in following the esse~ti~~o~~~~c~~r!

~~ the Unl~~d States have failed because

.~oo~era lV~ ~overnance (one-workerone-vote) they have been unable to
work process. Here Kibbutzim provi~;or~ ~ o~.efflclent management of the
two aspects of work and community mana 5 rutchlve bexamples ?f the way these
gemen ave een carrled out.
While students of cooperativ f
'.
from the Kibbutz experience \~~r~~r~t orga01zatlOn can gain much inspirat'ion
understand in depth the nat~re of the K:~~u~reme8tl for such learning is to
analyze to what extent th
.
1 .u z:
n:t then can we usefully
butz movement can be ada ~e~a~;~cular. 50c1a1 lnventl?nS involved in the Kib.
special social and cUltu~al condi~~~n~nQ~threr cOlunl~r~es or.to what extent the
.
srae 1mlt thelr applicability
On one point we can be sure si r th rl'
.
other successful systems of'wor~~~ co~p ~r~~ 1 e;perlence parallels that in
Mondrag6n cooperatives in S ain f
era lves ,1n Y~go~lavia and in the
to~ of worker cooperatives ~ann~t ~; :~~~~~r)'ht~e S1mp
?Ul~dlng of a growing secpllcation of isolated organizational unit
l~he d
y through the multidepends upon establishing an infrastr t s.
e evelopm~nt of the system
h
Federation, to provide educatio
uc.ure. su~ as provlded by the Kibbutz
stimulation and gUidance of then~a t~chnlca1basSls~ance, and financing for the
this volume provide impressive evirlous mem er U~ltS. The contributions to
tion provides guidance to its me bdence of.way~ In which the Kibbutz Federam er organlzat10ns.
Wi 11 iar.) Foote Whyte
William Foo~e Whyte is Professor Emeritus of Sociology and
lab?r ReJatlons at Cornell University and Presl'dent of the Industrial and
10g1cal Association.
American Socio-

THE KIBBUTZ AND THE ISRAELI SOCIETY

- CHANGING MUTUAL RELATIONS

In the thi rty years since the State of Israel ~Ias establ ished, the Kibbutz
has fulfilled a central role in its development, undertaking tasks in the
spheres of settlement, security, economy, and social relations. It showed
that it was capable of adapting itself to the changing conditions which occurred in its internal economic and social structure as well as to the
fluctuating relations in various sectors of Israeli society. During tilis
thirty year period the very existence of a collective movement in a noncollective environment was put to the test. While a large part of the Jewish population in the period preceding the establishment of the state came
to Israel out of ideological motivation and lived in different egalitarian
cooperative forms, most of the immigrants in the fifties and sixties, coming
mostly from Asia and Africa, had no similar ideological orientation.
During the period after the establishment of the state many of the Kibbutz
movement's responsibilities and certain specific functions were stateassumed. This had a negative impact upon the self-image of the Kibbutz movement. as well as upon its image as viewed by the surrounding society and
posed three fundamental questions:
1.

Does the Kibbutz movement still have to fulfill pioneering roles after
the achievement of the establishment of the State of Israel? And what
are these roles?

2.

Is it possible to preserve the special collectivistic and egalitarian

roles of the Kibbutz, even though Israeli society is becoming estranged
from them? Is it possible to influence the society and the state in
the spirit of Kibbutz principles, and how?

3.

By what means can the special fundamentals of the Kibbutz be preserved

under the new conditions? What is the measure of isolation essential
for the preservation of these fundamentals? What measure of isolation
is possible in view of the desire to fulfill general national role~ and
the wish to influence the fonnation of society?

These questions had become salient as early as the first decade of the state's
existence. During the years of struggle preceding its establishment, the
Kibbutz movement had been a central instrument as far as the achievement of
national goals was concerned. Kibbutzim had served as bases and reserves of
manpower for the Hagana and Palmach. Members of the Kibbutzim and the pioneer
youth movement had fulfilled central roles in the Ghetto revolts and the partisan movements during World \<far II, also organizing immigration and subsequently the illegal immigration. A large part of the immigrants who had arrived (in Israel) between the end of the war and the establishment of the
state had been organized by the Kibbutz movements, which had also absorbed
the immigrants, at least temporarily. Since the 1936-38 Arab riots, the
period of the "tower and stockade" settlements, the Kibbutz had filled a cenxxiv

tral p~ace in settlement activities. In the ten years or so preceding the

establ~shment o~ the state, the percentage of Kibbutz members in the Jewish

Israell popu:at1on was steadily growing, and in 1949 - the first year of
statehood.- ~t reached the peak of 7%, thereby greatly exceeding the 3%-4%
charactenstlc of the thirties.

