garber-Talm

- _- - _ _ - - _ _ . -__ _ _ _ _ - - -- - - - -

E

.i?s a &S_PIO~OC d ecoocmic pc" with the mczh. supporters of *

-noshvei-ov&. ~ I D U ~ Z ~ I E a n d ! 1s their represr >f a moshav-oic 3 clash which t !?lour party) u: belongs to hfa: ister of Agrimlt- meinafter, see fi

I

r' I

Agrarianism in Z s r n d s P a 3 S y s t p 575

. st fie kibbutzim who were equally adamant in their demand for the ?est, This time the kibbutzim were victorious, but by way of compen- ; , of the moshvei-ovdim received the post of Deputy Minista ,.&,n. After the next Knesset elections this strug51e will undoubtedly

' . . . i,r.ed, but it is most unlikely that it w i l l be resolved similarly. The , . I . ,*;-ovdim, as the main agricultural organization absorbing immigranb,

' ',.+cultural proletariat is beginning to devolop in Israel. There is a . --..v ..- for such a proletariat. During the Yishuv period Jewish agriculture

the main an intensive and mixed agriculture. Since the establishment . . i c ~ the need has increasingly been felt for large-scale agricultural pr+ . ,? for export, and for new agricultural industries, since the old branches ::;cers of vegetables, milk, and eggs, for instance) have reached their

.,ban point. Monocultures such as cotton and peanlits have been intro- ;, which are produced on what are, for Israel, large farms, 8 form of :itural organization almost unknown before 1948.

.: ,*;ever, the fact that there now exists a great unskilled agricultural labour .. ~nstitutes a problem. Although the public authorities endeavour, to

. . h e new immigrants as fanners, a growing group of immigrants has .:d for whom only inadequate funds were available and the necessary :&ion and tools were not forthcoming. The immigrants themselves do

. :.mess the necessary funds, with the result that they cannot be established ... it,pendent farmers. In other cases, evkn though all the prerequisites are

:..ble, these new immigrants, who had never been farmers in their lives and, :!.A matter, had never been engaged in agricultural work, have preferred : w m e agricultural labourers rather than take upon themselves the . iisibilities and hazards of independence. In this way an agricultural prole. -: has emerged. The labourers live in moshavot and in immigrants' camps ;:li3ges, move from cotton- and orange-picking to peanut-collecting and .'J harvesting, and are thus emploved periodically throughout most af . w r in seasonal work. The k i b b u h and rnoshveisvdim continue to :!e the principle of self-work, but in an increasing number of cases fheg c-hiiged to transgress it, both because of the pressure of the authorities to :w the idle labour force and because of a certain weakening of &e . d e itself, as a part of a tendency toward a decline in social vdues sins tiLblishment of the state. This process has also contributed to the mer- e of an agricultural proletariat. But this new group is as yet far removed

- I political influence. Like agricultural labourers in other countria, and '.(ularly like those who are also recent immigrants the agricultural work= . :ad are politically passive and apathetic and devoid of any pronounced "cal orientation. They are not unusually subject to the iduence of my ' m i s t or left-wing parties. They are not organized in a separate trade :I , but are individually members in the general trade union. hloreov&

than organizing themselves they are enrolled by others. A t the present diey are absolutely without political influence, whether as floating v o t m

,.:2

..i

-ming more powerful and their prestige is rising.

* ' J separate organizatioL

Mr. Etzioni is a graduate student and research analstant ar rne ['lliver\itp of California, Berkeley. Th i s paper w a s written when

was a graduate student and research-assistant at the Hebrew ['nirersity, Jerusalem. ,lcknowledgrment is given to Dr. Y. Garber- ' [ ' a h o n for very helpful criticism of earlier drafts of this paper. 1. See George C. Hornans, The Human Group, New York, Har- c'lllrt Brace and Company, 1950, esp. p. 417. 2. For a discugsion of the concept of control in relation to the com- fllullity, see K. Davis, H u m a n Socir ty , New York, T h e Macrnillan

See T. Garber-Talmon, "Social Differentiation in Communal 'rrrlcnl~nts." Scripta Hir roro lymi fano , Vol. 111, T h e Hebrew Vn!- '''r'at?q Jrruualem, 1956.

( ' w x w , 1950, pp. 61-64. 4

work mordinatnr. nrrd 211 nti ::iw roles nre appointed by 2 eekir zeneral ascemhly of ierally speakinz. thrre i s I;: t7ork situntinn and othrr ua the channels of cornmiinici:

he worlr-Crou:, do not : i r k >

i e formal and inforrml cnnf sicnificmt event in rhr c p ! ~

rIe community soon nitrr i!

