edit SideBar

My View of the Jewish Question

by Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr.

June 14, 1983

published in New Solidarity, Aug. 4, 1983.

Where I was born and spent the first 10 yepars of my life, Rochester, New Hampshire, Jews existed in the Bible, a subject which great1y occupied my attention during those and later years. During 1932, in the midst of the Great Depression's onset, we moved to my then recently deceased grandfather's city of Lynn, Massachusetts, the principal industrial slum assembled at the nether end of Essex County. It was a melting-pot city: What-passed-for-Anglo-Saxons, Irish, Italians in East Lyon, and ghettos of Jews. Greeks, and so forth in West Lynn. From the time I was transferred to a West Lynn Junior High School, during my 13th year. friends and acquaintances from the West Lynn side of the city were added to those from East Lynn. In those days, it was still exciting fun to become acquainted with the different kinds of religious and household custom practiced by one's friends and their families. This may seem to some along way from a direct statement on the Jewish Question today. The objection is mistaken. The essence of any question is history, and the study of history is sterile and useless until the reader of history ant learns to locate himself, his personal history, and bis proper purpose in life, as an efficient part ofhistory as a whole. The study of history is also a matter of accepting the practice of constantly changing many among one's own very personal assumptions about how to behave in society, which requires looking back into one's own personal life, to discover whence one acquired assumptions in conflict with the evidence of history. From youth through all of adulthood. the efficient study of history must always begin with critical reflections on relevant parts of one's own personal history. People who don't do that should shut up and listen and learn.
So, I must practice what I preach.
At the close of the war, after learning of what the Nazis had done with those they condemned to slave-labor, especially to their Jewish victims, it was the most natural thing in the world for me to place my sympathies on the side of Israel. Jews were not an abstraction to a fellow raised in adolescence in Lynn, Massachusetts. The Jews of the world lived there: German Jews, Polish Jews, Russian Jews, and so forth, most one to three generations removed from the "old country," and most with active family connections to the Jewish communities of Eastern Europe and so forth. Most of us in the United States, including the Jews who supported Israel's cause, were not Zionists, and were in fact hostile to Zionist teachings We knew two things chiefly. We knew that the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem was a Nazi and we thought that the Jews in Palestine would have the effect of uplifting the Arabs of the Midle East generally.
It didn't work out that way. The late Nahum Goldmann told me that I was a dreamer, that perhaps only a pair of rabbis in Israel would still agree with me. Nonetheless, I stick to my dream. History tells me, history warns me with a loud voice, that I am right.
I agree with those who say that the philosophical outlook of Jewry, especially in Israel today, is divided into two camps. I didn't discover this conception: it was told to me by a friend who is a leading expert in these matters, with whose judgement I often disagree. I must agree with his argument on this point. The evidence is overwhelmingly in support of the conception he outlined. I blow which side I am on. I know vastly more today than I knew back during the 1940s, but what I have learned merely enriches the standpoint I had then. I know now why I believed that Jews had the ability to uplift the condition of the Arab population of the Middle East I was right then; I am right today.
For about 2,000 years, beginning with the work of Philo of Alexandria, European civilization has known and benefitted from what might be termed the "Hellenistic Jewry" traced from Philo's influence as thinker and organizer. In this long span of what is called the diaspora (in English, "dispersion"), the heritage of Philo's work has been a phenomenon called "Jewish Survival." There were some evil things around Rome and Venice, especially Venice, to which some Jewish families were recruited in service of the Venetian faction, but put that special case to one side for the moment. Look at the exemplary role of the Iberian renaissance and the rebirth of Jewry in Germany beginning with the 17th century law of toleration of the Great Elector of Prussia, a law described by the great Samuel Pufendorf in his commentaries. Jews in the Iberian renaissance, and the rise of post-1653 Germany out of ruin, through Leibniz, Lessing, and so forth, into the great reforms of 1809-15, up to the disastrous 1815 Congress of Vienna, are distinguished as Heinrich Heine is distinguished. The Jew survived by developing his or her potentials for effecting useful and necessary contributions to the general advancement of civilization.
That is something of which every Jewish boy or girl ought to be proud. It is an image of purpose which every such boy or girl ought to adopt in adopting a course of personal commitment and contributions. That image, that noble tradition, insofar as it is adopted, and practiced by a community of Jews, is the genius of Jewish Survival over nearly two millennia of the dispersion. Why should it be any different in the case of a Jewish state of Israel today?
There is another, opposing sort of Jewish philosophical outlook. One of the most useful examples of this is provided by a Jewish scholar of the United States. This scholar included among his arguments the case of Hildebrand. later become Pope Gregory VII. Hildebrand's family, one of the Jewish families of Rome, had converted to Christianity, to the effect that Hildebrand's father had bribed his way into being appointed Pope. The Emperor had intervened, and Hildebrand's father was ousted from the Papacy on grounds of acquiring the post through bribery. The vengeful son, Hildebrand, bought vengeance against the family of the Emperor, and on this account, attached himself to the Venetian faction of the Emperor's adversaries, coming thus into alliance with the Cluniacs of France and the Welf (Guelph) faction centered around Mathilde of Tuscany. These fellows organized such enterprises as the Norman Conquest of England, in 1066 A D, the model for Hildebrand's own efforts to launch the Crusades, an undertaking set into motion not long after Hildebrand's death as Pope Gregory VII. The argument which the Jewish scholar drew from this and other examples to the same effect, was, since Jews had risen to positions as high as the Papacy itself, and yet anti-Semitism leading into the Nazi Holocaust had occurred, did this not prove that the efforts of the Jewish diaspora to assimilate into Western civilization had heen an historic mistake all along?
I disagree, but one can see easily why an argument of this sort would win over many U.S., European, and other Jews in the aftermath of the Nazi period. For one thing, Hildebrand was a wicked fellow, a violator of the fundamental principle of Jewish Survival. Like the Luzzatos, such Jews linked to the Venetian faction, have never done any good for European civilization, for humanity in general, and therefore have done the cause of Jewry no service. If there are any Jews to be blamed for helping to foster the bestial movements in European civilization, it is those Hofjuden who made themselves the servants of the Venetians and Venetian steered oligarchical projects such as the 11th-century Welfs or the Black Guelph forces of the late 13th and 14th century, or the "black nobility" of more recent centuries. The Jewish scholar in question committed the ineluded, very important error of confusing the biological definition of Jewry with the quality of Jewish moral commitment, the commitment of a Jewish boy, for example, to become what a Jew must be.
"We can't trust anyone! Everyone will sell the Jew out, sooner or later! Alyieh! Pick up the gun! we shall die like Zealots All races and If we die, religions are enemies of the Jew! Let us become a power like Venice was! Return, and perhaps we shall outwit them all, and either conquer or die!" The "Jewish commitment"? "We can't afford such luxuries. Have you learned nothing from Auschwitz?" Does Zionism then mean saving the biological Jews -- perhaps, only perhaps -- by means which destroy the precious Jewish heritage of 2,000 years of survival? Will Zionism, therefore, eradicate Judaism among Jews? Is all that was greatness in the heritage of the Ashkenazi Jew to be eradicated from this planet by Jews?
During the years 1947 through 1949, my conceptions on this subject were simpler, ingenuous, based on personal admiration for the best qualities of my Jewish friends and acquaintances: such Jews are an asset for civilization, and are likely to do good wherever they choose to make their destiny. Why should it he any different in Israel's ease? My vastly more informed knowledge of the matter today assures me that my approach then was based on sound principles. Why did matters go differently? Did I underestimate the destruction of the Jewish commitment by Jews?
What do I do about this matter? What do you, my reader, do about this matter? We each, according to the talent and resources we have developed, have moral responsibility for what is suffered by all peoples of our own and future generations. We are our brother's keepers. I am accountable for the fate of the Jew I am also accountable for the fate of the Arab. What, therefore, do I do about this matter? What is it your moral responsibility to do in this matter?
What is the implicit judgment of history upon our conduct in this matter?