THE PERIOD OF DOUBT AND CRISIS

The following developments.had a special impact on the role of the Kibbutz.
In these years, the establlshmen~ of the Israeli Defense Army and of the governme~tal f~amework cr~ated the lmpress10n that the specific contribution of
the K1bbutzlm to se~ur1ty had become superfluous. Moreover, due to a conflict
between.the Be~ Gurlon government and a part of the Kibbutz Federation, many
commandlng off1cers and Kibbutz members left the army when the \oIar of Independence came to an end.
The mass immigration which had caused the Jewish population to increase by
137% between ~948 and 1955 had practically bypassed the Kibbutzim movement.
It, t?O, had.ln~reased by 45% during this period, but mainly through the absorpt10n of 1mm1grants from.Europe~n countries that had prior education in
,~ou~h movements.
However, 1 twas 1ncapabl e of absorbi ng the mai n body of
1mmlgrants f~om Arab co~ntries due to its lack of ideological prepara'tion
and to the d1fferences 1n cultural background.
New immigrants' .moshavim, on the other hand, absorbed a SUbstantial part of
lost its leading posiof the Kibbutz popu~~~~)~ 1n Jew1sh rural population decreased from 42% in 1950 to 24.3% in

t~e n~w populat10n.

As a result, the Kibbutz movement
tl0~ 1n.the s~here of rural settlement (the percentage

T~e beginni~g

of the fifties had been a time of mass immigration, acute scarclty o~ agncultural products,. a~d. austerity. However, after the expansi~n
of ~gr1cultural settlement act1vlt1es and the rapid growth of productivity'1n
a~r1cultural pr~duction, ~ndications of surplus production, mainly eggs and
m11k, b~came eV1dent. Th1S phenomenon,coupled with a scarcity in agricultural
productlon ~a~tors suc~ as suitable land and \~ater, raised questions as to
whet~er add~t1?nal .agr1cultural settlements were feasible.
Urban settlement
an~ 1ndustr1al1zat10n, together with the development of higher education and
s~lence, repr~sented the future direction of the country.
Both within and
wlthout th~ K1bbutz movem~nt there were doubts as to whether the Kibbutz
could fulf111 these funct1ons.
Due to issues such as these, a period of self-examination began
It was still
unclear whether or not the movement was capable of fulfilling a'pioneerin
r~le now that th~ stat~ had been established. Some of the roles which th~
Klbbutz.had fulf111ed 1n the past, such as training educated Jewish youth
for agr1cultural and manual labor, seemed suoerfluous. It was likely that
town"
be more "u r governmental
bodies
f 1 ' f If
'11 . and the moshav of develop' mAnt
, - would
..
cess u 1~ U. 1 1ng roles connected with security immigration absorp- tion
and colonlZatlon.
'
,

In addition to the identity-crisis concerning the role of the Kibbutz in the

state, there were other factors which intensified the feeling of isolation:
1.

The split in the Kibbutz Meuchad federation in 1951 caused internal

social upheavals, damaging the status of the Kibbutz in the eyes of
the public.

2.

In addition to the emphasis placed on governmental power and initiative,

there was a growing tendency to ~Ieaken the traditional voluntary frameworks and to question the legitimacy of these autonomous communities
and movements with unique ideological content. These communities and
ideological forms of life had developed during the pre-state era and
the growth of the Kibbutz was eased by the multiplicity of ideological
movements. Now, so it seemed, those circumstances had changed. Moreover, two Kibbutz movements, the Kibbutz Artzi and Kibbutz Meuchad,
were in opposition to the ruling Labor Party during the greater part of
that period. This sharpened in these movements the feeling of contradiction between the social foundations of the Kibbutz and the trends of
development in the state.

