Q&A: Right-Left Correlation and the Hostages
Right-Left Correlation and the Hostages
Question
Hello and blessings,
For a long time now I’ve been trying to understand the strange correlation: right wing — against a hostage deal, left wing — in favor of a deal.
Why is this connected at all?
The clear facts are that rescuing the hostages will most likely come at a certain cost in blood. Why is a right-wing person unwilling to pay that price while a left-wing person is? What’s the connection?
I assume you have a well-developed view on the matter, and I’d be glad if you shared it with me.
Answer
Opposition to a deal sets the good of the collective against the good of the hostages (who are individuals). That is a right-wing nationalist outlook, which places the nation above the individuals. The left places the individual at the center, and therefore tends toward supporting a deal.
Discussion on Answer
The future price is uncertain (maybe people will be harmed and maybe not, and who will be harmed. It should be remembered that the October 7 attack was our fault and happened because of our failure), whereas the present price is certain (if we do not save the hostages, they will die or languish in captivity all their lives). Therefore, from the perspective of individuals, there is no clear price here, and uncertainty does not override certainty. From the perspective of the collective, there is damage (a present threat) to the public. To put it differently: right now it is not clear who will be harmed, even if there are indeed people who will be harmed. From the perspective of individuals, each person takes upon himself the risk that perhaps he will not be harmed. From a collective perspective, it is clear that part of the public will be harmed, and it is certain that the public is not willing to take that upon itself.
Thank you.
What you write is extremely strange.
That would make sense if we were talking about "national honor," "national pride," and the like.
But here we’re talking about security considerations, and about a bloody price that will likely be paid in the future, and that too will be paid by "individuals."
Does the fact that those individuals are "part of the collective" cancel out the fact that they are also, at the same time, "individuals" who also have a right to live here?
I can’t understand you.