My responsibility in the matter is of a special degree. Through following my commitment to discover certain truths, I have come to occupy a position whose possibility I would have ridiculed emphatically 10 years ago. This has occurred chiefly because there has been a vacuum of intellectual leadership in the world. No agency with the efficient means to do so was thinking seriously about lifting each and all peoples of this planet out of the global tragedy into which we have been sliding at an accelerating rate over the course of the post-war period. The quality of citizenship which Friedrich Schiller proposed, of being both an uncompromising patriot of one's own nation and also without contradiction -- a world-citizen, has been lacking. Through the intellectual and other advantages of the international association for which I am a principal spokesman, my association has tended to occupy that vacuum. That position is our moral commitment; to some degree, our moral commitment has become an efficient one. We are monstrously poor in financial resources, but we do what we are able to do, and we are the only force currently practicing that profession among nations. Others of power and influence, including international religious bodies, are either on the wrong side -- such asthe Geneva-based World Council of Churches -- or are so occupied with the internal affairs of their church, that they appear to care little for matters which will decide whether or not any future members of such a church will exist on this planet. Poor as we are in financial means and other tangible ressoyrces, the financial state of world affairs is such, that if we fail to address certain fundamental issues of our time, no one will adress them.
That is our responsibility in the matter of the "Jewish Question."
In the matter of dealing with any particular branch of the world's cultures, such as this, is indispensable to get into the inside of that culture historically. The scope of such a task is simplified greatly by the fact htat a culture can be reduced to its most essential characteristic features. There is, in each case, a governing cultural principle which governs the participants of that culture to the effect of more or less efficiently determining what can and cannot be adopted as the more detailed, secondary features of that culture as a whole. Furthermore, no particular culture is self-contained. The members -- or victims -- of each particular culture are human beings. As human beings, each is born with a two-fold nature. He or she is born as predominantly an irrational hedonist of a suckling, but with also that spark of the divine which absolutely distinguishes mankind from the beasts. The essence of all culture, therefore, is the conflict between these two naturally born tendencies for evil (irrational hedonism) and good (the divine potential for Reason) in each person, each people. This is not Manicheanism; sooner or later, either the first, evil, must prevail, by means of which mankind will destroy itself, or, the second, the divine potential for Reason, must prevail absolutely and forever. There can be no form of culture which is not constrained by this elementary conflict.
The elaboration of culture from this elementary root is not simple. Just as a rational adult may collapse into infantilism (anarchism. existentialism generally, or paranoid-schizophrenic psychosis), so cultures may degenerate, as the events in Prussia unleashed by the Hohenzollerns' betrayal at the 1815 Congress of Vienna plunged the noblest culture of the immediately preceding period into that madness of irrationalist Romanticism which produced the radicals of 1848 and Nazism later.
The most significant single feature of all culture is centered on the manner a culture solves, or fails to solve the problem of weaning the child from domination by the mother. The love of the parents, most immediately of the mother, is the primary means for transforming the newborn beast of an infant into a being who is moral and rational for the sake of love. Yet, what is tolerable and admirable in the condition of the infant and young child is mental, and moral sickness in the adolescent and adult. The child and youth must shift the attachment of love from maternal household to nation and humanity in general, to a sense of responsibility to the accomplishments of preceding generations, to the living generations, and to posterity over generations to come.
Hence, all evil religions are based on the "mother principle": Ishtar = Shakti = Isis = Astarte = Cybele, an evil at least as old as the Ur of the Chaldeans from which the ancient Abraham departed. Similarly, all evil pagan religions, accompany this mother goddess ("The Whore of Babylon") with a male figure of the type of a castrated phallus-god, such as Shaitan, Siva, Osiris, and Dionysos, or perhaps also a third male figure of the mother-goddess's love for her son, such as Horus = Apollo = Lucifer. This is sometimes overlain by a pantheon of the Hesiodic model, as the Roman imperial pantheon typifies the connection. These evil religions are associatiated principally, with Near Eastern forces various1y named the Chaldeans, Phoenicians, Magicians, Mobeds, and the Egyptian priests of Isis-Osiris-Horus. The exemplar of Phoenician cults in classical mainland Greece and a Graecia is the Cadmian cult of sodomic Thebes, of the mythical Lycurgus's Sparta, and the temples of the Cult of Apollo at Delphi and Delos. These ancient cults, anciently associated with the evil Tyre of Hiram Abiff, are the roots of modern pseudo-judaism, Kabbalism, and the pseudo-Christian versions of such cults, called generically Gnosticism.
Althought hese paradigms are specifically associated with the Middle East and European civilization's history and pre-history, it is demonstrated that the same principles are pervasive throughout humanity as a whole. Our ability to adduce the characteristic features of any culture depends upon a mastery of the characteristic features of religious beliefs: which forms of religious belief, such as those of Ayatollah Khomeini, are explicitly evil, and which is good? Even where culture professes itself to be more or less independent of specific religious denomination's control, the culture has the characteristics of a more or less homogenous sort of religious belief.
The history of Judaism begins with Moses, who either wrote or caused to be written the original content of those books of the Bible called the Pentateuch, barring rewritings effected under the direction of the Chaldean priests of Babylon during the Babylonian captivity, or rewritten and amplified under the direction of the same Mesopotamian priests during the period of the Achaemenid rule. The core of the Pentateuch is recognizably coherent, especially large parts of the Book of Genesis and Exodus, and sections of Leviticus and Deuteronomy Numbers is substantially doubtful in the form it exists today. Leviticus is partly specific to cultural peculiarities of Judaism, as distinct from what is definably the positive essence of Judaism; it is to be respected as the peculiar practice of Judaism, but has no more general sort of obligatory character. The Book of Job is an anomaly, but of great significance for Christianity. The remainder is not of great weight for approaching the essential characteristics of the matter. It is the historical figure of Moses which is of the greatest interest to the scientist dealing with the matter from the standpoint adopted here.
Forget that terrible fellow, Dr Sigmund Freud. He was Viennese, a defect for which be was not personally responsible, and under the influence of Ernst Mach et al , for which he does bear moral responsibility. Moses is a definable historical figure, who lived within a rather well-defined set of Egyptian circumstances, and embarked upon a mission whose purpose is clear enough from the circumstances themselves. Nothing essential within the Biblical account contradicts this. If Dr. Freud knew anything of the facts readily available to him with a modest effort, he successfully hid that from his readers.
Everything which survived to the present day from before the Christian era, from the Middle East and Europe generally, would probably not have survived but with the support of, and often at the instigation of the temple of Ammon in Egypt. Our best scholarship on this matter shows that Ammon is the cultural force associated with the Golden Age of Egypt, and the adversary of the destructive forces of Isis-Osiris-Horus cults, as well as the leading opponent of the Chaldeans-Phoenicians. Ammon was the sponsor of the rise of classical Greek culture from approximately the seventh century B.C., and it is presumably the same forces in Egypt which were behind Egyptian support for the Etruscans' rise to maritime power over the Phoenicians in the Eastern Mediterranean during the same pre-Persian Empire period.
Our attention is shifted to a somewhat earlier period, the period or the re-founding or Athens by Ammon during the period preceding the "dark age" of illiteracy in Greece which bridged both sides of the heginning of the final millennium B.C. (The datings are much disputed, to the point that the explosion of the island of Thera, a major catastrophe for adjoining Aegean civilization, is the best reference point for judging datings.) However, it is known that Moses's leadership of the expedition to found Israel occurred within approximately 10 years of the refounding of Athens by Ammon. It was a period of the wane of Hittite power and of the rise of the Philistines as a major arm of Chaldean operations.
The internal evidence of the Pentateuch shows that Moses's theology was in agreement with that of Ammon s monotheism, as Plato's Timaeus dialogue, for example, echoes the same theology later. Circumstances strongly suggest that the Habiru (Hebrew) Moses was a high priest or Ammon. He certainly was no obscure fellow in the public affairs of the Egypt of his time, and only the priests of Ammon represented the level and power of organized opposition within Egypt who could have enabled Moses to do most of the things recorded in Biblical sources. After the collapse of the Golden Age in Egypt, this was the manner in which most of the long range operations of Ammon were conducted in known instances, up to the point they put their organization entirely at grave risk in openly supporting Alexander the Great against Tyre and the Persian Empire.
The facts are 1) Moses's monotheism was uniquely coincident with that of Ammon, and not any other known variety of the entire period, except that of Plato later; 2) This expedition was a colonization project directed at the destruction of Philistine power in the region of Phoenician power closest to Egypt, and in the pathway of Chaldean directed assaults from Mesopotamia, a colonization project launched within approximately 10 vears of the same period Ammon refounded Athens as a bulwark against the bull-worshippers (e.g. Osiris) of Minos; and 3) that Moses fought to rid the Hebrews of their adopted worship of the Golden Calf, a variant of the Baal (Horus = Apollo = Lucifer) cult.
The circumstances are such that the only known, extant opposition which might have pulled off such an operation was Ammon, and that only a high priest of Ammon could have terrified a Pharaoh in the way the Biblical account details Moses's actions.

