The fast day of Tisha B’Av reminds us that we must not take the existence of the State of Israel for granted. Just as internal strife brought about the destruction of the Second Temple and the independent Jewish state of two millennia ago, we face the risk of another destruction today if we fail to pull back from the brink.
More than ever before, our leading elites must strive for agreement and compromise. Courageous leadership is needed to reach out and rebuild trust and cooperation between the different groups in Israel’s political system.
One of the main dangers to the continued existence of the state can be summed up in a single word: “whataboutism.” According to the Cambridge Dictionary, whataboutism is “the practice of answering a criticism or difficult question by making a similar criticism or asking a different but related question, typically starting with the words “What about?”
Whataboutism is a reflection of the current sociopolitical climate in Israel, an atmosphere in which we automatically blame the other side for everything. “My side” and “I” are entirely in the right; the problem is that “the other side” started things, and “the other side,” of course, is guilty.
“You encouraged people to refuse to serve as reservists!” Sure, but “You launched the judicial reforms!” Yes, but “You broke into an IDF base.” Yes, but “we’ve had enough of the judicial system always being on your side!”
Tisha B’Av is not merely a fast day mourning the past. It is also a warning sign for the present. Back then, many did not believe that destruction was a real possibility. But then, too, the destruction began with wars between Jews. It may have been an external enemy, the Romans, who destroyed the Temple and exiled the Jews. Yet it was the internal divisions, the self-righteous hatred, and the whataboutism of the year 70 CE that brought this disaster down upon us.
The Temple was destroyed due to baseless hatred
Our sages declared that the Temple was destroyed due to baseless hatred.
At first glance, this seems a strange explanation: How could baseless hatred affect our ability to defend ourselves against the Romans, the most powerful empire at the time? The answer is that without the causeless hatred, society would have retained its inner resilience and it would have been possible to find a solution, perhaps to reach an agreement with the Romans – or even repel them as was successfully done to the Seleucids during the period of the Maccabees.
But when we are paralyzed internally, we become powerless to counter threats from the outside.
Open the history books, or watch the movie Legend of Destruction. See how the divided Jewish society of 2,000 years ago brought destruction upon itself. There were many points at which things could have been halted. However, due to internal hatred, extremists burned down the other side’s food storehouses. Driven by hatred, they refused to cooperate with each other. Each side was too deeply dug in to its “righteous” position, and thus the shared goal of defending the homeland was forgotten. No-one had the courage to halt the headlong plunge into the abyss.
Whataboutism, just like baseless hatred in the Second Temple era, now threatens the “Third Temple” of the modern State of Israel. Despite various heartfelt expressions of solidarity and common destiny, hate continues to spread among us. At a time when we are facing immense challenges, Israelis are entrenching themselves within the boundaries of their respective “camps.”
Every social group is now convinced that it is threatened and persecuted. Such strong emotions cause many of us to oppose even talking to “the other side,” fearing that this will be seen as “normalizing the enemy.” This situation, in which every member of the other side is automatically marked as a foe, without acknowledging that there are also reasonable people on both sides with good intentions, constitutes an existential threat to the state.
By definition, a democratic society is one that combines healthy competition among different opinions with cooperation between those who hold differing views. On the other hand, a culture characterized by silencing, canceling, and mutual rejection leads to the paralysis of public and political systems. If the other side is deemed entirely beyond the pale, then the next stage is the legitimization of violence – followed by even more terrible consequences.
Many positive initiatives in today’s Israel promote internal understanding and solidarity – from volunteering and charity-giving across different sectors to projects promoting dialogue and encounters between different camps.
But goodwill efforts and in-depth conversations over coffee are just the first step and are not sufficient, on their own, to bring about real change in our politics and leadership. Despite the current national emergency, our political system is in paralysis. While our home burns, our party political leaders are locked in power struggles, ranging from petty Twitter spats to arm-twisting in the Knesset.
Unfortunately, the political system seems incapable of breaking out of this cycle. Thus, the only way forward is to build bridges and agreements between civil society leaders. Developing concrete solutions and clear road maps to agreements will signal to the politicians to step back. It is important to advance concrete agreements on core issues.
The leaders of the various groups must go back to dealing with real content, rather than with external appearances. It is their duty to work to reach painful but necessary compromises on issues such as the judicial system, haredi conscription, relations between religion and state, and perhaps even the war in Gaza. There are already several initiatives in these areas, but currently, people do not have the courage to go public and state their willingness to compromise.
Everyone is scared of whataboutism: What will my own camp say about me? And how is it even “permissible” to speak with the other side, who, as everyone knows, is full of traitors and enemies of the people?
We don’t have to agree on everything. Agreements can be limited and partial. The importance of this process lies not in the content itself but in the broader public message it transmits.
We don’t hate one another. We may disagree deeply, but we want and are able to live with each other. We are not trying to create some form of phony unity but to restore mutual trust and the most basic level of political cooperation.
We believe that the most important lesson of Jewish history is that an independent Jewish state is not something that can be taken for granted. There is no guarantee that Israel will survive forever. Without a reduction in the level of hatred, greater trust, and the creation of agreements and the public and political courage to stand behind them, our future is at risk.
Our fathers and mothers established the state for us – one of the most outstanding accomplishments in the history of the Jewish people. During this extremely difficult period of crisis, we need courageous people who understand that part of the challenge of the “day after” is the need to join hands, turn down the heat, and build the foundations of a functioning political system that will ensure our continued and shared existence.
Dr. Netanel Fisher is head of the Department of Public Policy at the Academic Center for Law and Science and a research fellow at the Kohelet Policy Forum. Dr. Adar Cohen is the head of the Department of Teacher Education at the Seymour Fox School of Education at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and formerly, the national inspector of civics-teaching for the Education Ministry.