Cognitive dissonance is what happens when a person holds two sets of beliefs at odds with each other. The human brain doesn’t like logical inconsistencies, so someone experiencing cognitive dissonance performs mental gymnastics to justify their opinions. These arguments don’t hold up to outside scrutiny and it becomes an endless feedback loop of justifying one’s own wrong opinions with more wrong reasoning.
Many minority groups are particularly susceptible to cognitive dissonance. It can lead to searching for a different scapegoat or minority to blame for society’s actions. As a member of the LGBTQ+ community, I admit that it’s very isolating being in the “out-group” of society. Being considered abnormal leaves a hole in your heart, just begging for a community to fill it. That can lead some people of minority status to search for acceptance and validation elsewhere, particularly in fringe political groups. They fall further and further down the rabbit hole and bond over a shared hatred of other minority groups. They consider themselves above those minorities because they’re special and they’re different. They’re one of the good ones.
It’s pitiful to watch, though sometimes the irony of the situation can be funny. When I need a good laugh at the absurdity of human behavior, I scroll through Blaire White’s social media page, and watch other far-right political commentators of minority status. It’s a bad habit, I know, but it’s hilarious to me to see these people uplift ideologies that are so at odds with an unchangeable part of their existence: their labels.
The worst part is that they don’t seem to realize how they look to the members of the groups they’re trying to appeal to. They parrot the harmful rhetoric of their new “in-group” they’ve seemingly found acceptance in. They may draw false equivalencies between the mixed bag of reactions to their controversial identities. They seem to take pride in how special they are, how their two conflicting identities, usually political and minority, are so rare to find in tandem. They seem to want to overcompensate for their identity with their politics. But their political “allies” are always laughing at them behind closed doors. They are the butt of the joke on all fronts.
What’s even more shocking is what happens when their political “allies” are elected. They fail to come to the reasonable conclusion that a party that believes in restricting the rights of minorities will restrict their rights too. They come to the illogical conclusion that they will be exempt because they are special and parrot the talking points of hatred. They are deluded into thinking they are a part of the “in-group” of their fringe political group. In reality, they are in just as much danger as their fellow minority. There is no such thing as being “one of the good ones”. We are not immune to the consequences of our behaviors.
On the other end of the spectrum of cognitive dissonance is intersectionality. Intersectionality is when the overlap between minority statuses causes a unique understanding of discrimination. Usually, when someone experiences persecution based on an unchangeable part of their identity, they develop a stronger sense of empathy. They realize how stupid it is to draw lines between race, religion, sexuality, gender, nationality, et cetera. They don’t want anyone else to live through the difficulties, discrimination or danger that they have faced. This is a normal, human response.
Being disenfranchised generally gives one a certain outlook on life, barring outliers such as sufferers of cognitive dissonance. It’s why women tend to be more left-leaning politically than men. It’s why it’s so hard to find an openly queer or non-white Neo-Nazi, Zionist or any variety of fringe political group (outside of social media). It’s odd and does not fit neatly within their scope of life. They’re hammering the square peg of their existence into a round hole– it just doesn’t make sense.
Though some victims of cognitive dissonance may accuse people whose morals align with their actions of having a mob mentality, it’s obvious who is truly being unduly influenced. It’s not crazy to assume that most members of the LGBTQ+ community are pro-equality, pro-union, and pro-Palestine. We have a firsthand understanding of how hatred and propaganda are terrible weapons and that a little bit of empathy can go a long way. All of these ideologies are linked; your experiences don’t live in a vacuum separate from your opinions.
All this to say, when you meet a victim of cognitive dissonance, you have several options. The easiest option is to get angry or laugh at their ridiculousness. A more difficult, time-consuming option is to poke holes through their arguments, in the hope that they will see the light of reason. Though it may be in vain, it can’t hurt. It may sow the seeds of doubt in their own mind. It may stop other people from falling victim to the same logical fallacies and flawed reasoning. But at the end of the day, you can’t just travel into someone’s brain and force them to understand how inconsistent and hateful they are being. Some people are comfortable being wrong. Though it may be their right to have their own opinions, it is also my right to point out how bad these opinions may be. I’ve accepted that we may always be at odds, much like the gap between their two identities.
I’ve gotten 10x the hate thrown at me for my pro gun ownership stance than for me being a gay man.
It’s almost funny how close you are to getting it. By lumping Zionists in with Neo-Nazis and “fringe political groups”, you ignore the minority and marginalized status of Jews. American Jews, who make up less than 3% of the national population, are majority (~90%) Zionist.