The Theology of Ammon

It is conclusively documented, that the versions of early Jewish writings dated from the general period of the second temple of Jerusalem are not the version of those writings available to Israel during the time-frame embracing the lives of Moses and King David. At two well-documented points, the Jews in captivity were forced to rewrite their religious texts under the supervision of the Chaldeans and to include material taken from Chaldean mythologies. Moreover, there is evidence which shows that Philo's corrections of points of theology were not as much a Hellenistic revision of Judaism as has been alleged to be the case. It is more probably the case that Philo restored Judaism to Moses's actual theology, cleaning up many of the corruptions imposed by captivities.
The point to he made is of a rather obvious sort. It is argued that since Philo's theology, like that of the Gospel of St John and the mission of St Paul, for example, can be shown to agree with such writings of Plato's as the Timaeus, that "therefore" Philo, who is presumed to have influenced his friends and collaborators, St Peter, and St Mark, on this point, must have revised Judaism under Hellenistic influences presumably "contrary to the Judaic tradition." Ah, but if Plato's theology was that of Ammon, and Moses himself was probably a high priest of Ammon, who in fact has been guilty of "revisionism" among Jewish writers?
The answer to this question hangs chiefly on the validity of presuming that Plato's theology was in essential agreement with that of Ammon. Since Plato's theology was developed in close collaboration with the Cyrenaic temple of Ammon during his lifetime, there is no great presumption in the matter on that account. The question becomes, therefore, can we presume that the theology of the temple of Ammon during Plato's lifetime was also that of Moses's lifetime? Additionally, if this presumption is borne out, can we adduce from the Pentateuch passages which corroborate this point?
By way of illustration. What is a God who, by his nature, is efficient and yet is beyond the capacity of the human senses? What is an act of creation out of formless void? If we read "days" to signify God's days, not those of man, what does such a process of successively layered creation signify about the manner of expression of the Creator's efficient will? Let us consider how Plato's theology responds to such questions, and then consider the matter, how we may require that such beliefs by a Cyrenaic temple of Ammon during the fourth century B.C. must necessarily concur with those of priests of Ammon nearly a thousand years earlier.
Modern scientific theology since St Augustine, was chiefly the accomplishment of the 15th-century Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa, the first modern European to enable man to understand Plato's Timaeus adequately, as both a theological work and a scientific work. It is the direct equivalence of theology and science established afresh by Cusa's work, which enables us, more than 500 years of scientific progress later to settle the questions we have posed with a decided finality we conclude that there was nothing "made up" in Moses's form of Judaism or that of Philo and the Christian Apostles later. Not ignoring the case of Ammon or certain important Vedic sources, we put those acknowledged matters to one side for the moment, and insist that Judaism and Christianity, in their original forms, have nothing in common with William James's Varieties of Religious Experience, but are very special forms of religious belief whose ideas of God are conclusively borne out by scientific evidence If there were no books to read on the subject. Moses's theology could be read in the book of the heavens.
This directs our attention to the essence of Judaism, to the theological foundations for the "Jewish commitment."
Near the beginning of tbe Timeaus, Plato's Socrates names God "tbe Composer," and directs the attention of the participants in the dialogue to the matter of the lawful principles expressed by the way in which the Composer composed the universe. One will not find this in any English edition of the Timaeus except an authentic version produced in 1978 by the writer's associates, Benjamin Jowett committed willful fraud in his translations on this and related points, establisbing his "putative English meanings" for the classical Greek later incorporated, on his authority, in standard English-Greek lexicons.
Plato employs three central principles into the body of development of this dialogue l) His notion of the hypothesis of the higher hypothesis, a notion developed in another location; 2) The principle of the circle as it clearly existed in the practice of geometry at the Cyrenaic temple of Ammon during his lifetime: and, 3) The proof, developed by a collaborator of Plato's working at the temple of Ammon, that only five kinds of regular polyhedral solids (4, 6, 8, 12, and 20 sides) could be constructed in visible space -- the so-called Five Platonic Solids. Using these principles, Plato argued that visible space as it appeared to mankind's sensory perceptions was a distorted reflection of the real universe, elsewhere describing our sensory perceptions as akin to distorted shadows cast by firelight on the wall of a darkened cave. The limited range of solids whicb could be constructed in visible space showed that visible space had some embedded, delimiting principle; to reflect the real universe into visible form, reality must be compressed into a distorted form according to those limiting, bounding, geometrical principles.
The question of science, tberefore, must be attacked first by defining what those bounding geometrical principles were. He proceeded to this purpose by polygons (triangle, square, within circles: the polygons from which the five regular polyhedra are constructed. This was the point in the Timaeus at which European comprehension failed -- until Cusa's rediscovery of what we name today the "isoperimetric theorem" of basic topology, by means of which Cusa solved the problem left unsolved by Archimedes's attempted quadrature of the circle. Later, working from Cusa's writings on mathematical physics, Leonardo da Vinci's Mil an, Italy collaborator, Luca Pacloli, reconstructed a proof for the Five Platonic Solids, and, of course, Leonhard Euler constructed the first modern form of rigorous proof during the 18th century. The question posed, answered generally by Cusa, was: Why does inscribing the polygons within circles necessarily prove the character of the geometrical bounding principle in question?
The formal problem was that during approximately the second century B.C., persons influenced by the Peripatetics, in Egypt, had rewritten classical Greek geometry, introducing axioms and postulates, and codifying geometry as a system of syllogistic theorems in the greater part. This was essentially Aristotle, and the view of the universe and creation famously demolished by Philo. This assumed that the point and straight line had an axiomatic kind of interrelated existence. From the standpoint of such a geometry, Plato's Timaeus was largely incomprehensible. Hence, until Cusa, there is little written evidence surviving, excepting the "Paradise" canticle of Dante Alighieri's Commedia, to show any progress in understanding the Timaeus beyond that made popular by the writings of St. Augustine.
Cusa re-discovered that circular-rotational action -- the later Principle of Least Action of Gottfried Leibniz -- was the only self-evident existence in the universe, and that the straight line and point were defined by the same kind of circular-rotation action of the cIrcle generated by the original action.
The first circular-rotation action creates a circle of undetermined area in a measureless void. The void is no longer. The next action, circular-rotational action upon the created, measureless circle, creates the straight line, dividing the first circle into two halves, and creates the beginning of measure. The same rotational action upon the same circle now creates the point. From these three creations, form and measure are created out of a formless, measureless void. From these three elements, so created, all forms of existence in visible spare are derived by synthetic geometry, as typified by the development of synthetic geometry by Prof Jacob Steiner. Is man thus creating? Man is thinking creation. Man is giving the form of thought to the name of creation. By aid of this thought, man is attempting to comprehend, to measure that whirh has been created.