I the amount of tocial t-clnt

rork-groups in one Kibbu!r :

:erences result from pip* in I

,onnecting work situation6 11'

n the Kibbutz.

I g in Israel, see: S. N. Eiarn-r: I, London, Routledge ond Krr

Agratiar The Canadian J o u m l of Economics am' ? O i i Z i d ~~

1 I 374

H a Israel Agrarian P a w ? .dominance is of &e hbbut;

win&ne total floating vote in asicu! -=e (excepting the new immigrat. u''d aImost no moshvei-ovdim is inconriderable. .Any p q w'nich see:. f~ control the government, or, si. - - ~ a in their in tend

i : d u r a l products be the r&ime is basically a codition, seeks t ~ ' increase its share in the governme. 8 0 J e d tc mu- to the urban electorate. !n -' *-ion, as C m p r e d with the un! ]?and larger a g i c u l h d cTe( States or even England, the political d e of Israel is still dominated -1 'bed in their you&

A t the present h e Jewish parties in Israel have both rural and 'h Of these h'0 parties ha!

ideolop, notwithstanding the decline in ideological intensity from the F f't in kbbutzim only. M~~~ state of the revo]

aI;'bbub ~f fp ' , it regards ~

u d a t to app group such as farmers would lose at the polls. For that reason all parties st:- for general national interests and general ideology. AS a result, and now.: 1 P M e s are re] standing the great si@cance of the q p r i a n factor in pobticd life, tl:'oned above. Both have mb is no party in lsrael that calls itself or endeavours to be a farmers' or

P*. On the other hand, all the parties have an agrarian wing. Even the righi -ab done. parties such as the General Zionists and tIerut run a small number of collecti ' sum UP: the further to &e agricultural Settlements. These settlements go back to the period when pm*es* the greater &e sj coIlecC;\.e-pioneering values were dominant in the Yishuv, and si- tf: ' c u * ~ , of collective agriculture the parties are anxious not to remain outside the accepted forms of pioneen d e d agrarian parties in &

but to all mtents and purposes the urban wing is preponderact. City vo with &a form the greater part of their electorate, and their agrarian groups are of f *e po'tid life of Israel a

actiiities. Private agriculture (the moshavot) votes for these two p

si pficance. !agran'a P q exists. Each I: The Progressive party, Israel's liberal party, has also an agrarian v{ J d e o l ~ ~ y prestige, and the

composed of two sections: kibbutzim, or anized in the Ha'oved Hazioni; 8 'L'ture to a large extent But nd a special wpe of moshvei-ovdim, with B greater emphasis on individual! ' a l h e , because agnCdture a Ye~erSneless, &e :&an \\mg is dominant in the Progressive party. Am 'e main channel for rehab iLhe five Progrejslve Knesset members fiere is not one agrarian representall i becoming something like an

~ ~ a p z i . *e dominant facto: in all of Israel's coalition governments, is cle P O ~ ~ I significance is decrc based on b c b :ts rural and urban wings. Most of the moshvei-ovdim (82 .7~~ paper laves out

communk cent in Jcne. 135i:) a e comected with &e part)., and so are about a f'? a- of the bblutzim. Rut, oc the other hand, the party has broad su urbai: 12bo;ll. and other urban groups. There are eight members and eieven members of moshvei-ovdim, (the real agrarian among the f o q hlapai members of the Knesset. Of the nine

XIinister of .4giculture, who is actually a member of a kibbutz, may sidered a eenuine agrarian representative. The same situation exists, mutandis, yn the mdin religious p q , Hapoel Hamiuachi; there also an urban wing, and an agruian wing which comprises kibbutzim and ovdim

The two parties whose voters are mainly recruited from the agrari are left-wing parties: Ahduth Ha'avoda and hlapam. Ahduth Ha'av nine members in the Knesset of whom seven are members of k i b b u d Mapam's nine Knesset members, six are members of kibbutzim. In M these parties the agrarian wing is clearly dominant, and in both case

Any p q that openly declared itself to represent an hte- ' e the

'LerS, a d bo& are 'heir aPP-g to be geam

sent the interests of

7 -

in tile cabinet, WO-retain their attachment to kibbutzim, b - - -

I

-

* Mr. CILIV... - Univer*ity of California, Berl he was a graduate student ai

! University, Jerusalem. Acknow Talmon for very helpful critici

I . See George C. Homans, Z court Brace and Company, 195 2. For a discuqion of the con8 munity, see K. Davis, Human Company, 1950, pp. 61-64.

