Sometimes political discourse gifts us a phrase so jarring, it instantly leapfrogs the queue of breaking updates, solemn condemnations, and parliamentary bickering. This week’s blue-ribbon winner: Israeli politician Yair Golan warning in a radio interview that “a sane country… does not kill babies for a hobby.” Is there a course where public figures practice phrasing things in precisely the language certain to spark mutual outrage? If so, gold stars all around.
Let’s wade through the rhetorical mire, attribution notebook in hand.
Not Your Everyday Hobby Lobby
Golan, chair of Israel’s Democrats party and, notably, a former major general, made his statement on Kan public radio. According to the Jerusalem Post, he was lamenting Israel’s conduct in the ongoing Gaza conflict and cautioning that “Israel is on the path to becoming a pariah state among the nations – like the South Africa of old – if it does not return to behaving like a sane country.” His litany of what a “sane country” does not do included waging war against civilians, killing babies “for a hobby,” and setting goals involving population expulsion.
The choice of words is, at the very least, memorable—imagine a graduate seminar in political caution tape, with “hobby” as Exhibit A. As detailed by CTV News, Golan’s comment quickly outpaced the regular news cycle and made itself quite comfortable at the center of a media tempest.
Cross-Party Unity: Denouncing the “Hobby”
If there’s one activity all sides of Israeli politics seem to enjoy, it’s denouncing perceived affronts to national honor. In this case, Golan’s phrasing managed the rare feat of drawing fire from government and opposition alike.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu responded by accusing Golan of “outrageous incitement” and claimed his words “echoed the vilest antisemitic blood libels against IDF soldiers and the State of Israel.” Netanyahu’s rebuke, reported by the Jerusalem Post, included a firm insistence that “the IDF is the most moral army in the world, and our soldiers are fighting a battle for our very existence.”
Opposition leader Yair Lapid, not to be left out, posted on X: “Our fighters are heroes and are defending our lives. The statement that they kill children as a hobby is incorrect and is a gift to our enemies,” as cited in multiple reports including Hindustan Times.
Education Minister Yoav Kisch, highlighted by CTV News, called for an investigation into Golan for incitement, reminding the public that Golan currently holds no parliamentary immunity. Meanwhile, military chief Eyal Zamir, in a statement circulating across outlets, expressed dismay at remarks perceived as challenging the “morality” of army conduct.
A full bingo card, really—a rare, if fleeting, bipartisan moment.
Golan’s Clarification: Aim for the Leaders, Not the Grunts
With just about every corner of the Israeli establishment weighing in, the original message quickly got buried under a pile of official statements and digital side-eye. Golan’s clarification (if you can call Twitter clarifications “clarifying”) attempted to extract the military from the rhetorical blast zone. As picked up by CTV News, Golan stressed at a press conference that his criticism was squarely aimed at the government, describing the army as “my home and in my heart.” He followed this with a familiar motif: “A government that says we can abandon hostages and starve children is a government that speaks like a spokesperson for Hamas.”
There’s a certain grim symmetry here—an inflammatory phrase requiring a cascade of statements explaining its true intent, topped off with follow-up interviews ensuring absolutely no one is satisfied.
For those hoping the “hobby” phrasing was a translation hiccup, Ehud Barak’s commentary in the Jerusalem Post offers a gentler read: Barak called Golan “a brave and direct man,” suggested the statement was meant for the political echelon, and diplomatically noted, “maybe it would have been better for him to choose one or two different words.” No argument there.
Hobbyhorse or Headline?
It’s clear no one, including Golan himself, truly thinks “killing babies for a hobby” is on anyone’s national agenda. Yet the phrase has a sticky persistence—the sort of line that’s equal parts lost in translation, rhetorical Hail Mary, and instant diplomatic liability. The Daily Star adds that Golan has been an outspoken critic of Netanyahu’s government, and this is hardly his first brush with controversy over remarks on Israel’s moral direction.
The whole episode reads as a case study in the dangers of metaphor under pressure (and perhaps that even in an age of political crisis, a single word can still snag headlines from every angle).
Aftertaste
If nothing else, this peculiar dust-up affirms one truism of contemporary politics: with enough rhetorical velocity, an ill-chosen “hobby” can momentarily unify even the most fractious assembly. Is it possible for a political metaphor to survive first contact with social media and twenty-four-hour translation cycles? Or is there now a secret contest among officials to see who can produce the next headline to stop a nation mid-scroll?
Either way, one imagines future speechwriters will be giving the synonym list for “policy, practice, or activity” a little extra scrutiny. Some hobbies are best left at home.
