Key boundaries for civilized political discourse
We were remined during the three weeks of multiple opinions in the Talmud encouraging introspection over interpersonal relationships. Their suggestion stems from the opinion that it was baseless hatred between Jews that caused G-d to castigate the Jews, destroy their Temples and exile them from their land.
One area the Jewish community needs to pay particularly close attention to is its behavior in the area of political discourse. These conversations and social media interactions tend to become vicious in today’s political climate.
Through discussions and debates over the war in Gaza and Israeli or American politics, keeping the conversations civil and respectful must remain a top priority for the Jewish community. In both the Diaspora and Israel, division is a plague that spreads rapidly and it isn’t one the Jewish people can afford to run rampant.
For political discourse to remain civilized, those involved in political dialogue must adhere to three rules: First, keep to the truth and don’t lie. Second, don’t be extreme — employ nuance. Third, put Jews, Israel and country over party.
Telling the truth is a value most people are taught as children. For many, sticking to the truth and not telling a lie is a cardinal value. At the same time, it seems that when politics are discussed many shift from valuing truth to believing the ends justify the means; and they lie to advance their party, candidate or position. But rarely, if ever, is lying justified in political discourse.
There are several concerns when sticking to the truth besides outright lying by fabricating false information and spreading it.
A person who spreads false information is just as guilty of poisoning political discourse as one who fabricates the information.
Unfortunately, mainstream media and certainly less reputable sources of information can no longer be relied upon to tell the truth. All too often, their information turns out to be false. Spreading a headline, video or screenshot and assuming it’s true just because “it was on the news” is not a valid excuse for someone who wants to stick to the truth. A person who wants to inform others is responsible for verifying their information.
In addition, lying by commission and omission is just as grievous an infraction. Telling the truth requires telling the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
It is easy to paint opposing opinions as extreme while viewing your own opinion as moderate. Intellectual honesty is crucial to recognizing when your opinion is veering to the extreme and is no longer moderate.
It is just as easy to paint your opponent as an enemy as it is to paint them as extreme. Just because someone has an opinion that differs from yours doesn’t make them your enemy; it makes them your opponent.
Israel’s first Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion and its first opposition leader Menachem Begin were political rivals, but they never saw each other as the enemy. They felt their opponent advocated political positions that were dangerous for Israel and, if implemented, could bring the destruction of Israel itself. Yet they never canceled their opponent; they saw them as a brother and a fellow Israeli.
Jewish tradition, as illustrated by Maimonides and many other Jewish scholars, is to stay moderate on issues and in behavior. An important way of staying away from the extremes is to employ nuance when discussing controversial issues. Employing nuance requires looking at issues from different perspectives and not just the way you understand it.
Israel hasn’t escaped the bitter political rancor that America has been suffering from over the past few decades. Judicial reform debates turn from the best way to run the Supreme Court to a threat to the nature of the country. Debates over possible solutions to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict turn from the best way to achieve peace for Israel to calling people murderers for their opinions. Discussions over the next steps in the war turn from dialogue over priorities to calling other Zionists enemies worse than Hamas. It must all stop; the bitter political characterizations have to end.
The last lesson might arguably be the most important: All too often Jews get caught up in the shortsighted tribalism that accompanies party politics.
Jewish history has taught us many lessons. Chief among them is not to place faith in outside institutions that assure Jews they can rely on them for safety and security.
Jews must learn to put their political loyalties second to their dedication to their people. It is painful to watch Jews fighting with each other over preferred parties and their policies. Irrespective of how dangerous one party’s policies towards Israel might seem and how wonderful another party’s might seem, disagreement over party should never be the cause of division within the Jewish community. Jews must learn it is perfectly acceptable to favor one party over another, but it is unacceptable to cancel other Jews over their loyalty to a different party.
Beit Hillel and Beit Shammai were two schools of Talmudic law. The students of each school disagreed vehemently with the other school’s students. Yet, they were able to set aside their differences and marry each other’s children. Beit Hillel’s positions were accepted because their teachers would begin by respectfully quoting their opponent, Beit Shammai, before teaching their own opinion.
It is fine to delineate the flaws of one party’s policies while still speaking respectfully about the people in that party. That is how we can ensure community unity, civility and respect.
