There is a story about a well-known polemicist who, when called by a media outlet and asked to participate in a debate, would ask: "What position do you want me to present?" After being invited to present the desired opinion, he would appear for the debate and passionately present the arguments for the position he was asked to represent.
Such exercises are also done in rhetoric studies: students are asked to present positions for the purpose of discussion, regardless of their personal identification with those positions. But what can be amusing in a school exercise becomes cynical and despicable behavior when adopted by public representatives.
Everything is on the agenda.
Unfortunately, this is the reality that has developed in our country in recent years. You can't believe a word that comes out of the mouths of elected officials, because they change their opinions like socks, depending on the political wind that blows. They can passionately claim today that it is day, and tomorrow at the same time they will claim that it is night, and when you ask how that fits with what they said yesterday, they will stammer something like 'it's not the same thing.'.
Instead of a genuine debate based on beliefs, values, facts, and logic, we witness an arena filled with shifting agendas and interests. Opinion itself has lost its weight; what matters is only who said it and who it serves at a given moment.
Reversing positions according to immediate need does not reflect a process of disillusionment and a change of perceptions through learning or observing the changing reality, but rather the behavior of a political chameleon. Factual integrity has been sacrificed on the altar of tribal loyalty.
When public debate is emptied of factual content, it loses its value and meaning, because you know that the people who speak with such great passion don't believe a single word they say.
And this is very sad, because one of the defining characteristics of Jewish culture throughout the ages is the debate on the subject. 'Dispute for the sake of heaven' was considered an essential tool among the people of Israel for clarifying issues. The great sages of Israel argued with each other fiercely, but out of deep mutual respect, in the pursuit of discovering the truth. Whereas in today's public sphere, it seems that the debate on the subject has almost completely disappeared.
The price of cynicism
This situation comes at a heavy price. When the public looks at its elected officials and opinion leaders and sees how positions change according to the political need of the moment, trust in public systems collapses. Cynicism becomes the central point of view, and the sense of alienation grows. If everything is an agenda and a position, there is no longer any point in listening, trying to understand, or having a dialogue.
The fix for this situation begins with each of us. We must refuse to be drawn into the divisive tribal discourse, and demand – from ourselves and our elected officials – a return to the essence. We must learn to have a meaningful and genuine discourse, to listen to each other, and to seek solutions instead of blaming.
Only if we succeed in bringing integrity back to center stage, and force public representatives to understand that principles are not perishable tools but spiritual and moral anchors, will we be able to restore public discourse and trust in the words of elected officials. This will be the first step that will lead to bringing hearts closer together and healing the rift that has opened up in the nation, not least by cynical and partisan politics.
