Judaism 3.0 : Judaism’s Transformation To Zionism

by Gol Kalev

First Disrupter – creation of the United St...

First and foremost, through the values of the American Revolution, Americans liberated themselves from the eternal European practice of blaming the Jews for Europe’s own problems.

The American Revolution countered this European blame-game by replacing it with a strong notion of self-determination and accountability – concepts foreign to Europe, long living in a feudal system and under monarchy. Indeed, core to the American Revolution was taking control of one’s destiny.

Americans no longer needed to thank the monarch when things were good, nor blame the Jews when things were bad.

Second disrupter – creation of the State of Israel (old Zion)

(a) European Jew-haters can no longer bully the weakling. The weakling now has its own state, its own army, its own might.

(b) The imbalanced equation that existed for centuries was violated. The Jews were no longer “a guest who never hosts.” Jews turned from being refugees into “homeowners.”

The European relations towards the Jew have been deeply rooted since the beginning of European-Christian civilization in the core notions of Replacement Theology and the Suffering Remnant.

Consequently, for Europeans, a weak Jew has been a natural core aspect of life. Moreover, any sign that the Jews are no longer weak would run in sharp contradiction to this core notion, and hence, the Jew gaining strength would present an existential crisis for the European.

The Protestant and then Catholic Church reversed course and disavowed previous beliefs, as well as the Church’s desire to keep the Jews weak. Therefore, religious Christians today not only have the tools to deal with a strong Jew, but by their own belief and Church guidance, are supportive of such strengthening of Judaism.

Secular Christians do not have the tools of the religious Christians. For many of them, there is this distant memory, some notion deep inside that for some reason, a strong Jew is a negation of their own existence.

Such secular Europeans ended their religious evolution when their ancestors turned secular and hence, were not beneficiary to the shift in the Church’s thinking. They “froze in time” when it came to the Christians’ treatment of Jews,

Hence, in a sense, such secular Europeans are today’s baton-carriers of the Middle Ages’ Church treatment towards the Jews. Secular Europeans are the baton-carriers of the residual notion of Jews as the Suffering Remnant – of Jews needing ...

Israel’s sudden success – in security, economy, innovation, technology – was simply too fast and too difficult to swallow for the secular European.

When Jewish success happens too rapidly, Europeans produce a dangerous counter-reaction. This was the case in the 19th century

Now for the first time, it is not individual Jews, but the entire Jewish nation that is prospering

Can the European who was able to tolerate the weak Jewish nation also tolerate the strong Jewish nation? So far, indications show that he cannot.

The two disrupters to age-old European Jew-hatred are clearly occurring on the Jewish national level, and not the religious level – they are not centered on theological disrupters,

History shows that when a society in Europe felt humiliated, the Jews were often the ones who paid the price.

New troubles are emerging for Europe, and early signs are already there that frustrations are being taken out once again on the Jews.

the new set of frustrations developing in Europe are this time directed at Judaism through Israel. This too is indicative that Judaism has transformed, at least in the eyes of those European aggressors.

Some in today’s Europe have been amassing built-up frustrations, humiliations and anxieties. The shift of global political and economic leadership to the United States, the sudden European fall from grace and loss of its colonies, the rise of Islam in Europe, the trench war against Islamist terrorism and the emerging debate over Europe’s character all have elevated such frustrations to alarming levels.

History shows that as Europeans become terrified, Jews should be worried – in this cycle – the Jewish state.

European governments and the European establishment have openly promoted a narrative that if the Jewish state could solve its conflict with the Palestinians, terrorism and other Middle Eastern issues could also be resolved.

Another derivative of the same myth, also broadly supported by politicians, pundits and journalists is that Europe is paying a price for its political and military support of the Jewish state.

Israeli or Jewish action has nothing to do with the tragedy of terrorism in Europe. Yet, an outlet is needed to direct this European frustration,

inciting the Muslims against the Jewish state as a way to “appease” the Europeans Muslims.

In addition to taming Muslim disdain towards Europe, this is viewed as a way to score political favors for a growing electoral body.

Ironically, for the vast majority of French Muslim voters, Israel is not a priority, or even on their radar screen.

Some believe that the Muslims are used as an outlet by the white Europeans to express the European anti-Semitic stance. For a white European to say something negative about the Jews or Israel is not politically correct, but if he can co-opt the Muslim to do so, then that is not just politically correct, but would even be considered politically incorrect to deny the Muslim the means to vet “his” frustrations against Jews or Israel.

Europeans are under threat from Islam. The Jewish state needs to be sacrificed. What makes this even more alarming is that the mechanism for such sacrifices exists. Unlike in the past, Europe now has a centralized authority to direct all of the earlier deflections – the European Union. The EU is significantly less supportive of Israel than any of the governments that compose its union.

The Europeans’ deflection and the blame is not directed at individual Jews, but rather at the Jewish state. This is further evidence that Judaism has transformed. Even in this arena, European behavior suggests it is no longer in Judaism 2.0, but in Judaism 3.0 – Zionism.

By the 21st century, secularism became Europe’s “new religion.” Like in the past, this new European religion is oppressive and attempts to force its views on the remaining “heretics”

Jerusalem is the flagship of religion.

no country is more associated with religion than Israel.

Europe reacted to the threat of Islam with a battle against religion. The politically correct environment mandated this: “There is no problem with Islam, there is a problem with religion.”

Thus, if Europe is in a battle against religion, it is in a battle against Jerusalem, it is in a battle against Israel. This underscores a shifting attitude of Europe towards Zio...

No longer a “secular brethren” (or perceived as such), Zionism is now an easy target in secular Europe’s war against religion,

astonishing European reaction to the UNESCO resolution suggesting Jews and Christians have no historic connections to the city of Jerusalem

opposition to Judaism 3.0 is so strong that Europeans were willing to take a swipe at Jesus and Christians.

The idea of a republic is not only new (250 years old), but it was also forced on most of Europe.

“shoved down their throats” by the Napoleonic wars, and hence, the repeated counter-revolution and resentment.

World War I

monarchies were abolished and republics were established throughout Europe.

The shock of the war has faded and the debate in Europe is set to resume. But the form of debate is different

With the emergence of a neo-monarchy of sorts, the European Union,

Until World War I, the broadly accepted notion that kings were appointed by God (Divine-right monarchy) contributed to the stability and buy-in of the people into their government.

the American Revolution was amongst other things a rebellion against such Divine-right monarchs, but not against Divine right. It resulted in a Divine-right republic – “One nation under God.” This, while the European Revolution against the Divine-right monarchs was also against the notion of Divine-right – against God. Hence, by the 21st century, a non-Divine-right neo-monarchy emerged – the EU.

Brexit and the Trump election in 2016 led many in Europe, especially associated with the EU “neo-monarchy” to conclude that the “people simply do not know how to vote.”

Perhaps people should not have the right to make such monumental decisions, the thinking goes, and let sophisticated leaders do so. Same applies to other so-called “deep-state” bureaucracies that at their core subscribe to the notion that the people’s power must be checked and professionals should make decisions for the people.