The fourth collective and the Israel obsession

The internet and anti-Semitism

- On TikTok, the most widely used online platform today, a video portal created in China in 2016, anti-Semitism and hatred of Jews have developed in a form that has never before been seen in terms of its uninhibited spread and media presence. 

The phenomenon is well known and is occasionally discussed in the arts sections of newspapers.

- Whereas hatred of Israel and Jews previously tended to emanate from certain groups, such as Islamists, leftists, or nationalists, anti-Semitism and hatred of Israel have increasingly become a mass trend on the new online platforms. Hatred of Israel has become hip.

Women's rights activists describe the Hamas massacre of October 7 as a legitimate action in the struggle for freedom, and representatives of the gay community wave Hamas flags at events or wear Palestinian scarves. This is despite the persecution of gays and lesbians in the Hamas theocracy and the threat of death they face.

 - To a greater extent than other portals, Tiktok's algorithms register every inclination and respond with a cosmos of corresponding offers.

In this way, a search for “Gaza” brings up a flood of video clips accusing Israel of genocide and portraying the Hamas massacre on October 7, 2023, as an event deliberately and calculatedly permitted by the Israeli government, even staged, with the motive of committing genocide against the Palestinians.

- However, the phenomenon of anti-Semitism on TikTok is only an exponent, a bow wave of a trend that affects the internet in general and with which what used to be expressed as village gossip is growing into a global digital monstrosity. Anti-Semitism is becoming increasingly atmospheric. 

- In response to media reports about Israel's actions in the Gaza war, which followed the Hamas massacre of October 7, 2023, the chancellor and foreign minister of the German federal government, which took office in May 2025, announced a review of arms deliveries to the Jewish state. Israel was accused of disproportionate force and of failing to protect civilians, it was said.

- This is despite the fact that the casualty figures mostly originate from Hamas' propaganda ministry, which has been proven to use the highest possible casualty figures as a strategy, mistreats or murders insubordinate journalists, does not distinguish between combatants and civilians, deliberately establishes its military bases among civilian facilities, and continues to hold Israeli hostages captive. Hamas' figures have often been proven false. However, this was hardly mentioned in the German government's statement, which also failed to propose a solution to the question of what proportionality would look like in relation to a terrorist organization that has enshrined the destruction of Israel and all Jews in its charter and proclaims that the massacre of October 7 will be repeated in due course. And which refuses to surrender in order to avoid further suffering for its own civilian population, nor does it release the hostages.

- A few days later, the chancellor and foreign minister backtracked on their statements in view of the opposition within their party, only to announce again a halt a little later. Regardless, the proclamations represent a break with Germany's previous stance toward Israel. The audible accusation of pandering to a certain clientele, as well as to the general international trend of hatred toward Israel, cannot be dismissed, especially since the volume of German arms deliveries to the Jewish state is negligible, for example in comparison to deliveries to Turkey, which has been waging war against the Kurds in its own country as well as in Iraq and Syria for decades, resulting in countless civilian casualties, expulsions, and border shifts. Or in comparison to deliveries to Saudi Arabia, which has been heavily involved in the civil war in Yemen for eleven years, with 400,000 civilian casualties to date. At no time has there been a similarly critical statement from the highest German government authority regarding these arms deliveries.

- In doing so, the government is following the more or less anti-Israel guidelines of public broadcasting, which has been setting the political agenda since the Merkel era. There, reports on the Gaza conflict are always framed with images and emotional commentary on the situation of the suffering population of Gaza, while the reasons for Israel's actions and the fate of the Israeli hostages are discussed far less frequently, and the plight of the population that fled the rocket attacks of Hezbollah in northern Israel is usually mentioned only briefly and soberly. The casualty figures are taken over without comment from Hamas propaganda, while Israeli statements, for example about rocket launch bases under hospitals or Hamas command centers under UN buildings, are regularly accompanied by the remark that these claims cannot be independently verified. 

- The affirmative portrayal of Hamas propaganda by Tagesschau, etc., and leading media outlets culminated in the summer of 2025 in reports of a famine in Gaza. Images of emaciated children went around the world. It turned out that children suffering from genetic metabolic disorders had been selected. The parents or siblings, unless they were removed from the frame, appear well-nourished and healthy, which does not seem to bother anyone at Die Zeit, for example, which presents such a photo with the headline “This is what hunger looks like.” According to investigative journalist David Collier, “a tragic situation has been exploited and turned into a weapon.”

