I prefer not to write about politics and politicians. In this polarized climate we live in everything becomes a provocation, every word said in favor or against a politician (or a cause that has become politicized) immediately casts one in an immutable box that does not reflect the totality of a specific human being and their thoughts, their heart, their essence. Nonetheless, I feel compelled to comment on last week’s storming of the Capitol building.
On January 6, 2021, the American experiment was tried, when a mob of insurgents attacked the Capitol as a protest to the result of the presidential elections. They were motivated by the perpetuation of a lie (that there was extensive fraud in the counting of the votes), by the shameless desire to hold on to the presidency (without any thought to the consequences of such act), by misinformation and by inflammatory speech (by the sitting president, by the right-wing media, by shameless operatives that gain much by sowing discord). And while the liberal media can be blamed for exaggeration sometimes, this is not the case this time. The Capitol building was stormed and vandalized by a group of people who internalized the message spewed by one strand of the political, and it resulted on what we saw this past Wednesday. In 2021 America, any speech that promotes hate and confusion is unacceptable. The words that motivated this violence are the kind of words that have been said for many years, that pit one American against the other, that diminishes people who do not share one’s point of view, words that fan the flames of friction. To a certain extent we all participate in the words that pit one American against the other. The difference is that some people have resorted to violence and hatred-motivated actions, while others have not.
I am reminded of a passage in the Pirkei Avot (Chapter 5:17), a collection of teachings by rabbis from the 1st and 2nd centuries CE:
“Every controversy that happens in the name of Heaven is destined to be permanent, and every discussion that is not in the name of Heaven will not last. Which is the kind of controversy that is in the name of Heaven? That which happened between Hillel and Shammai. Which is the kind of controversy not in the name of Heaven? The one perpetrated by Korach and his followers.”
The sages Hillel and Shammai disagreed about everything relating to Jewish Law, and their followers continued their tradition. The Talmud records their heated debates about Jewish Law and how to perform God’s commandments, and about how to live Jewishly. They disagreed about the implementation, not about the final goal, which was to determine the best way to live in community respecting the Divine.
Korach disagreed with Moses about who should be the leader. Moses was the leader of the people, and Korach wanted that status. The text of the Hebrew Bible reads (Numbers 16:1): “And Korach, son of Izhar son of Kohath son of Levi, betook himself” along with a few other people, “to revolt against Moses.” Rashi, a medieval Jewish Biblical commentator, explains the strange wording “betook himself”: Korach wanted the leadership for his personal vanity, not for the good of the community. His name will never be remembered for good, because all he wanted was the power, eschewing the difficulties involved with trying to balance a community’s needs (a huge part of leadership).
According to our tradition, the people that incited the events on January 6th will not be remembered kindly in history and in our collective memory. They will always be remembered as the people who did not care for the country, only for their power. And I long for the days in which our country will behave in the manner of Hillel and Shammai (and their followers), who had heated debates in the academy but lived together as a good community. May this country be able to stop the vitriol that only destroys, that does not build, the words that do not add any value to our community.