We're not just arguing about politics, we're defending our identity | Dr. Shimi Shagiv

Dr. Shimi Shagiv argues that political polarization in Israel is not merely a debate over facts, but an identity-based and physical process. He explains that when a political stance becomes part of one's identity, an attack on it is perceived as an existential threat, activating defense mechanisms and reducing the ability to listen. Shagiv proposes building a stable and flexible identity that does not depend on an external enemy.

Dr. Shimi Shagiv, in an opinion piece in Maariv, analyzes the roots of political polarization in Israel. He argues that the political debate is not just about facts and values, but a deeper process in which the political stance becomes part of personal identity. In this state, an attack on the opinion is perceived as a threat to belonging and values, triggering a physical defensive response. Shagiv explains that facts alone are insufficient to change a position, because the person already belongs to a camp and arranges the facts within the existing narrative. He warns against an "anti-identity" – an identity defined by opposition to the other, rather than by independent values. Politics, he says, exploits feelings of fear, deprivation, and betrayal to strengthen the threatened identity. The solution, according to Shagiv, is not giving up opinions but building a stable and flexible identity, allowing one to stand by values without turning the other into an enemy. He calls for paying attention to the moment when the debate turns into a defensive reaction, and asking what exactly is being defended.