Israel's statements contradicting the claims of a famine in Gaza are ignored. Israel's food deliveries are reported in a derogatory manner or not at all.

- The alleged famine is declared by German parliamentarians on the left to be “the greatest crime of our time” – while in Sudan a real famine is unfolding  - hardly mentioned - in which, according to UNICEF, "more than 638,000 people – including many children  have been affected by the most severe form of hunger"  since 2024, triggered by a civil war that is being fueled not only by Russia and Iran, but also by Saudi Arabia, which remains one of Germany's largest arms importers.      The media state >>

It becomes clear: the hatred of Israel and the anti-Israel double standards in the media are palpable and are repeated daily.

- Anti-Semitism, according to a proven definition, is when one resents Jews or the State of Israel for something that one does not resent others for, or resents them less for.

How did this double standard come about, and how did anti-Semitism increase to such an extent?

Totalitarianism and the collective

- In contrast to the community that has grown out of associations of smaller associations and ultimately out of the living relationships between individuals, the collective aims to unite people into a unified block: community for the sake of community. The concept of fascism, symbolized by the bundle of rods, was originally intended to illustrate the bundling of the will of the many under a unifying leadership. Therefore, collectivist society always leads to a totalitarian system. And totalitarian leadership always strives for a collectivist society.

- A characteristic that reliably emerges sooner or later in the course of the formation of totalitarian collectivist communities is anti-Semitism. In the case of the Nazi state, it was part of the ideology, as it were. In communism or Stalinism, systematic persecution of Jews did not begin until later, after the end of World War II.

Islamic anti-Semitism

- In a newspaper article in 2003, Israeli historian Yehuda Bauer highlighted three totalitarian systems of the twentieth century that each developed a specific form of anti-Semitism as an essential characteristic. According to Bauer, alongside National Socialism and Stalinism, Islamism emerged as the last of the major ideologies of this kind, as a totalitarian system that is also accompanied by genocidal hostility toward Jews.

The third totalitarianism / Radical Islamists are fighting for world domination. They have that in common with Hitler and Stalin." Yehuda Bauer, Die Zeit, 2003.

However, the distinction between Islam and Islamism as a term for political Islam is a Western projection based on the self-image of the separation of governmental power and religion, as it developed in Christian societies. This corresponds to the passage in the Gospels in which Jesus uses the example of the two sides of a coin to say that one should give to Caesar what is Caesar's, but to God what is God's. Or when, standing before Pilate, he answers the question of whether he is the King of the Jews: “My kingdom is not of this world.”

- Islam itself does not recognize a fundamental separation between Islam and political Islam. The establishment of political rule is part of the conceptual basis of Muhammad's teachings and was implemented from the very beginning. Within twenty years, Islam grew into a military superpower and expanded rapidly. In contrast, Christianity existed for over three centuries in its early days as the teaching of a persecuted minority, which initially spread through dialogue and teaching.

- Mohammed, on the other hand, soon emerged as a warlord and demanded submission to the umma, the community of believers, after he came to power in Medina. The extermination of the Jewish tribe of Banu Quraiza (Sura 33 verses 26-27) and the murder of Jewish critics, such as the poet Ka'b ibn al-Ashraf, are described in Islamic sources. 

- It was representatives of the European Enlightenment who, in a romantic embellishment, initiated the 

 narrative of Islam's alleged tolerance. It served the new bourgeoisie as a means of criticizing Christianity and the Church. It bore little resemblance to the reality in the regions under Muslim rule. Although there had been a period of religious tolerance in Andalusia under the Umayyad dynasty (756-1031), neither Jews nor Christians enjoyed the same freedoms as Muslims, as evidenced by, among other events, the execution of the forty-nine Christian martyrs of Cordoba between 851 and 859. However, the period of relative tolerance also ended after other dynasties took power. The first pogrom against Jews on European soil took place in 1066 in Granada, which became the center of Islamic rule in Spain after the end of the Umayyad Caliphate. A Muslim mob attacked the homes of Jews and murdered about four thousand people. According to historians, the death toll is said to have exceeded that of the later Christian pogroms in the Rhineland. The first forced conversions and expulsions also took place in Spain under Muslim rule, long before the Christian reconquest and the expulsion of the Jews by the later Inquisition, which resorted to similar methods under Isabella of Castile. Under the Almohad regime, which began in 1148, Jews and Christians were given the choice of either converting to Islam or leaving the country, otherwise they faced execution. For this reason, the Jewish philosopher and physician Maimonides had to flee Spain with his family.

