Conceptual artist and philosopher Adrian Piper, explores, amongst other things, why we resist scrutiny against our beliefs. In Piper’s view, threats to our beliefs threaten the entire self. So we are naturally motivated to shield our beliefs from self-examination.

There are several ways we do this: Sometimes, we consider our beliefs to be objective facts. Other times, we think that, with enough introspection, we’ve achieved some final product — the “correct” set of beliefs. Finally, we often think that our beliefs are the result of critical thinking and the interpretation of reliable information, while the beliefs of others are due to some sort of defect: they have a tendency to read misinformation, their upbringing led to bias, they are uneducated, and so on. These methods allow us to live in an illusion where we are always correct and those who don’t agree with us are fundamentally mistaken.

Israel and Hamas have recently reached a ceasefire agreement and, if peace persists, many of us will begin to reckon with Israel’s actions throughout the war. The reason why this particular debate demands reconciliation with Piper’s framework is that these strategies of protecting our ideology are no longer just theoretical when it comes to the Israel-Palestine conflict; lives are on the line.

Given our current political climate, I feel the need to add that I am Jewish, and I grew up supporting Israel just as the vast majority of Jewish kids did. Until recently, I still did.

As Israel ramped up its attacks on Gaza, killed more and more civilians, and committed several war crimes, many of us Jews adopted the strategies that Piper describes. We insisted that people who came out in support of Palestine were ignorantly hopping on the most recent and trendy left-wing train. We insisted that pro-Palestine rhetoric was the latest form of subtle (or not-so-subtle) antisemitism. We insisted that Hamas held 100% of the blame for the catastrophic death toll in Gaza. We insisted that those dying were indoctrinated from birth and already terrorists in the making. We even insisted that the death toll and the famine were calculated works of antisemitic fiction.

It’s understandable why we did these things: Israel is a core aspect of many Jews’ identity. To come to terms with the evils that Israel has committed is to doubt our entire morality, ideology, and sense of self.

And yet, especially on WashU’s campus (and even in WashU’s administration), I’m constantly troubled to see how many stand strong with a cause that I (and many experts alongside me) have come to view as genocidal and brutal. If the deaths of tens and tens of thousands won’t provoke self-examination, what will?

I want to stress the basic, indisputable facts of the conflict. Since Oct. 8, 2023, more than 65,000 Palestinians have died in Gaza. At least 20,000 of these are children. The death toll is likely far higher, due to the difficulty in accounting for the entire Gazan population amidst the mass destruction of the area. More than 167,000 Palestinians have been wounded, and over 2 million have lost their homes. Over 200 journalists and 1,500 doctors have been killed, and more than 1,300 Palestinians have been killed simply seeking food, water, or healthcare.

If you have remained loyal to Israel, your first instinct upon reading the former paragraph was likely defensiveness; we’ve been conditioned to react this way to protect ourselves. To accept that these horrid acts were done purposely by the Israeli government would entail doubt on everything that many of us have come to believe. And I would agree that a lot of current rhetoric is designed to make you feel defensive — it comes at your morals, your upbringing, your religious convictions — it alienates you further in your beliefs. But, trust me, it’s not too late to stand up for what’s right and agree with the expert assessment: Israel has committed a genocide by purposely or recklessly killing tens of thousands of innocent civilians, many of whom are children.

It hurts to subject yourself to self-examination; it’s vulnerable, confusing, and completely voluntary. It might go against every instinct you have or invite criticism from your loved ones. But I urge you to consider: People are dying. I’m not asking for a paradigm shift, but I hope this article stirs even a sliver of doubt regarding the motives of your opinions. Because, as Piper says, “I am talking not just about you, but about us.”