This feeling of contradiction was intensified by the weakening of the Histadrut (the general federation of labor - the comprehensive organization of
the working class to which the Kibbutzim also belong). The development of
the Kibbutz movement in the pre-state period was facilitated by the fact of
its belonging to a widespread network of institutions and organizations forming part of the Histradrut and attempting to realize communal and egalitarian
principles in various forms of life. The economic sector of the Histadrut,
its socialized medical system, the network of cooperatives, both rural and
urban, etc., formed a kind of safety belt around the Kibbutz movement. Now
some of these institutions and organizations were weakened while others were
undergoing processes of bureaucratization.
The relative increase in the number of non-skilled laborers, mainly new immigrants, the majority of them deriving from oriental countries, on the one
hand, and the growing demand of professionals and highly educated people on
the other hand, created the background for a growing discrepancy in salaries
in Israel. This damaged the egalitarian principles which had been accepted
or at least professed in the past.
This combination of factors gave rise to the feeling of crisis and to the
question marks concerning the anticipated future of the Kibbutz movement.
These were intensified by the demographic stagnation and by the fact that no
ne~1 Kibbutzim were established between 1955 and 1962. In these years, the
population of the Kibbutz movement did not increase at all, since the small
number of outside people and of the Kibbutz-born adults joining it as members
only balanced the number of those who left.

tion to the struggle of Israel for economic independence. It provided a new

means for the Kibbutz to participate in the achievement of national goals.

GROWTH AND INTERNJll CHANGES

In contrast to the period of self-examination and crlSlS during the fifties,
the first years of the sixties showed signs of a turning point in the direction of renewed growth and social and economic development. One expression
of this trend was the increasing number of Kibbutz-born adults who joined
the Kibbutzim at the end of their military service.
Between 1962 and 1967, the number of Kibbutz members increased by 20% and the
Kibbutzim's population (members, children, and temporary residents) by 13%.
From the beginning of the sixties onwards most of the Kibbutzim were becoming
multi-generational communities, with members of different age groups living
together in a relatively small community, and maintaining equality in all
spheres of life including the decision-making process accomplished by the
general assembly and by various committees. However, this integration was
often accompanied by ideological tension which was expressed especially after
the Six Day War in such books as The Seventh Day, a soldiers' discussion.
But this tension also contributed substantially to the regeneration of the
movement and to overcoming the crisis. The fact that the majority of Kibbutzborn adults remained in their birthplaces contributed to the strengthening of
the family institution and the creation of large multi-generational families
that are rare in modern society.

Another adjunct of the p~oce~s of Kibbutz ~ndustrialization.was i~s contri~

bution to the industrialIzatIon of developIng areas. The KIbbutzIm establlshed
regional enterprises for processing their agricultural produ~ts that served
as a central source of employment for inhabitants of the regIon.
But while younger people were enterin~ the.K~bbutzim! an in~reasing numb~r of
them were becoming students in the unIverSItIes an~ In the l~de~e~dent hIgher
learning institutions of the Kibbutz movement. Thls was a slgnlflcant development since the establishment of industrial plants created a demand for technical and professional manpower. Between 1969 and 1~73, the number of students
in these institutions increase four-fold. But the Klbbutz has been.able to
manage this situation. Every year about 5% of Kibbu~z members recelve.postsecondary education compatible with their personal WIshes and the requlreme~ts
of "the Kibbutz. In the past, the general assumption '!fas that higher educatlOn
would alienate members from fulfilling roles in the KIbbutz labor framewo~k.
increasing the number of people working outside the Kibbutz a~d eve~ leaVIng
it. In the meantime, most of the students become integrated lnto Klbb~tz roles
in returning from their stUdies, and the number of students who leave IS even
lower than the general percentage.

In the sixties, the process of industrialization of the Kibbutz began at an

accelerated pace (about 80% of. the 290 Kibbutz enterprises were established
from the early sixties onwards). At this time, too, there was a new direction
in the selection of types of industry. Priority was accorded to more capitalintensive enterprises, the number of workers demanded by them being compatible
with the ability of the Kibbutzim to supply them from its memberShip. Some
of the plants that were established earlier required a large number of workers
than the Kibbutzim were able to suppiy out of their membership. This discrepancy caused the employment of hired workers from outside the Kibbutz,
which is contrary to traditional Kibbutz values.

