{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.014012738853503185, 'fraction_numerical': 0.006369426751592357, 'mean_word_length': 5.135416666666667, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Rejoinder to Roberto Bachi's article on The Population of Israel.


 This article is a response by authors Friedlander and Goldscheider to a review article about their book written by Roberto Bachi. They maintain that he has misunderstood their analysis. In order to convey the gist of their analysis, a brief outline is presented of the objectives of their book, The Population of Israel. According to the authors, Israel provides an interesting case study of the relationship between population processes and policies which may have more far-reaching implications. The focus on Bachi's criticisms is on the analysis of immigration patterns and policies, especially an evaluation of Israeli natality policies. Mainly, he was critical of the immigration model, where the use of absolute numbers of immigrants rather than rates of immigration was preferred. The authors did compare immigration rates and volume of immigration for the periods 1924-26 and 1933-36 and these waves of migration were analyzed. Bachi has claimed that the main reason for the decline in immigration to Israel is due to the progressive exhaustion of Jewish population outside Israel; clearly the appropriate explanation is otherwise. Bachi should be able to see how immigration to Israel has responded in ways similar to the socioeconomic and political forces of other international migrations. The authors cite Bachi on 2 points and show how he wrote a biased and distorted review in order to defend his ideological position. Kibbutz fertility and birth rates as influenced by abortion are the 2 issues discussed. The 2 authors claim that since abortion in Israel is connected to socioeconomic and ethnic subgroups, a policy which restricts abortions would reinforce ethnic stratification and discrimination. Other criticisms by Bachi are refuted as well. The authors feel that it is necessary to question the assumptions underlying policies, to evaluate critically their efficacy, and to search out the relative costs and benefits of alternative investments. In analyzing population policies and patterns in Israel, Friedlander and Goldscheider argue for the central importance of population factors in the continuing evaluation of Israeli society. New population polcies must take into account the errors and weaknesses of previous policies in order that they not be repeated.
