"Denial is a defense mechanism postulated by Sigmund Freud, in which a person is faced with a fact that is too uncomfortable to accept and rejects it instead, insisting that it is not true despite what may be overwhelming evidence. The subject may deny the reality of the unpleasant fact altogether (simple denial), admit the fact but deny its seriousness (minimisation) or admit both the fact and seriousness but deny responsibility (transference). The concept of denial is particularly important to the study of addiction. The theory of denial was first researched seriously by Anna Freud. She classified denial as a mechanism of the immature mind, because it conflicts with the ability to learn from and cope with reality." (Wikipedia)
Ever since Theodor Herzl's sloganistic misrepresentation of Palestine as 'A land without a people for a people without a land', Zionists have been resorting to the familiar psychological mechanism of denial.
Most recently, at a 'literary' gathering in Jerusalem, the faithful were told by Japanese novelist Haruki Murakami that "Between a high, solid wall and an egg that breaks against it, I will always stand on the side of the egg." In my post on the subject, Haruki (Jerusalem Prize) Murakami (26/2/09), I concerned myself mainly with Murakami's willing participation in what was after all just another Israeli PR stunt. I perhaps should have added that his wall and egg metaphor hardly does justice to the settler- colonial dynamic of the struggle between Palestinians and Israelis, suggesting Israel's implacability and might but not its genocidal behaviour. A far more apt metaphor for the Zionist invasion, ethnic cleansing, occupation, caging, and brutalisation of the Palestinians is that of the hammer and the anvil.
Nevertheless, for most of us, however inadequate Murakami's metaphor, it is pretty clear that Israel is the wall and the Palestinians are the eggs that have broken, and are continuing to break, against it. Most of us, that is, but not your Zionist faithful. Just stand back and watch as Jerusalem Post blogger Sherri Mandell's denial mechanism kicks in in classic fashion:-
"With all due respect and appreciation for Murakami's phenomenal talent, just once I would like it if an artist could come here and talk about his art rather than our politics... We are like masochists who invite others here to chastise us and then give them a prize for so doing. For a smart people, I have to say, we are really dumb. Back to the egg and the wall. It makes sense that Murakami stands on the side of the fragile egg. An egg is more alluring than a wall. Not only can it be easily cracked, it can easily hatch. It is vulnerable, yet full of possibility. It is nuanced, multifaceted, and open to interpretation. That high, solid wall, on the other hand, is monolithic and closed - big and hard and ghastly, a product, no doubt, of the military-industrial complex. But there is an important question: Who is breaking the egg? We don't know in Murakami's analogy. The egg simply breaks against against the overwhelming power of the wall. It is assumed that it is the fault of the wall. And yet, in another scenario, the owner of the egg could be angry at the wall's owner and fling it at the wall. The wall (assuming it has a will) doesn't intend to smash the egg to smithereens; instead it is the desire of the owner of the egg to shatter it. There are other ways for the analogy to unfold. Suppose the egg is filled with poison. Or suppose the wall looks solid but is actually made of eggs? Contrary to appearances, there is not one side here who is vulnerable. We Israelis are also vulnerable, egglike. Just ask the women from Sderot... It may look like we Israelis are the wall and the poor Gazans are the egg, but that egg isn't poor Humpty Dumpty just sitting there. That egg is a bomb." (Heart-earned wisdom: the egg and the wall, 25/2/09)