All of these factors signified the new trends which began to be evide~t ~n the
Kibbutz from the sixties onwards. The way Kibbutzim responded to thelr Internal needs contributed also to the state's requirements in differe~t.spheres.
Beginning with the Six Day War, the Kibbutz contribu~ion to the tradItIonal .
goal oriented spheres _ secu~ity~immigration~absorptl0n,and settlement - agaIn
became prominent. The contrIbutIon to securIty wa~ expressed by the ~arge
number of Kibbutz-born or Kibbutz-educated adults In the voluntary u~ltS of
the Israeli Defense Army: the Air Force, Commando Units, etc., and l~ the
high rate of officers among them. Their exact num~er may not be.publlshed
but can be inferred from the large percentage of Klbbutz casualtles o~t of the
total Israeli casualties, which was six times higher than the proportIon of
the Kibbutz population to the general Israeli population.

The Kibbutz industry continues developing at a rate surpassing that of general

Israeli industry. while its share in export is significantly greater than its
share in Israeli industrial production. The fast development of industry did
not hinder the development of Kibbutz agriculture. This was due to the fact
that worker productivity in agriculture increased greatly during this period.

After the Six Day War, settlement activities were also resumed, and more than
thirty new settlements were established. A rel~tively.large perc~ntage of
the immigrants who arrived from Western and LatIn Amerl~a~ co~ntrles were
absorbed by Kibbutzim. However, the number of those orlglnatlng from the
U.S.S.R. is very small.

The success of the process of industrialization in the Kibbutzim offered

rural employment to the growing population in face of the previously mentioned
agricultural limitations, such as scarcity of land and water. Therefore, the
desertion of villages - a common occurrence in countries undergoing accelerated
industrialization - was prevented. As a result, the percentage of the Kibbutz
in the Jewish Israeli rural population again began to increase continuously
(from 21% in 1961 to 35.6% in 1976). The process of industrialization, together with the accelerated rate of productivity in agricultural work, augmented the portion of the Kibbutz in the National Product to a degree greatly
outweighing its portion of the population (40% of the agricultural output and
6% of the industrial output, as against only 3.3% of the Jewish Israeli population). Kibbutz industrialization was therefore also an important contribu-

Thousands of young people, Jews and non-Je'!fs.from ma~y countries, ~isit th~
Kibbutzim yearly. They stay in them for llmlted perlods : partly In Ulpanlm
(intensive Hebrew courses) and partly as volunteers. DurIng rec~nt years,
activities directed at the integration of youth from poverty strlcken strata
_ mainly from Oriental backgrounds - into the educational framework of the
Kibbutzim were intensified and are steadily expanding,
The developments which started in the early sixties provided the ans~ers to.
some of the basic problems with which the Kibbutzim had been strugglln~ dur~ng
the period following the establishment of the Stat~. S~nce then, and In splte
of the existence of governmental apparatus and legIslatIve frameworkS, there

still remain many functions to which the Kibbutz is capable of contributing

more than other organizational frameworks. This is due to its social structure and system of values, internalized by education and emphasized by public
opinion, which regards contribution to national goals, social solidarity, and
mutual responsibility as obligatory.
The specific Kibbutz social structure Which encompasses all spheres of a
person's life and in which there is no connection whatever between one's occupa~ion and one'~ standa~d.of living allows the Kibbutz to be extremely
flex1ble at chang1ng cond1t1ons, to adapt roles to various needs and to
~b~lize internal so~rces to a maximal degree during emergencies: These cond1tlOns were respons1ble for making industrialization possible and to con ..
tinue to allow the Kibbutz to fulfill roles in the areas of security ab.,
sorption. and education.
In con~lusion, the Kibbutz movement, during the era following the State's
establ1shment and espeCially during the sixties and seventies, succeeded
according to several criteria, where its predecessors - communal movements
in other countries - had failed:
1.

It attained inter-generational continuity, while many other Communes

the world over had crumbled when their founders aged.

2.

It succeeded, generally speaking, in preserving the values of common

property. eq~ali~y, an~ direct democracy in spite of the phenomena of
social.polar1zat1on Wh1Ch accompany processes of industrialization and
econom1C progress even in communal societies or cooperative organizations.

