CONCLUSIONS

http://www.solhaam.org/articles/kibbut.html

The success and wealth of kibbutzim resulted from large capital sums provided without strings by world-wide Jewish communities at considerable hardship to the communities.

But most Israelis outside the kibbutz movement were then struggling under tough conditions to make ends meet and gain a reasonable standard of living.

Although kibbutzim had the ability to give and share with others who were in need, to pass on the benefits of what they had been given, to spread the application of co-operative principles, they signally failed to do so.


Some kibbutzim have become capitalist employers of labour. Co-operative principles have been replaced by self-interest. To the extent to which this is so is their higher standard of living and quality of life the result of profiting from the work of others.

And some of these kibbutzim have separated their industrial enterprises from the kibbutz community. Policy setting and management have been distanced from kibbutz members and it would appear that to this extent managers and directors are attempting to take over control from kibbutz members. Appointing of external managers is likely to make matters worse in the end.

Kibbutz members are at risk of losing control over their destiny when community-orientated decision-taking moves towards profit-maximising.


Borrowing had been cheap at the time kibbutzim were lent (received) donated funds from Jewish communities at next to zero interest rates compared with inflation. The prosperity of the kibbutzim had developed from the donated funds they had been lent (given) in the past. <8>

So when about ten years ago inflation in Israel reached over 200 per cent and exceeded interest rates then being charged, borrowing again seemed cheap. And kibbutzim took out large loans from banks.

But the banks were not giving money away as had the Jewish communities. Inflation dropped to 50 per cent and then to 20 per cent while interest rates stayed high at 60 per cent and then 40 per cent.

As a result many kibbutzim now have to repay what they borrowed, have to repay large debts and pay high interest charges to the banks.


Within the kibbutz all are equal, all share to the same extent. Some are more able than others, some do more than others, but all are paid the same. Earnings are pooled and divided equally.

But some kibbutzim are now considering introducing income differentials. Members could then be paid according to the profit-maximising market value of their work. Together with giving members greater spending choices, there is the risk that such changes can lead to greater inequality. Such changes could reverse the very ideals on which community life is built by creating poor and rich kibbutz members.


The system of allocating work by handing out jobs, by rotating them, is fair from the point of view of some work being more pleasant or satisfying than other kinds of work, from the point of view of members' abilities and skills, likes and dislikes. Decisions about work are made by and close to the people doing the work.

On the other hand, imposing decisions about work when these are made remotely in a managerial hierarchy, usually demotivates. In a natural reaction to the style of management, workers cease to care, lack commitment and dedicated effort.


For some time now many able and disillusioned young have been leaving kibbutz life for more rewarding and satisfying life outside.

Some kibbutzim are attempting to counter this trend by letting younger members study for professional and academic qualifications, largely of their choice. In turn the member is expected to commit himself to life on the kibbutz.

And members may work to an increasing extent outside the kibbutz, their salary being paid directly to the kibbutz.