On Tuesday, the author of Harry Potter, J.K. Rowling, justified her stance in opposition to a cultural boycott of Israel, drawing from J.K. Rowling's mega-successful book series of lessons about the state of being great significance of remaining engaged with the other side, without being affected by holding deep-seated differences.
Last week, The British novelist made famous as the author of the Harry Potter fantasy series - J.K. Rowling, was among some 150 U.K. signatories to a letter published in the Guardian against a cultural boycott of Israel. The letter was a written answer to a declaration by 700 U.K. artists who gave information about their intention to boycott the country earlier this year.
The letter that was signed by J.K. Rowling and others stated, "Cultural boycotts singling out Israel are tending to cause disagreement and discriminatory, and will not further peace," "Open dialogue and interaction further the progress of greater understanding and mutual acceptance, and it is through such the ability to understand and acceptance that movement can be made as regards to a resolution of the conflict."
The signature of the author who won multiple awards spawned a number of online messages taking aggressive action against J.K. Rowling as a "Zionist" and even accusing Rowling of destroying their childhoods as a result of her stance.
On Monday, J.K. Rowling elaborated her position and stated, "expressed strong disapproval on most of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's actions in office." "However, I do not believe that a cultural boycott will force the Israeli Prime Minister from power, nor have I ever heard of a cultural boycott ending a bloody and prolonged serious disagreement," "If any bring about are felt from the proposed protest, it will be by ordinary Israelis, many of whom did not vote for Mr Netanyahu. ... At a time when the stigmatisation of beliefs and ethnicities seems to be on the upward movement, I believe strongly that cultural dialogue and the action of working with someone, is more important than ever before and that cultural boycotts are divisive, discriminatory and counter-productive."