These successes were att~ined in the course of a continuous struggle against

external influences and lnternal processes, such as the infiltration of hired
la~or, the in~roduction of hierarchic management patterns in certain industr1al enterprls:s, the weakening of direct democratic processes, private income~ from outslde sources damaging equality, etc. Although the Kibbutz fed~rat~ons.and communities have developed independent educational and cultural
1nstltut1ons on a country-wide, regional, and local basis, the danger of the
pene~ration of social norms, contradicting internal Kibbutz values, still
perslsts.

structure among the world's trade unions) and their influence in the major
worker's parties is much greater than their numbers alone justify. Kibbutz
members have often held leadership positions in ~hes~ parties.and.hav~ represented them in the government, the Knesset, and 1n H1stadrut 1nst1tut1o~S.
The inconsistency between their "objective" status as owners of collectwe
means of production and their affiliation to the instit~tionali~ed org~ns of
the working class deepened over the last twenty years w1th the ~ncreas1ng .
industrialization of the Kibbutzim and the establishment of reg10nal organ1zations. The income and standard of living of the Kibbutzim increased, and
some emp 1oyed hi red workers in agri culture and industry. Most of the workers
in the regional industries are hired, while the ownership is in the hands of
a cooperative of Kibbutzim in the region.
A subjective expression of this inconsistency is the fact that when asked to
state their class affiliation, Kibbutz members have difficulty in answering.
In one study (Rosner et al., 1978), the majority replied - in answer to an
open question - that the Kibbutz movement forms a special class. In another
study, some identified themselves as "middle class" and the majority as
"vlorking class" (Antonovsky, 1968). Th~ difficulty in .person~l ide~tity may
also be related to the ethnic factor Wh1Ch has become 1ncreas1ngly lmportant
in Israel's class structure. A majority of production workers, both in agriculture and industry, are Jews of Oriental origin or Arabs, while most of
the pt'ofessionals and middle class are of Western origin, Most of the Kibbutz members are also of western origin and have therefore social and cultural
affiliations with the profeSSionals and middle class but work mostly in agricultural and industrial production. In recent years, efforts have been made
to strengthen the link between Kibbutz members and the other parts of the
working class.
The Kibbutzim have decreased the amount of hired labor, which was introduced
in order to provide work for the masses of unemployed new immigrants. The
hired workers in the regional industries have been given participation in
both management and profits, and efforts have been made to increase the contact between Kibbutz members and wage earning Histadrut members in various
areas.

princi~les g~iding ~ts activity, and the values of substantial parts of'the

Since the establishment of the State, there have also been significant changes
in the position of the Kibbutz movement in the hierarchy of the various dimensions of sta tus. The founders of the Ki bbutzim brought no property with
them, and anyone who joins a Kibbutz become a "partner" without paying any
thi ng. Because of thi s, the Ki bbutz accumul ated property by means of loo.ns
from public institutions and banks. Owned capital is only a relativ:ly small
part of Kibbutz property. But as stated above, the share of the nat10nal
product produced by the Kibbutzim is much greater than their proportion in
the population.

According to the usual definition which identifies workers with the class of
wage earners,.the Kibbutz members are not part of the working class. And
even thou~h Klbbutz members manage their collective means of production and
are not hlred laborers, they belong to the Histradrut (which has a unique

According to Sarkai (1977), the average standard of living in the ~ibbutz at

the beginning of the seventies was about 80% of the average expendlture outside the Kibbutz. In terms of consumption expenses, the Kibbutz was in the
sixth decile. However, because consumption is collectively organized, Kibbutzim possess communal consumption facilities which are not generally available to families of similar income levels in non-Kibbutz settlements of the
same size. In general, both the standards of living and the income of the

PR08LEMS AND TENSIONS

A wide gap exists between the Kibbutz's egalitarian and communal values

the

Israell publlC. Th1S gap reflects both the channes that occurred in the demographic co~position of the Israeli society that ~ere mentioned above and the
changing place of the Kibbutz in the Israeli stratification system.

