Setting an example -- for good or otherwise

Avot Today is non-political, for the very good reason that Pirkei Avot is directed at how we humans should behave. It is not a political manifesto. This does not however mean that we do not discuss politicians. The very nature of their profession demands that they be in the public eye and that their words and thoughts receive a high level of publicity. What’s more, since the relationship between politicians and the general public is—or should be—founded on trust, we often demand to hear from them even when they may be reluctant to speak to us. Finally, politicians set an example: their high media profile provides a platform for them to project themselves, deliberately or otherwise, as role models whose words and actions may be copied by others.

In July 2022, Avot Today posed some questions about the sort of behaviour we might expect of politicians (see “Thinking better of politicians: can it be done?” on Facebook and on the Avot Today blog). We return to it now, following a report posted yesterday on the Jerusalem Post website headed: “Almog Cohen apologizes for ‘disrespectful’ insults hurled at fellow MKs” (here).

The article details the words spoken and the reception which they received. Rabbi Eliezer ben Hyrcanus (Avot 2:15) teaches that the kavod of one’s chaver (difficult to translate: “the respect to which to one’s fellow human is entitled”) should be as dear to us as the respect to which we are entitled. This suggests a test of reciprocity. Before saying anything to another person, we should stop and think how we might feel if the same words were spoken back to us. If we would feel hurt, insulted or abused, that should set of an alarm bell in our minds that tells us not to say those words.

Politicians will tell us, correctly, that parliamentary debates are often conducted in an atmosphere of anger or frustration in which it is easy to lose one’s temper. They will equally correctly observe that, in the heat of debate, it is easy to say things that are offensive and which one may later regret having said. But Avot does not regard any of this as an excuse. Offensive behaviour towards others and the loss of one’s self-control in a fit of fury are no more permissible in the Knesset (or any other parliament) than they are in family discussions, in traffic jams, in the shops or in hospitals.  In the teaching of Rabbi Eliezer quoted above, we are warned not to let ourselves be easily angered. Later, at 5:14, Avot deems a person who is quick to anger and slow to calm down as being a rasha, evil.  The definition of someone who is strong is that of the person who can exercise self-control (4:1). From this we might reasonably include that a parliament full of people who insult others and lose their temper is a parliament of the weak and the wicked.

Having insulted and disrespected others, the proper course is to apologise. While this is not explicitly stipulated in Pirkei Avot, it is part and parcel of Rabbi Eliezer’s advice to treat the kavod of others as being as dear to us as our own. Just as insulting political opponents does not refute their arguments, so too does apologizing for insulting them not constitute an acceptance or validation of their arguments. In an ideal world, an apology to the person one has offended will be accompanied by teshuvah, genuine repentance for what one has said or done. Since teshuvah is a matter between the offender and God, we cannot know if it is efficacious or not. However, an important ingredient of teshuvah is the commitment of the penitent person not to do the same thing again: since so much of what politicians say and do is open to the public, it is often easy to spot the activities of a habitual reoffender.

Politicians are no more or less human than the rest of us, and we cannot say with confidence that we would behave any better than those we have elected, had we been in the same place, since we are not subject to the same pressures (see Hillel at Avot 2:5).  Even so, we are entitled to expect an acceptable level of conduct from them and we are entitled to express our disappointment and our disapproval when they do not. Two moral qualities in particular, identified by Avot, often appear to be in short supply among our elected representatives. One is that of acknowledging the truth (Avot 5:9); the other is that of being grateful to receive criticism (Avot 6:6). I for one look forward to the day these deficiencies are remedied.