The very definition of ‘cognitive dissonance’


John Kerry used the word “apartheid” in reference to Israel, according to a story in The Daily Beast. “The secretary of state said that if Israel doesn’t make peace soon, it could become ‘an apartheid state,’ like the old South Africa. Jewish leaders are fuming over the comparison.”

The “Jewish state” “might” “become” an “apartheid state” in time?

Future historians will have trouble believing that denial runs as deep as it does. But it does. Here’s the Telegraph from a couple of months ago, reporting on the reaction when Kerry, who was still at the table, warned that people might start boycotting Israel someday.

“Might.” “Someday.”

Yuval Steinitz, the intelligence and strategic affairs minister and a close ally of Mr Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister, said America’s top diplomat was ‘holding a gun to [Israel’s] head.’

‘The things Kerry said are hurtful, they are unfair and they are intolerable,’ Mr Steinitz told reporters…..

Naftali Bennett, the industry minister and leader of the far-Right Jewish Home party, said: ‘We expect of our friends in the world to stand by our side against the attempts to impose an anti-Semitic boycott on Israel, and not to be their mouthpiece.’ His comments were echoed by Adi Mintz, a senior official in the Settler’s Council, who accused Mr Kerry of ‘an anti-Semitic initiative.’

You’d expect far right Zionists to say things like this; the fact that as many liberal Jews believe it as they do defies belief. It is the very definition of ‘cognitive dissonance.’

One thought on “The very definition of ‘cognitive dissonance’

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s