Kibbutzim have improved :elati~e to other groups in Israel since the establishment.of th: ~tate, espec1ally 1n the last two decades since the beginning of
the 1ntens1f1ed process of industrialization.
The changes in the political status of the Kibbutzim in contrast have had a
tendency. toward decline. In the early days of the state, the political power
of the,K1bbutz movem:nts reached its zenith. They had great power in the major
worker ~ par~y, Mapa1~ and were the main force of the second worker's party,
Mapam, 1n Wh1Ch two K1bbutz movements formed the core. In the first Knesset
P948) t~ere were 26 Kibbutz members among the 120 members of the House, ~Ihile
1n.the e1ghth Knesset (1973) their numbers were reduced to fourteen. Even
try1S number of members of Knesset was an 0verrepresentation when compared
w1th ~he percentage of Kibbutz members in the general population. In the
electlons of.1977, whe~ ~he strength of the worker's parties declined and they
were. forced l~tO Opposltlon, the number of Knesset members from Kibbutzim also
decllned to nlne (7.5% of parliament members).
However, the political power of the Kibbutz movement is not limited only to
the number of its M.P. 's an~ ~iniste:s. In a study of elites in Israel it was
found. that 22.2% of the pol1tlcal el1te are Kibbutz members (WeingrodG~rew1tcry, ~9?7). It seems that this special status derives from the valuat10nal sl~n1f1cance ?f membership in the Kibbutz as an expression of the implemen~at1on of the 1~eol09Y the various parties profess. Another factor is
that K1bbutz membersh1p allows political activists greater freedom and independence because their livelihood is not dependent on politics.
The.weak pOints in the political status of the Kibbutzim is the fact that
the~r members ar: us~ally to be found in the higher levels of party re resentat10n an~ organlzatlonal structure, but Kibbutz members do not repres~nt the
sectoral 1nter~sts of ~ost,party members such as the trade unions, financial
s:ctors, women s organ~zatlon"etc. This finds expression also in the relat1~elY low representat10n of K1bbutz members in the country's administrative
ellte - 4.4%.
We cannot quantitatively measure the changes in the prestige of the K'bb t
H?wever, after the establ~shm:nt of the state there was a strong feel~ngUa~~ng
K1bbutz m:mbe:s of.a decllne 1n the centrality of the Kibbutz movement and in
the.prest1ge lt enJoyed before, when it acted as a kind of vanguard for the
~o~lal goals that s~~olize~ its highest values, In addition, internal div~~lons based ?n pol1tlcal dlfferences contributed to the decline in prestige
lbbu~z pre~t:ge rose after the war of 1967 in which the role of Kibbutz mem:
ber~ ln pos1tlons of,command and in elite units was conspicuous, Their eco~om1c success, especlally, in industry, also had an impact. In a public 0 inlon ~oll ,among the I~raell population taken after the defeat of the worke~'s
~ar~le~l ln the e~ectlon~, most of those asked replied that they thought it
.~slr~ e that K1bbutz l~fluence in the Israel E:conom'y should be great~r than
;_;,~~~:: ~[Q~~:t~~pulatlon, and 43% thought the same concerning political
IIIIIU:"'-" , .... , .~-~ .. , ~. Or-chan, 1978),
It seems, thereforf'!. that notwiths~and1ng the decllne l~ the,pres~ige of the Kibbutz movement in com arison
~~;~)~he pre-state perlod, lt stlll holds a measure of "over-charis~a" (Shur,

Generally, the position of the Kibbutz on the different dimensions of status

seems to be more balanced and consistent than in the past. In the past, the
status of the Kibbutz was relatively higher in the hierarchy of prestige and
partially in the hierarchy of power, but relatively lower in the economic
hierarchy. Hhile there has been a relative decline in its place in the first
two hierarchies - linear in political power and curvilinear in prestige there has been a rise in its economic status. The relative balance also reflects a condition of greater stability in the status of the Kibbutz in Israel's structure and its metamorphOSis from a pioneer "vanguard" to a permanent way of life which provides for the needs of its members on the basis of
unique collective and egalitarian principles. But on the other hand, as a
result of the economic success and political influence of the Kibbutzim,
parts of the working class, and especially those of Oriental origin, might
perceive the Kibbutz as part of the affluent ~stablishment of western origin
- in spite of its egalitarian structure and socialist ideology.