We also know, that the other four Patonic Solids are subsumed by the l2 sided regular solid, based on the pentagon the Golden Section.
Therefore. as Plato inscribed the polygons within circles, he was acting on the principle that all forms in visible space are merely extensions or the hereditary principle of circular-rotational action. The uniqueness of the regular triangle, square, and regular pentagon therefore expresses, with respect to the circle, the geometrical principle bounding visible space.
By treating the circumference of the circles as analogous to a vibrating string of a musical instrument, the points or the polygons divide that string harmonically according to the intervals of the fifth, fourth, and third, of the 12 tone octave-scale These are not quite the correct values. The proper projection of a self-similar conical spiral is a plane spiral whose characteristic is the Golden Section, and thus corresponds, topologically to a 12-sided projection from 3-space onto 2-space, so the division of the circle into 12 equal sectors, divides the arms ofthe projected spiral in exactly the proportions of the well-tempered, 24-key polyphonic 12-tone octave-scale However, neither Plato nor Kepler knew of conical functions of a complex, continuous manifold. and their results are a good approximation for the discrete manifold of visible (Euclidean) space.
Correcting the solar hypothesis developed by Cusa earlier, Kepler proved that the planetary orbits are determined by a series of Platonic solids, and that the harmonic ratios of the perihelial and aphelial velocities of the orbits are the Platonic harmonic values. Karl Gauss was first to show that a required feature of Kepler's calculations, a formerly existent, destroyed planet, for which Kepler had calculated the harmonic orbital values, conformed to the harmonic orbital values of the principal asteroids Gauss also showed, with aid of his discovery of the arithmetic-geometric mean, that Kepler's assumptions respecting the significance of elliptic functions in solar orbits was mathematically the correct approach.
Both Pacioli and Leonardo showed, by observation, that all living processes had the morphological harmonics of growth and function associated with the Golden Section in opposition to non-living processes. This was emphasized by Kepler, who also showed that Golden Section is the characteristic feature of astronomical laws: implicitly, the universe as a whole is a living being. This connection is understood by aid of the fact that a Fibonacci series (the arithmetic approximation of population-growth through reproduction of individuals) converges upon the Golden Section. The Gauss arithmetic-geometric mean gives a more general expression for this. Since Leibniz's emphasis upon the fact that circular-rotational action expressed a universal principle of Least Action, we have been led to recognizing that all work expressing negentropic growth must be represented as an expanding sequence of concentric circles, at least in most-primitive form. This sequence is harmonic, and therefore corresponds to an elementary conica1 function constant rotation and growth of the length of the radius of rotation, combined with progression along the central axis of a growing cone This is the elementary form of the complex variable of mathematical physics. This generates a spiral on the surface of the cone. which is the first integral of the action, and cyclical volumes, between circles at the beginning of each cycle, volumes defined by their elliptic cross-section These volumes are the second integral of the action. each defined by topological continuity, at beginning and end, but involving the elliptic generation of an added topological singularity in between. This conception underlies Gauss's notion of the arithmetic-geometric mean, and is expressed by Bernhard Riemann's employment of what he terms Dirichlet's Principle, to provide a coherent notion of completed creative action in the universe (negentropic action).
This development is physics, including the work of Riemann, Karl Weierstrass, and Georg Cantor's 1871-83 work on the transfinite, bears directly on Plato's notion of an hypothesis of the higher hypothesis. We restate that notion in modern terms of reference, situate it with respect to physics questions, and we are then advantaged to look again, in a deeper way at the theology of Plato's Timaeus. The point is to use the language of physics to define more exactly what we ought to mean by such words as "creation," God, Logos.
In scientific work there are three levels of hypothesis.
1. Simple Hypothesis. The investigator attempts to bring a previously undigested type of phenomenon into coherence with the established body of prevailing scientific theorems, both for scientific work in general, and for the class of inquiry in which the phenomena in question are assumed to lie.
2. Higher Hypothesis. The investigator challenges an underlying assumption, of the form of an axiomatic or postulational assumption, underlying the existing of accepted scientific theorems. To the degree this is experimentally demonstrated in some conclusive manner, a "crucial experiment," the entire lattice work of previously accepted theory collapses, and, a scientific revolution in at least some field of inquiry is established.
3. Hypothesis of the Higher Hypothesis. To the extent successive scientific revolutions correspond to a sequence of increasing per capita potential powers of mankind over nature, the question is posed whether or not some principle of discovery is common to each among a sequence of scientific revolutions. Such a principle of discovery is a notion of an hypothesis of the higher hypothesis.
The latter is the form of knowledge which Plato equates with the Logos, man's perfection of ap proximate knowledge of the creative principle which underlies the continuing creation of the universe. This is the "level" of knowledge which is in direct correspondence to efficient ontology, ontological actuality. In physics, such an hypothesis corresponds to a potential-surface of the kind implicit in our foregoing remarks.In physics discussions, this is called a principle of ontological transfiniteness.
Thus, the Logos is ontologically being, the immediate locus of underlying causality as a creative principle pervading the universe. It is the efficient will of the Composer, with which the Logos is consubstantial. The essential distinction of St Augustine's point of emphasis in theology, the Filioque, is that perfected man, by knowing and submitting to the Logos, causes the Logos to flow through its guidance of his willful actions, such that the Logos flows through Christ, and from Christ -- and that man must live thus in pursuit of the imitation of Christ. The congruence of this with Philo's approach to theology is not difficult to 1ocate, nor the bearing of this upon the Jewish commitment.
The view of the universe we have summarily indicated here was, in respect to its most essential features, the theology and science of Plato, and of the temple of Ammon from which classical Greek culture obtained the foundations of its knowedge.
Whence did such knowledge appear to ancient mankind? We know from Vedic sources that peoples living before 6000 B.C had developed an astronomical knowledge including measurement of millennial and longer cycles, including cycles for the geographic and magnetic north poles. The validity of such cycles was first established by Kepler, and was more thoroughly examined during the lifetime of Gauss. The truth is written in the heavens for those with the dedication and patient effort to read the book carefully.
The geometrical knowledge transmitted to the classical Greeks, including Solon, Thales, and Plato, among others, is of a form which must have been developed over a long period earlier. If we consider only the principle of creation, provably central to Ammon's geometry practice, as the notion of creation applied to the subject of the Universe and theology, we have implicitly at once the kind of monotheism we associated with Philo and the Christian Apostles. The crucial reflections of this in the Pentateuch are virtually conclusive evidence that this was the form and content of the tehology of Moses, leading Hebrews from slavery in decaying Egypt to establish a new nation based on this monotheism.

