I am distressed by the ferocity evident in the letters to the editor regarding the upcoming presidential election. It seems that partisans of each side are certain that if the other side wins, the apocalypse will ensue. In this way I think that The Jewish Link’s readers are taking their cues from the candidates themselves and their surrogates. Trump and his allies say that if Harris wins the state of Israel will cease to exist in two years. Harris and her allies say that if Trump wins then our constitutional republic will cease to exist. I think the likelihood of either of these predictions coming true is minimal, but it nonetheless fans the fires.

This ferocity reminds me of 1995, when people were calling Yitzhak Rabin a “rodef” (in which case the halacha would sanction his assassination) and then seemed surprised when someone acted on that opinion and killed him. Is anyone really surprised that there have been attempts to assassinate Trump? Is it so unreasonable for someone to take in the rhetoric against him and conclude that defeating him is too important to be left to the ballot, and instead decides the issue with a bullet?

As a student of U.S. history, I can only think of one previous election where either side was this adamant that the election of their opponent would be a disaster for the country, and that’s 1860. Southern states at that time chose secession, and ultimately civil war, as preferable to accepting the election of Abraham Lincoln. Is that where we are today? I certainly hope not. But I fear that not everyone agrees that four years of their opponent’s presidency would be preferable to a repeat of 1861-1865.

I yearn for the presidential elections of my youth, when Democrats could accept Richard Nixon’s 1968 victory and Republicans could accept Jimmy Carter’s in 1976, and the losing side in both elections could console themselves in the hope that four years hence they would field a better candidate and advocate more popular policies. Republicans today need to say that four years of Harris will not spell the demise of our country, and Democrats need to say that they would prefer another four years of Trump to a successful assassination attempt.

Each side (and its partisans) also needs to remember that approximately half of their fellow citizens disagree with them on this race. For our country to be strong and to operate at peak efficiency on behalf of all its citizens, it needs the collective wisdom of all, regardless of party. We must find a way to stop insisting that any idea or bill sponsored by the other side is, by definition, unacceptable. We need to find a way to tone down the rhetoric, yell less and listen more.

I also think that we Jews, with the victim’s memory of the terrible power of hate speech, should be particularly sensitive to this issue. We should be the leading voices for moderation, demanding that the public arena be a forum for debate over ideas and policy, not ad hominem attacks. Let’s agree to concede that whatever their differences over policy, both candidates are patriotic Americans who sincerely believe that their election will do the most good for the most citizens, if for no other reason that the alternative is too frightening to contemplate.

Murray Sragow

Teaneck