Zionism Is Neither Racialism nor Nationalism

Rose Sybil explores the intricate dynamics of religion and identity in the Middle East, highlighting the role of ethno-theocratic absolutism in shaping political and social landscapes, and examining its impact on alliances, nationalism, and the broader global context.

The Political alignment of the whole Middle East must be viewed as ethno-theocratic absolutism instead of racialism or nationalism, mixed in with Trader/globalist infections that can affect anybody. This is not only evident on the Muslim Arab side but also on the Israeli Jewish side, democracy notwithstanding, especially in how people view each other. The religious foundations of Israel conflate ethno-religious feuding with racialism or patriotism and nationalism, making it messier for everyone else. Zionism reignited a focus on religious rightism that tore apart Europe during the establishment and later the fracturing of the Catholic Church and created the West in the first place.

This dynamic is nothing new but unique to this age and goes back to the very origins of Judaism. They are the first people to see themselves as uniquely chosen as “God’s” people combined with a revelation as the primary religion detached from natural processes. This prevented them from making alliances in a healthy manner with peripheral groups (it is normal for far-apart groups to see each other as alien as they are separate subspecies and less suitable for peripheral ethnogenesis), and this has echoed (pun intended) through millennia. This small shift in worldview created an inflexible “us or them” dynamic among Jews with all other groups, not allowing for natural alliances or peripheral ethnogenesis. A lack of natural peripheral ethnogenesis creates an inflexible false dichotomy of extreme inbreeding or multiculturalist random crossing of far-apart people en masse.

The religions during the Heroic Age of Europe, barbarian tribes, and Archaic and ancient Greece were a naturally evolving manifestation of their people’s souls with overlapping bullseyes of identity. People warred but their warring and alliances were not over religion. Peripheral ethnogenesis has always been common; intermarriages and adoptions between tribes, clans, and city-states occurred continuously but in small percentages that had cumulative effects over time. These also were natural ways for people to create alliances, and without this exchange or only a one-way exchange there is stasis of forms that emerges with a friend/enemy distinction that likewise only goes one way. Jews only allow peripheral ethnogenesis if it is towards their group and expect full allegiance from those that are apart, unable to form real alliances. When you see everything in a friend/enemy distinction in a stasis, eventually it just devolves into paranoid enemy distinction and the inability to make friends. This is why a friend/enemy distinction should be a tool for understanding current circumstances and not an end-all-be-all.

Christianity hit Rome after its transformation to a globalizing empire and the culmination of the Trader subsuming the Heroic Spirit. For all the differences between the two religions, Christianity did take revelation as the primary aspect and the concept of being God’s chosen, except that it applies to all people as long as they convert. This equally harms the foundations of identity and traditional spirituality by replacing natural formative processes with top-down religious rightism. Now we live in a world where people are more willing to accept far-apart random other cultures as long as they are Christian but scorn natural variance in their own people. This tore apart Europe many times in ways more insidious and destabilizing than normal warring between groups, because people take it to such extremes that there is no going back at future points to alliance. It is all or nothing in a way not seen in nature or natural overlapping between people where, at times, they align and others oppose each other.

Many will point to the unifying factor it created against the Islamic onslaught of Europe, but Greece was able to unify against the Persians at Thermopylae and other adversaries without religious universalism. In fact, it is unlikely there ever would have been an Islam if there were not a Catholic church first. Just like Christianity took some aspects from Judaism and not others, the fundamental similarities between Christianity and the more regressed and primitive Arab Islam are the expansionist nature and forced conversions. All three of the religions share the revelation detached from the natural formative processes aspect. The more esoteric and complex aspects of Sufism were added in when Persia was conquered and forced to convert. The only reason that Arabs are not accused of the same colonialism as Christian Europe was the greater rate of dysfunction and lack of ability to keep control of colonial states. The unifying factor after the fracturing of Islam (just like Christianity, we see a lot of inward fracturing after the forced conversions of remnants of local traditional spirituality) is perceived external enemies. Having an Israel in the region gave previous enemies their Muslim ummah in common against the infidel — without this they turn against each other.

Jews likewise see themselves in a permanent stasis of a people, and Zionism is their escape when unable to cohabitate with others, but the blame for that is always externalized into likewise all-or-nothing vantages of victimization as universal good and evil. This mentality then eats itself in liberal hierarchies of victimhood where they look for the oppressor and oppressed or good and evil, thus finding Zionists to be the oppressors (more functional and capable of harm) and Arab Muslims as the victims. Jews’ inability to form normal alliances and peripheral ethnogenesis stemmed from this religious absolutism of themselves as “God’s” chosen, and they can externally blame all they want, but it created likewise irreconcilable dynamics with them and other European groups. The inability to have flux or put anyone else first is a mirror image of Christianity’s all-inclusivity, both being harmful in their own ways.

This dynamic within Jews is not new but occurred with Hellenistic Jews and Maccabees. Religious zealotry prevents the overlapping of various identities and natural offshoots. In response to Hellenistic Jews that had a natural draw towards Hellenism, likely from overlapping Bronze Age backgrounds and past ethnogenesis, Maccabees slaughtered them and forced circumcisions. Zionism was likewise a response to patriotic Jews that reformed, which at the time was very right-wing but is now a blanket term used for any liberal that left Hasidism or orthodoxy. Now those more nationalist Jews confuse religious zealotry with patriotism and nationalism, which actually prevents normal bonds and alliances between groups while maintaining distinct identities.