The Theology of Social Practice

If there was such significant agreement on underlying issues of theology among the early Christians and adherents of Philo's Judaism, why did the two separate? St Paul provides the best identification of the issue involved: the issue of circumcision. The immediate form of the issue was whether the customary, secondary features of Judaism, such as circumcision and dietary laws, were really that important? St Paul argued that among Christians, including Jewish Christians, such things were optional for the person and families concerned St Paul went further if Jews permitted such customs to stand in the way of furthering the mission to the Gentiles, making a fetish of those customs was dangerously harmful.
St Paul would never have tolerated for an instant the terrible doctrines of Bernard of Clairvaux or Martin Luther, to say nothing of the Aristotelian forms of Gnosticism introduced to corrupt Byzantine and, later, Western Christendom. With these belly-button mystics, St Paul rightly had no patience. That awful monastery of St Catharine's in the Sinai, where Constantine and his successors whipped up that wicked, Gnostic hesychasm of Byzantine Gnosticism, and the transfer of this wicked, "integrist" belly-button madness to Mount Athos' "Holy Mountain," would have brought forth more than one scorching epistle from St. Paul. St. Paul was a good Jew and an excellent Christian: We are placed in Creation for the purpose of useful labor, and we are accountable for not only what we do, but also for the foreseeable consequences of what we do, even for the entire world and for generations to come. Between terrible Calvinist dogma and Christianity, there is nothing in common; those who profess that dogma are worse than those terrible Sadducees, and almost as bad as their sibling-offspring of the Order of St John's Hospilallers, the Venetian Jesuits.
St. Paul placed the emphasis on faith proven through works, but he warned that this was not enough. Without Faith, Hope, and Love, good works are emptied of virtue. Unless we love humanity as a whole, and direct our labor to uplifting humanity as a whole, we are nothing This love for humanity must take the form of a sense of personal accountability to God by the individual, of the kind of personal ized love toward God which is expressed by persisting desire to bring our own will for practice on this planet -- and, in the heavens -- into agreement with the Logos. In that sense, one loves a sometimes distinctly unloveable humanity for God's sake.
Therefore. St Paul strongly reprimanded those Christians who insisted that the Gentiles had to meet the qualifications of circumcision, Jewish dietary law, and so forth, before being brought into the fold of Christianity. This was a painful argument for some Jews of the time to hear from this former Pharisee turned Christian Apostle. There are some people today, who will stamp their feet, and begin pacing angrily up and down the walls and across the ceiling just to demonstrate to you that Judaism was not a proselytizing religion. Judaism, especially in Philo's pathway, did proselytize -- and why shouldn't it? In St. Paul's time, they didn't precisely disagree with St Paul's insistence that the Gentiles needed some spiritual improvements. They did put road-blocks in their own pathway on this account. Christianity may be in generally rotten condition as a matter of constituted bodies of people today, but everything good that has happened in European civilization over nearly 2.000 years was a benefit to humanity accomplIshed by the mission to the Gentiles which St. Paul pressed so energetically.
Despite this point of difference, Jews who followed Philo did practice a love for mankind, and held themselves accountable for their success or failure In contributing something of enduring benefit to mankind with their brief mortal lives If one couldn't become a great philosopher or scientist, at least one could make a substantial act of love toward the hungry and oppressed and leave it to the rabbis and philosophers to explain what the higher purpose of all that might be. Certainly, the Ashkenazi Jews, in particular -- discounting those Venetian sorts -- have performed as well, or better, than nominal Christians on thIs account over the recent millennia Any consistent Chris- tian knows this, or could find it out easily enough, and has great respect and affection for Judaism on this account.
Since 1946, especially since 1967, something went very, very wrong inside Jewry generally. On this matter, my views tend to converge on leading points of practice with the late Nahum Goldmann's, and at least some of the dedicated people who follow in his footsteps today. At first glance, Nahum Goldmann's idea of a World Jewish Congress. to counterbalance the directions taken by Zionism, was plainly in the right direction. A Jewish state in Israel must be a Jewish state, asserting principles of fraternity and cooperation with Arabs, difficult as that might be to arrange. The conscience of world Jewry must be mobilized to bring that policy to fruitfulness. It is difficult, but not impossible. I emphasized this to the National Leadership of the Ba'ath Party in Iraq during April 1975. The people to whom I spoke called themselves Arab humanists, and thought of me as a friend -- if not of the inner circle of Arab brotherhood, enough of a proven friend to be permitted to discuss such matters frankly with them. I have had friends among Palestinian leaders who understood the point very well -- when they were not being killed like flies by Irgun crazies or the Nazi International's terrorists around Abu Nidal and that sort. These Arabs needed some first steps from Israel itself or perhaps from people of the sort associated with the World Jewish Congress, something to show ordinary Arabs that a new way in the Middle Easyt were possible.
We tried during 1975. Some pepople in Israel collaborated with my efforts during the last months of the Rabin government in 1976. The effort continues, despite the evil fellows -- like Dr Leo Szilard -- who proposed the future general destruction of the Middle East as early as the Pugwash Conference of 1958, where certain Anglo-American circles and Soviet representatives pre-arranged the Nuclear Deterrence package of imperialistic doctrines later imposed upon the government of the United States. We appear to be running out of hope. If Abu Nidal completes his agreement to assassinate Iraq's Saddam Hussein, probably the entire Middle East is gone, and Israel, too.
There is the matter of that evil fellow, Joseph Churba, and Meier Kahane's Kach -- and we know who inside Israel is really behind that -- who are working with some crazy nominal Christians in Oregon to blow up the Middle East in "Holy War" by building a "Third Temple of Solomon" on the site of the second most sacred site of Islam, the Dome on the Rock. There is that dangerous Soviet fellow, Aliyev, working. with help from Zbigniew Brzezinski, with the Nazi International's directors in Switzerland. who control the international "Islamic fundamentalist" insurgency. to help in realizing Soviet dreams of a "Third and Final Roman Empire" under the mystical thumb of Matushka Rus. Moscow says it is restraining Arab forces from war wIth Israel in the Middle East, but the Soviet KGB is operating through Nazi International channels based in Switzerland, Venice, and Rome, to escalate bloody attrition against Israeli forces in Lebanon, to the point Israel naturally responds with a quick, decisive, counter-measure.
Hope seems to be running out. That crazy Sharon sent Israel into what we warned would become "Israel's Vietnam," with his insane ambition's invasion of Lebanon. Now, governments being what they are presently, Israel is stuck in Lebanon, and the day-by-day attrition leading to the flash-point of a new Mideast war cuts down the Israeli forces set up as targets in the occupied areas Why did Nahum Goldmann's strategy fail? What is wrong in the conception of the strategic function of the World Jewish Congress? To put the point more precisely. What is lacking?
St Paul would have placed his index-finger on the problem immediately. He already has: it's the problem of the "circoncision," that terrible, self-defeating clannishness which has been the virtue and almost fatal error of Jewry over the millennia. "Jewish problems are Jewish problems. Besides, it is the Gentiles who are to blame; directly or indirectly, for all Jewish problems." That may bring automatic, nodding agreement in the minyan, but what good does it accomplish, except to make some Jews feel proudly self-righteous all the time everything continues to become much worse? If the Gentiles are the problem, why not change the Gentiles? Why insist that Israel is purely and simply a "Jewish Problem"? Why not direct the energies to the problem? I know all the standard Jewish retorts to that proposition, but I stick to it. Any Jewish leader who wishes to think seriously about the matter is obliged to agree with me on this point.