DILEMI1AS AND PROSPEGTS

In contrast to the problems and tensions mentioned above, a number of opposite
trends can be distinguished. Parts of the ,veteran communities and their offspring see the Kibbutz way of life as an alternative, from the point of view
of the quality of life, It has succeeded in coping with a number of manifestations of alienation, which characterize the individualistic urban way of
life founded on competition. On the other hand, there are young people belonging to Oriental communities who believe that joining a Kibbutz would allow them to advance without having to surmount the numerous obstacles blocking
their progress in other frameworks. The findings of recent surveys of public
opinion are witness to these trends, and also to the increasing number of young
Israelis who, without belonging to the traditional youth movements, join Kibbutzim, This they do in "private" groups established in order to serve together in the "Nachal" (settlement oriented army corps) subsequently taking
the initiative in forming connections with Kibbutzim, There is also response
to advertisements in newspapers offering people a chance to join existing
Kibbutzim, or even to establish new ones. The use of advertisements and other
media indicates a reaction to the lack of connection between large parts of
the Israeli public and the Kibbutz movement. (According to a survey held in
1978, 50% of the Israeli public had never visited a Kibbutz.)
Much interest in the Kibbutz experiment is evident among social scientists and
scholars the world over who see the Kibbutz as a sort of social laboratory
capable of testing possible solutions for the problems of modern society.
However, so far, there have not been many projections from the Kibbutz upon
other sections of Israeli society. Many people claim that the Kibbutz is a
unique societ.Y composed of unique people; therefore, nothing can be inferred
from it concerning other societies. POSSibly, this differing point of view
derives from too close a proximity or maybe from the fact that some of the
fundamental problems of modern society have not yet taken a Central place in
Israeli public discussions due to the enduring state of emergency. But the
Ki bbutz is a permanent challenge to the convent; ona 1 forms of 1ife and organization in Israel. The Kibbutz experience shows the possibility of:

1.

Managing a complex and highly productive econolllY both industrial and

agricultural, without using material incentives;

2.

Satisfying the needs of a heterogeneous population without using money,

on an egalitarian basis, taking individual needs into consideration;

3.

Managing community and economic organization on the basis of direct

democracy with the participation of all members making decisions together with the rotation in managerial roles;

4.

Bridging the contradiction between city and village while maintaining

an urban, industrial economy and an urban culture in a rural environment.

Third, facing the growing gap between Kibbutz values and those of other parts
of society, the Kibbutz movement has continued to combine a strategy of openness with relative isolation. While the economic activities of the Kibbutz
movement are well-integrated into the Israeli economy and Kibbutzim continue
to play an important political role, they have preserved their educational
and cultural autonomy in order to ensure both the ideological socialization
of future Kibbutz members and to counteract the influences of the mass media
that are opposed to Kibbutz values. The success of the Kibbutz to maintain
in the future this mixture of openness and isolation may determine both its
ability to fulfill a pioneer role in certain areas and to preserve its alternative ideals and structure.

Enhancing the influence of the Kibbutz upon Israeli society will depend upon
the formulation of a new identity for the Kibbutz movement. Will the Kibbutz
movement regard itself as yet another form of life in a pluralistic Israeli
society or as an "alternative society" bearing a social message and challenge
toward itself and its environment? Will the Kibbutz movement become a pressure group safeguarding its economic interests? Or will it continue to value
itself as a movement fulfilling pioneering roles whose content (presently social and value oriented) changes? Will the Kibbutz movement succeed in breaking out of the circle of isolation and adjustment ~Ihile preserving its auton01llY in the vital educational and value spheres, but also enlarging its contribution to society and increasing its openness towards it? The answers to
these questions do not depend exclusively upon the Kibbutz movement, but they
will play an important part in determining the future development of the Kibbutz and its status in the State of Israel.
The answers to these questions, too, are related to the answers to the three
questions with which we opened the article and, to which we can now return.
Fir~t, the experience of the statehood period showed clearly that the special
nat10nal goals of the State of Israel, such as the integration of communities
from different origins, the settlement of new areas, economic independence,
etc., cannot be achieved by administrative means and economic incentives
alone. There is still need for volunteerism, for ideological commitment,
qualities that can be found in the Kibbutz movement more than in other parts
of Israeli society. But there is a need for pioneering not only for the implementation of national goals. Important social goals such as decreasing
inequalities and increasing social justice have also national implications.
Second, in spite of temporary deviation in specific areas, mainly by employment of hired labor, Kibbutzim have succeeded in preserving their internal
~gal Harian and cooperative norms and social structure, in spite of the grow1ng gap between the work and values of the surrounding society. The Kibbutzim
have been less successful in influencing society with the spirit of their
values. This relative failure can be explained by the changes in the social
and demographic composition of this society as well as by historical conditions
such as frequent emergency situations. The challenges presented by the internal
structural changes in the Kibbutz - e.g., inter-generational transition and
industrialization - have caused the Kibbutz movement to invest most of its
effort internally and less externally.