The Jewish Reformation was a product of peripheral ethnogenesis and a desire to integrate. Prior to this, the formation of basically a new form of Judaism called Hasidism was a reaction to the Church constantly pushing for conversions. Reformation was then the next fold in reactions to Hasidism, and the swing back in response was religious Zionism. The old spirit of the divide was always present, clashing religious zealots with hostility towards those they lived amongst, wanting to prevent other Jews from natural peripheral ethnogenesis and change. See how what came before actually causes its own inverse and opposition in a folding manner of Jewish chosen revelation absolutism to Christian (and this has nothing to do with Christ) universalist chosen revelation absolutism to a more radical form of Judaism in Hasidism to Reformation to Zionism reacting to the desire to reform and have living origin myths and peripheral ethnogenesis. Hasidim are hostile even to other Jews, not wanting to be conscripted for years. They have a negative interaction with pretty much every group, e.g., Christians visiting Israel. They tend to push the settlements, etc. I do wonder but cannot find conclusive evidence if they were unwilling to fight for other nations, similar to how they have resisted fighting for Israel. The Reformist Jews were most definitely present in European nations’ militaries and were mixing with other Europeans already for a long time. The blame which they were assigned could very well have been from hostile interactions with Hassidic Jews.

In ancient and Archaic Greece, there were overlapping and changing belief systems and cults but they did not mark lines of identity or alliance; it was far more fluid. Religion has morphed into something that destroys natural spirituality and leaves a void that atheist materialism can fill. It can also be worn as a skin for maintaining power, but no matter what, it creates stasis of forms. True Heroic leadership is self-sacrificing and correcting, and identity is like many overlapping bullseyes. Spiritual synergism does not require extremely demarcated lines of more recent high religions, as much as ethnos is a living and changing thing. The bloodbaths seen in Europe for conversion and then fracturing of so many offshoots of the original Church harmed Europeans. There is also a reason that the conversions first targeted pagan groups but allowed Jews to remain coexisting, which mirrors the evangelical sacrifice for Jews that is not reciprocated. They still see Jews as the original chosen; they are the chosen because they believe in revelation relating to a Jew.

Judaism and Christianity have almost inverse issues created by their religions. Judaism tries to keep a stasis of forms of past scripture and people in a manner that they do not understand peripheral ethnogenesis. The focus is heavily inward, and there is a consistent effort to stop natural changes on the edges that happen because of integration. For example, Zionism emerged as a response to the Jewish Reformation. At the same time, there is an expectation for Jews in other areas to remain loyal, which hinders the formation of beneficial alliances through marriage. This situation forces them to either abandon their new culture or face strong opposition. Christianity does the opposite in that it prioritizes the religion also in a stasis of forms over other cultural bonds; tradition is uprooted from natural overlapping bullseyes to a top-down, interchangeable part that works no matter if you are in one nation or another. It becomes an all-or-nothing instead of an organic transition between regions and their spiritual beliefs, where they must all conform to the top-down religion or are not part of the whole. The ancients did not proselytize to foreign people; their spirituality was layered and varied enough to have alliances without having to all have the same religion.

The original reaction of the Protestant Reformation might have devolved into a stasis of forms, arguing over who could interpret dead scripture. The underlying revolt of the Spirit was against the disconnection of living local identity and for the true universals in holy formative processes in the foundations of creation, not in the top-down universals of revelation-as-primary religions. Spirituality is the generative force harmed by its decay into a religious simulacrum. The European spirits are distinct in that we can have a confederation of local identities and religious/cult beliefs but still have bonds of unity. The Heroic Age itself was a confederation in this manner. There was no distinction between revelation and nature; theism and deism were a continuum with overlapping layers across various groups. The ancient world had revealed a natural religion in the image of creation itself, from nature into the transcendent, not separate from it. This schism has long been a significant cause of devolving simulacra of the material world in transhumanism. The spiritual first became a religious simulacrum expansionist/consuming force before devolving into materialism. Protestantism was a revolt against the unipolarity of the Church, as it is unnatural to all identity and meaningful creative spirituality of the Europeans, even if it also contains favorable aspects.

The reaction to separating church and state in the West did not touch the real root of the issue, which was a need for local totalizing spiritual identity that builds up in the unity of peripheral bonds of protection and the exchange of marriages to tie regions together. The separation of church and state ended up folding along the same meta zeitgeist of the material void, making all people interchangeable and subject easily to markets. Instead of its intention of preventing religious infighting between totalizing rural localities, it eventually became a means of destroying the religious rights and morals of these localities. Just as speech protections were never imagined outside of the context of cultural repercussions and danger, so did they never imagine a time when the separation of church and state would be used to invade our lands with non-European religions or harm local spiritual identity. It is only from this over-litigated position without healthy foundations that special interest groups can form and pull the nation in every direction for multicultural globalism. Without local identity and living ethnos, minority groups are no longer accountable to a majority, just like the state is abstracted away from the people it supposedly represents.