Sweden’s strategy could well have worked if they committed to it. They didn’t actually go for “herd immunity” as you claim, and had a number of lockdown restrictions in place, although to a lesser degree than some other places. They unfortunately had some early blunders with nursing home protocols, and over half their deaths are from nursing homes specifically. But if you correct for that, they would be looking a lot better.
As for isolating the elderly or vulnerable - it’s not a cognitive dissonance. Two different parties both have a right to liberties, the ability to assess risk trade offs for themselves, and agency to make their own decisions. Those who are risk averse can quarantine themselves indefinitely, while those who aren’t can continue with their lives unimpeded. What exactly is the dissonance?