The German Jew, For Example

To see the Jewish question rightly, we must begin by putting to one side everything which happened after World War I, and to see what happened since 1917-18 as almost an inevitable consequence of what happened earlier especially since the launching of the Inquisition about 1230-33 A-D. in France and Spain. It was with the rise of Venetian power in the West, the growing power associated with Lombard banking houses such as the Bardi and Peruzzi, that the Inquisition against Jews in Western Europe began. The point is not only to see the changing circumstances in which Jews of the diaspora lived -- circumstances sometimes for the better, often for the worse, or worst, but also to see the various cultures of Jewry as as much defined by Gentile cultures in which Jews lived as by Judaism itself.
It is sufficient to focus attention u pon several leading examples: the Prussian Jew, the Austrian Jew, the Polish Jew, the Lithuanian Jew, the Russian Jew, and the highly differentiated conditions of circumstance and culture of the sephardic Jew. The best place to begin is the period 1653-1815 in Germany, and the sharp differentiation in circumstances between the Prussian Jew and the Austrian Jew The point is to de emphasize the Jewishness of the Jew, and to place relatively greater emphasis on the historically determined cultural differentiations imposed by Gentile cultures.
It is from the vantage point of America, the convergence of substantial portions of Jewish populations from all branches of European Jewry into the United States, melting-pot, that the essential matter is best understood by seeing the differentiated way in which various currents of European Jewish culture generally failed to converge until the 1938-46 period. and how the honor of nazi realities affected attempted convergences during and after that period, first over 1938-67 and from 1967 to the present. The unfortunate fact to be noted in this connection is that Americans, including Jewish Americans, have hecome very poor observers of everything which is tru1y important in the world. We are generally too much influenced by Hollywood "cowboys and indians," cheap "soap-operas," and "competitive spectator-sports" -- too much like those of Nero's arena. To us, politics, and life itself have become one team wearing one uniform, against an opposing team wearing a recognizahly different, popularly advertised name-brand of another uniform 'A good guy" is a fellow who cheers for "our team," and the opposition is the fellow who cheers for an opposing team. A Jew, to an American, tends to be either "A guy who's with our side," or the other side; what he is inside, is deprecated as a matter of "theory." The important evidence on the matter under consideration is mostly right there, in the form of evidence any scientific investigator would require. Most Americans, unfortunately, are too busy being seen being pragmatists by their neighbors, to spend any mental effort in observing the evidence. So, the matter is left to as much as can be accomplished by relatively rare "American throw-backs" to Henry Clay's Whigs and Benjamin Franklin as myself. Americans are prejudiced "for Jews," or "against Jews," a quality of opinion whose scientific merit never violates the limits of the sort of truisms one can hear in any bar room discussion of the burning issues of the morning's newspaper-headlines -- it's one of those Gentile customs which ought to worry thoughtfu1 Jews.
The first thing to understand, is that there is a profound difference between an Austrian and a Prussian In Prussia, the Great Elector's law made Jews and Huguenots citizens -- at least, as much as citizenship was available to Prussian subjects generally at various times. The characteristic morality of the Hapsburg realm was expressed most generally by the habit of the Hapsburgs of giving families of Jews as gifts to various parts of the Holy Roman Empire's aristocracy, the ugly phenomenon of the Hofjuden, that special form of Hapsburg anti-Semitism which occurred in Britain in the model of Charles Dickens' image of Uriah Heep Heinrich Heine and Nahum Goldmann belong generally to the Prussian model at its best. A Mandelssohn of Berlin married the great collaborator of Alexander von Humboldt, Lejeune Dirichlet. It was toward Prussia and the German science of the Gottingen tradition of Leibniz and Gauss that the German speaking Jew of both Germany and Austro-Hungan, aimed himself to get out of the stink of everything smelling of Hapsburg culture from about 1815 onwards.
Dr Karl Marx, who made some terrible mistakes, was of a Polish-Jewish family named Levi, from Minz, who settled in Trier and were swept up into the great admiration for Dr Benjamin Franklin and the American constitution which prevailed in that City'S life, until the great demoralization which began with the Hohenzollerns' betrayal of Germany at the 1815 Congress of Vienna. However, despite his father Heinrich' s softness toward that evil Swiss fellow Rousseau, young Karl Marx' s essay "On Choosing A Profession," of 1835, reveals a pretty fine fellow, before his carousing in Bonn and his later, abysmal corruption at Berlin. The Germany of Leibniz, Lessing, and Friedrich Schiller especially during 1809-15, was about the best place in the world, outside the United States, for a Jew to be.
The affliction of the Austrian Jew was not a matter of being Jewish, but ofbeing Austrian Austro-Hungary especially from 1815 onward, was a decaying hulk, created by Venice -- like the Ottoman Empire, and modeled variously upon the Roman Empire, the Byzantine Empire, and the ancient Persian and Babylonian empires It was a captive-house of nations, each a "semi-autonomous" sort of particularist entity, of distinct ethnic and religious character, all ruled over by one common financial and military authority, an authority associated with rule by an aristocracy which was chiefly Greek or Italian but which called itself Austrian. It was a Jesuit's empire, a prison of stagnating cultures, in which the conception of man and of man in the universe, was a fair approximation of such ancient Phoenician abominations as Cadmian Thebes, Lycurgan Sparta, and Delphi. The wicked fellow, Dr Sigmund Freud, is paradigmatic of the worst features of the Jew turned entirely an unofficial Jesuit, a true Hapsburg Austrian.
This showed itself in Nazi behavior during the 1938-45 period. After the Swiss, that Venetian colony which really directed the Third Reich -- and which runs it to the present day -- the Austrian Nazis were the worst, together with those south Germans who were really Venetians or Swiss by aristocratic pedigree To such the Jew was like a petdog, to be protected and petted, according to inclination, or to be destroyed when one tired of it or tortured into Nazi service, to be used again as a pet after the war. The Austro-Hungarian culture was deeply racialist, in the sense efficiently expressed by Richard Coudenhove-Kalergi's conception of a Pan-European Union as paradise. This we also know in Poland, from the case of Lublin and from Russia in the form of the area's culture of the Jesuits' Byzantine Rite, an important channel for the Soviet KGB today.
What ruined the German Jew ultimately was merely that which ruined the German generally. It began with the 1815 Congress of Vienna, where the Venetian, Capodistria, assigned by Venice to run Russian foreign affairs, directed his puppet Prince Metternich, and the Hohenzollern sent into internal exile the Freiherr vom Stein who had de feated Napoleon Bonaparte and saved the Prussian monarchy. Under this arrangement, the wicked Jesuits were brought back from their well deserved exile in Russia, to run the secret-intelligence service of Prince Metternich and the Holy Alliance, and eventually to participate in a lead ing way in the assassination of President Abraham Lincoln.
During 1809-15, there was a great upsurge of morality in the German populations of Prussia and the Rhineland generally, an upsurge fostered by the poetry and dramas of Schiller and by the impact of the Stein-Humboldt-Scharnhorst reforms. It appeared that the Age of Reason had begun in Prussia -- until that miserable Hohenzoliern betrayed it all at Vienna The political repressions which cascaded in Prussia in the aftermath of 1815 and the elevation of that wicked Swiss-Jesuit tool G W F. Hegel, to the position of "official state philosopher," produced a wave of demoralization and cultural pessimism in which that Swiss concoction, German Romanticism, flourished, out of which the sons of the patriots of 1809-15 became the proto-fascists and radicals of the period leading into 1848 and beyond.
Richard Wagner, the Houston S. Chamberlain who selected Adolf Hitler to lead the new Bavarian Nazi movement, and the Dostoevskyan evil von Kettler, Pech, and Alfred Rosenberg, among many others, were the result. The Swiss arch-Nazi Friedrich Nietzsche, expressed the essence of the matter.
Does one wish to pretend that n umerous prominent German Jews did not participate in fostering this evil, or even in helping Hitler to gain and hold power during the initial period of Nazi rule? Shall we cover this up because they were "Jewish"? Shall we conceal what happened in Italy, France, and so forth under the Nazis on this account? Shall we pretend it was all Gentiles? With such mythologies, we shall never correct the real problem.
It was the collapse of German culture, chiefly under the erosive influence of Swiss-baked German Romanticism, which made the Jew victim of the Nazis. It was preventing, or reversing that collapse into the Dostoevskyian bestiality of Romanticism which had to be done. Should Jews have fled into Palestine then? Was that the solution? There is a famous, true story of a thoughtful German gentleman of the 1920s, who foresaw the next war coming, and diligently studied the world's maps, to locate for himself and his family, a place most likely to escape the ravages of the coming war. Accordingly he moved himself and his family to the safety of the island of Guadalcanal Is Israel a place of safety? Can one hide from the Gentile world's evils in Israel? There are gentlemen in Venice, Oregon, and Israel itself whose Dome of the Rock project is consciously intended to compel God himself to unleash the Battle of Armageddon!