Given that we are a marginalized minority, shouldn’t you more critically examine how you are relating to our experiences? When a Jew tells you something is antisemitic, do you stop and listen, as our DEI practices encourage? Or do you dismiss it, because it goes against your worldview? When a Jew tells you that we want to be safe in our own homeland, do you stop and listen, or do you change the subject? When a Jew tells you that we do not feel safe on UConn, do you stop and listen, or do you laugh at us?
How many Jews have you spoken to about Zionism?
How many members of the Daily Campus board are Jews? How many are associated with SJP/BDS/UConn Divest? Doesn’t intersectionality remind us that these questions are appropriate?
We have been talking for years on campus about how it is not the role of white people to speak over PoC (particularly Black people) and determine what is or isn’t racist. Why, then, is the Daily Campus plagued by non-Jews opining about what antisemitism is? Is it because we don’t count in your DEI framework? Is it because you are applying American ideas about race to the Middle East? Is it because you don’t know your history?
I am really trying to understand what is missing here. For some reason, nearly every Jew I talk to (including the anti-Zionist ones) understand what is happening in Israel and how that is impacting American Jewry. They understand the context of American Jewish history. They understand the role of Israel in Judaism.
But we have hundreds of people on campus who could not point to neither Israel nor Palestine on a map on October 6th (probably still can’t, for that matter), who have suddenly become experts in the conflict.
What will it take for you to hear us?
“Alfred”, you seem to be contradicting yourself. On the one hand you seem to be implying that Jews are a monolith when it comes to Israel, Zionism, etc. and that non-Jews having differing opinions is not only wrong but perpetuates antisemitism, akin to speaking over POC.
But then you go on to say that you’ve spoken with anti-zionist Jews on this very topic! When it comes to deferring to a minority group for their opinion, is it majority rule? Are only our fellow Jews allowed to disagree on topics like zionism and Israel, which are the #1 _American_ foreign policy issue of today?
I don’t think you give people enough credit, Jewish or otherwise. Your ideological opponents aren’t some brain dead mass, they’re just as intelligent as you are. Yes, there are ignorant people in your opposition, just as there are plenty of ignorant people alongside you. Try approaching this as equals rather than immediately assuming ignorance, you never know whether you’re talking to a fellow Jew, a Palestinian, or someone who otherwise has extensive knowledge.
Jews are not a monolith on the issue of Zionism, but the DC’s focus on the minority of a minority that is anti-Zionist Jews is akin to the tokenization we see with, for example, Blacks for Trump.
It is not wrong for non-Jews to have opinions about the issue, but it is wrong for the Daily Campus to center non-Jewish opinions of Jewish topics. Because the Daily Campus does not disclose its connections with SJP, JVP, BDS, Hillel, etc., it is impossible to take an intersectional approach to these opinion pieces. Where is the positionality? When we see articles about antisemitism, are they from the perspectives of Jews? How can we tell?
The bit of speaking over is when non-Jews at UConn feel they have the have the right to decide what is or isn’t antisemitism. Sure, Jews will disagree about whether something is antisemitic or not, but I’m not sure I see the place for non-Jews in that conversation. Certainly not in a campus newspaper that is, by the looks of it, firmly attached to a movement that decenters Jewish voices.
Me again. Thank you for your response. You should understand that writing in the Daily Campus is largely submitted by volunteers, and that any student can volunteer to write any given week. It’s not that the DC is centering anti-zionist Jews, it’s that we’re taking the initiative to volunteer writing for the student paper, and zionist students appear to be doing so at a lower rate.
Also, if you’re not a student, you can still submit letters to the editor, or (I believe) op-eds on behalf of an organization. Jewish zionist students, community members, and organizations have ample opportunity to publish their views in this paper. In fact, there have been at least 2 articles just this semester written as advertisements or defenses of Hillel, a zionist student organization.
As you’re aware, this generation of students skews anti-zionist, and the editorial board’s published editorials reflects that. This is the case in Jewish student publications like New Voices as well. Jews are being increasingly critical of Israel and zionism on the whole, with those most critical skewing young.
This paper has had similar coverage in recent past years under a Jewish editor-in-chief and Jewish managers. I believe you’d also find that Jewish writers are disproportionately represented among those who have written articles critical of Israel and zionism.
If zionist students want more zionist coverage, they’ll have to stop complaining and start writing.