3 Settlements." Scripta Hirrolol) veruity, Jerusalem, 1956.

1 i 1

f! 3. See Y. Garber-Talmon, 4 "

the new immigre ;Overnment, or, ,.< re in the governB+ xed with the Up-

, still dominated ensity from the r- represent an i n t t -ason all parties S,

result, and notu- 9 political & life, e . 1 farmers’ or apt-

ng. Even the rig!. number of colle~

:he period when : w , and sign$ L

i forms of pionee: r these two pan mderact. City vo:. n groups are of 1;.

.

o an agrarian w- la’oved Hazioni; L

sis on individuat. essive party. Am: rvian representat venunents, is clc iivei-ovdim (82.7 r- so are about a tL ,road support amq embers of kibbutz Ian representativa rine Slapai menbe n, but only om b ibbutz, may be ation exists, m

butzim and mosbvs

I the agrarian scdJ hduth Ha’avodn b crs of kibbutzim 4; Sbutzim. Ln bo&@ d i n both casab1

1; there also is 4 I 1

I f I

f

3 the political life of Israel, agrarianism is of great si@cance, but no , agrarian party exists. Each p a g has its agrarian wing because, in tbe

ideology, prestige, and the division of the national resources sided with xlture to a large extent. But no party is williag to tie its future corn??eteIy :riculture, because agriculture as an occupation is receding from its former as the main channel for rehabilitating the social structure of the people IS becoming something like an ordinary occupational group. As such, its

..a1 political signrficance is decreasing. %is paper leaves out the Communists, because they have only a very limited bdd raeli agncultmc

. . .

- .. ~ . .. .. . .

* M r . Etzioni is a graduate stuaenr anu rcxa*b.a -I-.....-I_ _ _ . 1-niverritv of California. Berkeley. T h i s paper w a s written when tion’st rress* lY”*

he was a- graduate student and ;esearchlashstant a t the Hebrew [,’niversity, Jerusalem. Acknowledgement is given to Dr. Y. Garber - ’l‘almon for very helpful criticism of earlier draf t s of this paper. 1. See George C. Homans, The Human Croup, New Tork, H a r - court Brace and Company, 1950, esp. p. 417. 2. For a diwussion of the concept of control in relation to the com- lllunity, see K. Davis, Human Soricty, New Tork, T h e blacmiilan C(Jrll?any, 19S0, pp. 61-64. 3. See Y. Garber-Talmon, “Socisl Differertiation in Communal ~r t t l rments .” Scripta Hierorofymitana, Vol. 111, T h e Hebrew Uni- ‘vryity, Jrru?ialem, 1956.

4

.16, No. 3 Fall, 1;

:merits

ion in the Kibbnit b f the mixed farming typr, anches such as cattle, pol lective consumption is alq ommunal kitchen prepares the communal dining hall.

ger children during the da! night.

::oordinator assigns mcmhe the managers of the hran ?power needs. Memhen dcc )ranch, sick-leave, etc. also

tie manager of the branch z

munication between the ac the particular work-group

ized position of control ir

! work coordinator, and all tative roles are appointed hi meklv general ascemhlv 0’

merally speaking, there is work situation and othcr in the channels of commiinic the work-group do not a r k the formal and informal cn nr significant event in the *I hole community soon a f t r r i

i

*

’ in the amount of social rn work-groups in one KiQbufl ifferences result from pap6 i f connecting work situntilin*

I in the Kibbutz.

.

Xing in Israel, see: S . N. E i m wt$, London, Routledge and

in a K ibbu t z , Xew York. Rrcanl

6. In the communal showers, where the gathering of mrml*r* work has a social chaiacter, discussions concerning w ~ ~ r k In the late afternoon, af ter work and shower, mcml)rr- mccl a big lawn, generally situated in the center of the K i l ~ b u f C . ‘ again one of the main topics of convewation ir W O ~ L Schwartz, “Social Factors in the Development of LrKal C ’ m I r Case Study of T w o Israeli Settlements,” Y a l r Lflc journflla NO. 4 (Feb. 1954), pp. 471-490.

7. Compsrc to discussion of the client: Amha; Etzioni, ‘1% ganizational Structure of Closed EducationLI In-titlltionn in tm t f u r v a r d Educational Revirw, Spring 1957, pp. 1@7-121*