The Russian Jew, For Example

The essential distinction of Jewish culture in Russia is that it was shaped not only by the oppressive bestiality characteristic of the Raskol'niki, but that it assimilated into Jewish culture the pagan mysticism of the Raskol'niki. The Jewish Pale was the Jewish Mir (a Russian term for mystical soul) The Jewish textile manufacturers of Vilna were the reflection of the Raskol'nik textile manufacturers of the Preobrazhensky cemetery-district of Moscow.
Next to the conditions of Yemen, this was the cultural pit of Jewry. Jews became almost Calvinists, almost Russian Jesuits "I cannot care about what happens to civilization, or the other fellow in particular. That is God's business, I must take care of my own affairs: my pleasure, my family, and - if the Rabbi hounds me enough -- the Jewish community."
The source of this was not Judaism, but the Russian Orthodox Church and its complementary offshoot, the Raskol'niki. If I find a dog's excrement in a Jewish house which has no dog, shall I therefore admire this object as a production of Jewish culture? Or, shall I suspect that a Gentile dog has passed through the premises? Shall I not consider so the excrement which those Russian priests and the Raskol'niki deposited upon what turns up in the baggage of Jewish emigres from Russia?
Accordingly, Russian Jewry became infected with Dsstoevskyian mysticism, the paradigm for Russian fascism, or Russian solidarism. which are one and the same thing. This was a receptive climate for the import of the 13th-century Venetian, Luzzato, Becanati, revival of Phoenician Kabbalism into Russia. This Raskol'niki mysticism infecting Jews in Russia, with its mystical worship of Blood and Soil, became the fertile ground for developing a Dostoevskyan variety of Zionism. Thence came the doctrines ofthe Holy Soil of Eretz Israel, did it not, on which soil all but biologically defined Jews were transgressors? Was Jewry , not degraded1 to some mystical sort of collective emanation of the people sprung as a racial blood from the holy soil of mother Israel? Jews became not Jews, hut a Jewish mimicry of Russian Raskol'niki. A Jew was no longer defined by Jewish faith by Jewish morality, by the Jewish commitment. He lived, spiritually as well as physically, under Russian occupation in Russia, and carried Russian culture, not Jewish culture, to Israel with him. He carried to Israel what many Jews before had fled to the United States, from Russia and Poland, to escape.
Some Jews in Russia and Poland, became social democrats out of recognition that the rescue of the Jews in these regions required the transformation oi the culture in which they lived, and by which they were dominated aDd surrounded. The best example of this is perhaps Rosa Luxemburg. Over the distance of time, her faults seem tiny and her nobility great. Unfortunately, like the "Westernizers" of radical persuasions, including V.I. Lenin, generally, the Russian social-democrats of 1905 and 1917, both Menshevik and Bolshevik were, like the populist Social-Revolutionaries, really Raskol'niki in the footsteps of the Pugachev insurrection. Bolshevism was "Soviet Marxism," Marx's formulations superimposed upon the mystical conception of the Mir; the Russian "proletariat" was a Dostoevskyan mass of Raskol'niki, whose essence was that peculiar mystical phantasm, the Russian soul, not an individual soul, but a collective soul, the will of Matushka Rus emanating in the Blood of the people sprung from her Holy Soil.
True, one cannot read the best examples of Jewish literature from the 19th century, into the 20th, without a sympathy often becoming a feeling of lovingness. These writers expressed a certain greatness, a great dignity, and a saving sense of historical irony. These writers and those they sought to uplift, deserved something much better than they had such people must be helped, because the commitment they express will swell the precious, tiny, ranks of small portion of humanity which dedicates itself to helping others.
If we speak of the flaws of such people, we speak with the anger we direct toward a friend who is trapped in some self-defeating neurotic pattern of behavior. We hate the flaw the more because it is something destructive within a friend. Our affection does not lessen, but properly increases our emnity toward the flaw.
We needed a proper sort of World Jewish Congress then but not as a self-contained Jewish congress. We needed a force to shape the culture of leading nations of the world, to create a global environment through which things could be properly changed. This could not be Jewish, but leading thinkers of international Jewry had special reason, consistent with the Jewish commitment, to be a most active and influential part of this effort. It is to the shaping of culture that we must always address our primary efforts -- then, or today.
Ask yourself: How do nations, as well as individuals, act? They act as they think what causes each to think as he or she does? It is culture. It is essentially their view of what man's nature is, what his needs are, what the purpose of his life ought to be. It is also a conception of man in the universe. How is the universe composed, in which direction ought it to be steered, and what is man's possible and obligatory labor to that purpose? Why should a nation exist? Why should people communicate in some definite language? How should that language be developed? If we act merely on the will of men and nations as existing culture permits us to influence immediate decisions, and if that culture is dominated by a degraded conception of the human individual like Raskol'niki-influenced culture -- what ultimate result can we expect but that intrinsic to such a culture, a result consistent with a degraded conception of man? Where does the human race go then? What is the outcome of all of one's fine scheming to cleverly influence this and that particular decision of nations, then? If we practice degradation, we and those we influence become only affirmed in their degradation. It is not our individual instances of exerting influence which we shape the outcome; degradation will shape the outcome -- and we clever, influential fellows, will then curse God, no doubt, for failing to respect the cleverness of our influential actions.
If we wish to change things, we must shift the prevailing cultural paradigms. Those clever Venetian fellows, those belly-button contemplators of Mount Athos, the Order of St John Hospitaller, understand this, but they are evil in purpose and methods We are busy with being "objective." We are being "practical politicians," clever fellows. So, we play cleverly within that conveyance called prevailing cultures, while the Venetians steer the conveyance itself to Hell Why do we not concentrate on changing cultural par- adigms -- our way, in our choice of direction? Why do we not make a concerted effort to cause this to become successful? Why do we not learn from history how this is to be accomplished?
It is not good enough to be a Jew, even to be a good Jew It is necessary to change the culture of the world, to be responsible for the conditions of life of all peoples of this planet Otherwise, if you do good, it will be by accident, and no doubt you will supply a mystical explanation for that.

