Moral Clarity vs. Moral Purity
While there can be, in fact, several simultaneous moral clarities, moral purity can only sustain a single narrative.
The headline of Yideot Achronot reads: "The Mistake, the Investigation and the Price."
These days an expression we often hear bandied about is “moral clarity.” After October 7, a congregant wrote to thank me for my "moral clarity" in condemning what for me was a clear example of genocidal terror, by Hamas. But the praise made me uneasy. It was as if to say that such strident, uncompromising posturing was a goal that we all should strive for, at all times. But sometimes clarity itself can be a bit unclear and there can be a fine line separating moral clarity from a moral muddle. Just as a snow bank can go from pristine white to a sooty grey in just a few days, so can a war yield fifty shades of moral clarity in just a few months. And we need to account for all of them.
There is a difference between moral clarity and moral purity, where the narrative reigns supreme, even if it means massaging the facts and gerrymandering truths from time to time. While there can be, in fact, several simultaneous moral clarities, moral purity can only sustain a single narrative.
As a Jew who is devoted to the values of my faith tradition and dedicating to supporting a flourishing Jewish and democratic state of Israel, here are two truths facts that are crystal clear right now:
Oct 7 was outright evil - and it is our moral obligation to make sure Hamas never is in a position to harm any Israeli (or their own people) ever again.
An attack on innocent aid workers who are not associated with a terror group is also morally abhorrent. So is the starvation that is happening in Gaza right now.
Israel has seriously degraded Hamas's fighting capacity over the past six months. Mazal tov. But all of that has been completely undermined by actions such as what happened this week. Mission unaccomplished.
In the meantime, those who choose to condemn Israel without saying in the same breath that Hamas has forfeited its right to govern - that's tantamount to saying that Israel has no right to exist in security. If their goal is to bring about a peaceful resolution to the conflict, then for them too, Mission unaccomplished.
I care about Israel enough to understand that moral clarity demands that I forego moral purity. I will not sign on to any permanent ceasefire that can't ultimately lead to the release of all hostages and the end of Hamas rule. Nor will I sign on to defending Israeli actions that deny the humanity of innocent people living in Gaza.
I can live with moral clarities that appear to conflict. I cannot live with a moral purity that requires me to uncomfortably spew propaganda in order to sustain a narrative. Yes, there is severe hunger in Gaza. Yes, all the Israeli hostages must be released. One truth cannot be uttered without acknowledging the other. This is not a question of bothsidesism or moral equivalence. Caring for people in distress is the right thing to do; it is not a question of what is more right. John Wesley’s adage rings so true at a time like this:
Do all the good you can, by all the means you can, in all the ways you can, in all the places you can, at all the times you can, to all the people you can, as long as ever you can.
It is possible to be devoted to Israel without having to pass a purity test. It is possible to wish for a better future for Palestinians without demonizing Israel. The path of moral clarity - not moral purity - is the path that will ultimately help us all out of this quagmire.