10

11

1.

Managing a complex and highly productive economy both industrial and

agricultural, without using material incentives;

2.

Satisfying the needs of a heterogeneous population without using money,

on an egalitarian basis, taking individual needs into consideration;

3.

Managing community and economic organization on the basis of direct

democracy with the participation of all members making decisions together with the rotation in managerial roles;

4.

Bridging the contradiction between city and village while maintaining

an urban, industrial economy and an urban culture in a rural environment.

hird facing the growing gap between Kibbutz values and those of other parts
T so~iet;, the Kibbutz movement has continued ~o com~i~e.a strategy ?f openof ss with relative isolation. While the economlC actlvltle~ of t~e Klbb~tz
n~vement are well-integrated into the Israeli economy and Kl~butzlm C?ntl~ue
~o play an important political role, they have pre~erved ~helr ed~c~~lO~~
nd cultural autonomy in order to ensure both the ldeologlcal SOCla lza 10~
af future Kibbutz members and to counteract the influence~ of the mas~ ~e?la
~hat are opposed to Kibbutz values. The success of the Klbbutz.to maln ~ln
. the future this mixture of openness and isolation may determlne ~oth ~ts
~~i1 ity to fu lfi 11 a pi oneer ro 1e in certa in areas and to preserve 1 ts a ter ..
native ideals and structure.

Enhancing the influence of the Kibbutz upon Israeli society will depend upon
the formulation of a new identity for the Kibbutz movement. Will the Kibbutz
movement regard itself as yet another form of 1ife in a plural istic Israel i
society or as an "alternative society" bearing a social message and challenge
toward itself and its environment? Will the Kibbutz movement become a pressure group safeguarding its economic interests? Or will it continue to value
itself as a movement fulfilling pioneering roles whose content (presently social and value oriented) changes? Will the Kibbutz movement succeed in breaking out of the circle of isolation and adjustment while preserving its autonomy in the vital educational and value spheres, but also enlarging its contribution to society and increasing its openness towards it? The answers to
these questions do not depend exclusively upon the Kibbutz movement, but they
will play an important part in determining the future development of the Kibbutz and its status in the State of Israel.
The answers to these questions, too, are related to the answers to the three
questions with which we opened the article an~ to which we can now return.
First, the experience of the statehood period showed clearly that the special
national goals of the State of Israel, such as the integration of communities
from different origins, the settlement of new areas, economic independence,
etc., cannot be achieved by administrative means and economic incentives
alone. There is still need for volunteerism, for ideological commitment,
qualities that can be found in the Kibbutz movement more than in other parts
of Israeli society. But there is a need for pioneering not only for tbe implementation of national goals. Important social goals such as decreasing
inequalities and increasing social justice have also national implications.
Second, in spite of tempora ry devi at ion in spec ifi c areas, ma i nI y by emp I oyment of hired labor, Kibbutzim have succeeded in preserving their internal
egalitarian and cooperative norms and social structure, in spite of the growing gap between the work and values of the surrounding society. The Kibbutzim
have been less successful in influencing society \'lith the spirit of their
values. This relative failure can be explained by the changes in the social
and demographic composition of this society as well as by historical conditions
such as frequent emergency situations. The challenges presented by the internal
structural changes in the Kibbutz - e.g., inter-generational transition and
industrializatiDn - have caused the Kibbutz movement to invest most of its
effort internally and less externally.

10

11