The Arab, For Example

There are three things every Jew must remember about Arab culture. There was an Ummayyad Islam. There was an lsmaili Islam -- largely destroyed over the period from al-Ghazali's "Destruction" through the Mongol conquests. The whole business was dominated by Byzantium, and that Venetian creation, the Ottoman Empire, from the Emperor Constantine until the close of World War I. Where more than 30 million Arabs lived in relative prosperity during the reign of Caliph Haroun al-Rashid, the ally of Charlemagne against the Ummayyads, approximately 10 million, at the most, live today. The destruction of the Arab world by Asharism is the essence of the Arab problem today.
The business of the Jew, especially if he plans his children to live in the Middle East, is to help free the Arabs from about a thousand years of sustained oppression. That is what some people call the "Jewish Ethic." Having read Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics, Spinoza's misguided appreciation of ethics, and having seen the full horror of the Jesuit's Cartesian dogma of "bioethics, I would prefer we drop the word "ethics" for anything admirable in Jewry, but I sympathize with the thought expressed by friends' use of the term "Jewish Ethics." I would prefer "Jewish morality" or, better "Jewish commitment." I mean specifically the moment when a father tells a son, "You are a Jew and now I must tell you what a Jew must be."
In a certain manner of speaking, my point has not been overlooked by masses of Ashkenazi Jews who have moved from Israel to whatever place their double-citizenship recommends to them as an alternative. They can smell the way things are going in Israel and around it. Seeing that Israel has in fact really lost the wars of 1956, 1967 and 1973, they have not lingered to await the consequences. I fear that merely burning Henry A Kissinger in effigy will not prove an adequate remedy for the present state of affairs.
Let us now speak with the utmost frankness on two leading subjects bearing upon this present situation. Let us put the British part of the matter to one side for the moment, for reasons I shall make clear enough. Let us look at the evil on the Arab side, by which I mean the Nazis operating chiefly out of Switzerland, such as Lausanne's Francois Genoud and the cronies of Dr Hjalmar Schacht generally. I mean the fellows from Walter Schellenberg's RSHA Amt VI, from the former Abwehr and Waffen SS, to be found wearing Arabic names in such places as Damascus and Aleppo. Let us also look at something more or less equally unpleasant, Israel's increasingly Byzantine (or, if you prefer, Venetian) policy toward the Arab peoples, now being extended into Africa and Central America.
The British, U S , and Soviet intelligence-services gloated over their agreements with Nazis, from 1943 onward, and gloated most em phatically over massive files of dossiers on Nazi officials of which copies are kept in such locations as West Berlin and Swiss Nazis, usable banking officials of Swiss banks. Indeed, Switzerland ended the war pretty much as the real Nazi redoubt, by the catastrophe, especially in such as Geneva, Lausanne, Basel, and Zurich, and not overlooking nearby Lyons in France. The most interesting items collected by these intelligenee services -- and the Mossad in due course -- were the assets of the Gestapo, Abwehr, and Waffen SS among non-German nationals, including persons of influence who had worked for the Abwehr and so forth during the periods of occupation.
There are certain matters of which elements of the lrgun based formerly in ltaly and France do not wish to have spoken publicly, even today, especially around Lyons and in connection with the Ovra of Mussolini's ltaly and Salo Republic: if anyone asks, they should either get a b]oody nose, or have it clearly understood that certain arrangements involved Bertrand Russell's variety of "methods which are disgusting even if they we necessary."
So, the RHSA Amt VI network was used to control most of the Arab world from the point coinciding with Schacht's "rehabilitation" at Nurnberg. These fellows based in Switzerland (one source estimates that 4,000 of them are still occupying influential positions there), created the international-terrorist and separatist movements, which most intelligence-services employed -- and thought they had more or less under control. After all, the Sufi Freemasonic network, and the apparatus linked to the Club of Rome's Arab Thought Forum and to Islam and the West, were assumed to be managed jointly by these intelligence-services together with fine Swiss financier-families.
Then, came the upward progress of KGB official Yuri Andropov in the wake of the Hungarian insurrection of 1956. (Was his mother Jewish, as some Israelis are slyly told or is he of entirely Greek origin? It really makes no difference. He was a protege of that crazy Finnish mystic Kuusinen and Eugen Varga.) After the Krushchev period, we saw a resurgence of the Third Rome paradigm in Soviet KGB operations and foreign policy vectors, a trend begun at St Basil's Cathedral by Stalin in 1943, and presumably levelled-down with the sudden demise of Lavrenti Beria. The Byzantine Slavic religious matrix was becoming prominent as a leading policy-instrument of not only soviet bloc domestic, but also foreign policy. With the work of Aliyev in Azerbaijan during the 1970s, it appears, heavy work in exploiting "Islamic fundamentalism" also became a major project of the KGB.
There was one way in which the KGB could lake control of "Islamic fundamentalism" through Switzerland, through deals with the Swiss-based Nazi International's apparatus. It is now obvious that this deal with the Swiss Nazis goes much further than the Islamic world, or the hideous anti-Semitic ravings of Francois Genoud. Friedrich Naumann's 19th-century Romantic fantasy, "Mitteleuropa," and the "pan-Europe" fantasies of Coudenhov-Kalergi, are marching in tandem, with Swiss backing, and deals across the border between the two superpower-blocs. This unleashing of the Swiss-German-Protestant-led development in Germany coincides with a Swiss-German language deployment in international finance against "the Anglo-American" powers. By pattern, Venice, Switzerland, and German speaking Europe, are being moved into Soviet-dominated "Finlandization," at the same time that the Nazi International's resources, and financial backers. are steering Islamic fundamentalism in a manner coinciding with Soviet interests.
What clever fellows the British, Americans, and Israelis have been! We are approximately at 1938 relative to the preconditions for World War III and for the general destruction of the Middle East -- Israel included.
What helped the Nazi International to consolidate its position in the Arab world was not only increasing collaboration with the Soviet KGB, or the KGB's friends among certain Byzantine churches' hierarchies. In the Middle East, Israel helped to ensure this most directly by adopting and practicing the policy, that Arab economic development, by increasing Arab strength, must be frustrated. The so-called Israeli lobby's influence in the United States made this U S policy, too.
Israel's strategic problem was to drive a wedge into the Arab world which would isolate and destroy the Nazi forces there. To accomplish this, it was necessary to foster developments within the Arab world whose cultural impact would be to weaken and ultimately obliterate Asharite currents. The key to this was to be found among the Palestinian Arabs. Since the establishment of Israel, two generations of Palestinian Arabs have been wasted from among whom at least tens of thousands of Arab leaders could have been developed, mobilized to accomplish for the Palestinian Arabs exactly that which, in essentials, Israel properly desired for itself. It was all there, in the history of Baghdad's creation and rise to power. It was written in the writing or al-Farabi and ibn Sina. How does one defeat the Ummayyads wtthin the Arab world -- the Ummayyads of yesterday who are natural recruits to Islamic neo-Nazism led by old Nazis today? One must help to create new Baghdads, and include the precautions learned from history, that the experiment not fail.
The hand of war of the republic is the hand of the works of peace What peace is offered the Arabs but the peace of Asharism, the peace which turns into endemic religious war. the peace of despair which turns to the well-known Asharite logic of the 'Żenemy of my enemy" when nothing else avails against the object of fanatical, obsessive hatred?
True, Israel could not accomplish this alone, but there was the United States Could not the same United States lured into a foolish policy have been aided to deploy its power for a sound policy? Do not tell me it is impractical ! Give me the resources of Israel and its friends, and let us assemble Jewish scholars anywhere in a convenient part of the world. and interface such a working group of scholars with the sort of private news-service capability I represent, and we could produce the most fine-tuned policy possible on this earth at present. If the principle of nearly 2,000 years of Jewish Survival had been practiced, if the principles of the Jewish commitment had been practiced, it would have been done. It would have succeeded with the backing of the United States.
If we can get through the present mess, it can still be done. Once the mistake is acknowledged, the beginning will be more or less automatic. Think not of tomorrow, but in the span of two forward generations: the important thing is to build day by day -- naturally, defending what is built -- against a future result a generation or two ahead It is not impermissible for a good Jew to learn an important point from St. Paul.

The Sickness of Cultural Pessimism

My friend puts it, that there are two philosophical outloooks in Israeli po1itics today. There are those who live only with the hideous memory of the Nazi Holocaust, and those diminishing numbers which think on 2,000 years of Jewish Survival. He is right; the evidence is overwhelming. My friend has courage. He fights still, but very fearful for the future of Israel I must help him, contributing to his efforts those of my personal resources which he may lack in significant part. To that purpose, I have written this to help his cause, and the cause of the Nahum Goldmann who has completed all he could do to that end.
The root of the problem is not Jewish. It is a blend of cultural pessimism of the German Jew, the cultural pessimism of the Polish and Russian Jew, the confused mind of the Austrian Jew, and the horrible impact of what happened between 1938 and 1945. The German Jew was driven into an initial state of cultural pessimism by the 20th-century continuation of 19th-century German Romanticism. The Russian Jew by the cultural impact of the Raskol'niki's mystical bestiality, the Austrian Jew by a culture sick from the beginning. The Nazi pestilence, because civilization demonstrated itself capable of permitting such things, especially the Germany formerly of poets and thinkers, fostered an awful, unthinkable pessimism about civilization itself To some Jews -- and others -- this meant: So is the world, and so we must live in it. To some, this meant learning from the methods by which Adolf Hitler succeeded -- when he appeared successful, but this time to Jewish advantage.
Now, the same old crap begins again If the Soviet Union continues its present Dostoevskyian trend, it will become Nazi in character, and is already collaborating with the Nazi International, as well as with church-bodies which are semi-Nazi in their Gnostic degradation. Did Israel, the World Jewish Congress, and so forth, fight cultural bestiality wherever it appeared ? Did they oppose the "environmentalist" movement, a faithful replica of the Wandervogel and related Romantic insurgencies which produced the Nazis? Did they work to strengthen Arab republicanism against Asharism within Arab nations? Did they take the cause of Pope Paul VI's Populorm Progressio as their own? Or, did most of them concentrate on vindictive tricks against any public figure who dared to criticize Israel's self-destructive course of policy-practice? In that respect, Israel's prevailing philosophical outlook has contributed substantially to creating the same old crap out of which the Nazi beast erupted, a threat to the very existence of Israel as a whole today.
The lesson must be learned from history, St. Paul's lesson. There is no religion -- except one to be spit upon as a wicked thing -- which does not look up personally to the Creator of the continuing creation which is this universe with love, and for the sake of that love act to uplift all of humanity, to destroy evil, but to save the peoples who are ruled by it. It is a false patriot who demands of his nation any policy contrary to that. In particular, you cannot be a Jew unless you care for the fate of future generations of Arabs, unless you are horrified by the fear, desperation. and so forth, which the Palestinian Arabs in particular have suffered. If you feel differently, please do not call yourself a Jew, but something else.
The purpose of existence of a nation is to give continuity to the life's work of a people, to make that nation a personality among nations, a personality dedicated to the improvement of civilization, and the uplifting of humanity as a whole. Such nations must exist, so that the good contributed by their individual members may be fostered and preserved to the advantage of future generations of humanity as a whole, even after the brief mortal life of the individual has been long completed. With such nations, each individual may work to some higher purpose for humanity, and may look up to the heavens with love, saying with great joy "I am doing your work."

Edit - History - Print - Recent Changes - Search
Page last modified on October 17, 2007, at 08:35 AM