ABSTRACT
The transition of Israeli society toward a neoliberal/post-Fordist socioeconomic model is inextricably linked to the globalization process. Due to the worldwide dissemination of this socio-economic model since the mid-1970s, local neoliberal projects became more viable than their alternatives. Capital flow, the growing power of transnational governing institutions (such as the WTO and the IMF) and corporations, the loss of power of collective subjects that had been an essential part of political life between the turn of the nineteenth and the turn of the twentieth century (political parties and unions), all have greatly hindered the consolidation of local, stable options to the neoliberal project.46
Nonetheless, even though global transformations strongly condition the nature of local models, they do not fully determine them. The postFordist/neoliberal project became hegemonic in Israel also as a result of processes specific to Israeli society and to this model’s potential for articulation with conflicting political projects. There are currently four fundamental political projects in Israel,
namely, the nationalist neo-conservative project, represented by Likud, the semi-liberal one, primarily represented by Kadima (and also by a very weakened Labor party), Shas’s religious populism (which will be discussed in the next chapter), and radical right-wing populism, led by Avigdor Lieberman and his party, Yisrael Beiteinu (analyzed in Chapter 5).47 All these political models can be, and in fact have been articulated with the post-Fordist/neoliberal socio-economic model. Save for the front led by the Communist party and for the Arab parties, all Israeli political parties have participated in the governments that have implemented the transition toward, and consolidation of, this model in the last twenty-five years. A striking feature of Israeli society is that, unlike many other societies where the same process has unfolded, the political projects that have implemented and strengthened this model have enjoyed the support of those social sectors that are the model’s main victims.