- Contrary to the notion that the persecution of Jews was primarily a European phenomenon, the history of Islamic countries shows a chain of pogroms, beginning with the massacre of the Jewish tribe of Banu Quraiza, which Muhammad himself commanded, to the Hamas charter, which quotes a hadith—a canonized tradition of Muhammad's sayings—with the genocidal statement: "The hour (of resurrection) will not come until you fight the Jews. The Jews will hide behind stones and trees. Then the stones and trees will call out: Oh Muslim, servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him" (Sahih bukhari 2925). 

However, the Hadith does not only appear in the manifesto of the theocratic Hamas; it was also recited by the Mufti of the Palestinian Authority on Palestinian television in 2012 during a speech on the occasion of the 47th anniversary of Fatah.

- Islamic anti-Semitism is a verifiable and continously effektive fact. In modern times, it also appears  ideological connotations, as in the texts of the Turkish Millis Görüs or the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood, founded in 1928. These and similar movements are generally referred to under the Western term "Islamism." Sayyid Qutb, one of the key protagonists of the Muslim Brotherhood, speaks in his 1950 work "Our Struggle with the Jews" of an "antagonistic Jewish power" and of an "inherent hostility toward Islam" within Judaism since the time of Muhammad.

Judaism, according to Qutb, is secretly striving for world domination or is already exercising it, controlling global politics from the background. Western conspiracy theories such as "The Protocols of Zion" are incorporated, as is the mention of the massacres of the Jews in Medina that Muhammad ordered, which are presented as a legitimate defensive measure. Accordingly, Qutb preaches the necessary spread of Islam, including through violence against non-Muslims.

His predecessor, Hasan Al Banna, who founded the Brotherhood, was an admirer of the Mufti of Jerusalem, Mohammed Al Husseini. Al Husseini maintained close contact with Hitler and was received by him several times in Berlin. During one of these visits, the Mufti personally advocated for the sending to their deaths of 2,500 Jewish children who, at Himmler's behest, had been exempted from transport to Auschwitz. Himmler had planned to exchange the children for trucks for the SS through negotiators in Turkey. However, the Mufti objected that they would later fight against the Arabs in Palestine, whereupon Hitler granted his wish and had the children transported away. Al Husseini established an SS division in the Balkans and one in the Middle East on behalf of the Nazis, which was to work toward a "Final Solution" there. He orchestrated numerous acts of terror and massacres against the Jewish population of Palestine, including the Hebron pogrom in 1929, in which 60 Jews were murdered and the Jewish population that had lived there for three thousand years was expelled.

- The Muslim Brotherhood spawned local branches in Syria, Jordan, and other countries, including Hamas in Gaza, which portrays its terror as a liberation struggle against Israel, but, following the principles of the Muslim Brotherhood, seeks the rule of an Islamic theocracy worldwide.

- Where collectivist coercion dominates the community, hatred of Jews seems to be a constant and inevitable consequence. An indicator. The extent of hostility toward Jews indicates when a collective becomes a black hole. They play the role of the canary in the mine.

The Anti-Semitism of Collectivist Systems

and the Anarchism of Judaism.

- The rejection of minorities is inherent in a collectivist, bloc-forming community. They disrupt the pressure for unification and are to be either assimilated or expelled. The Jews were particularly affected because they have existed as a minority for two millennia. But other minorities were also persecuted in the Nazi state.

- However, not to the same extent as the Jews, whose persecution was known to be part of the Nazis' public agenda. Moreover, the persecution originated in a country where the Jews had assimilated far more than elsewhere.

- This determined hatred cannot be adequately explained by minority status. Also striking is the pronounced anti-Semitism in some countries where no Jews live, such as Pakistan. It is a specific, instinctive hostility that develops in collectivist systems.

- The reason for this specific hostility lies in the essential anarchism of Judaism. In Judaism, man was first understood as an individual in an own relation to God and his fellow human beings. It was the respect for the life of the individual that distinguished Judaism from other peoples of antiquity, for example, in the rejection of human sacrifice.

 The hatred of Jews in collectivist states thus proves to be hatred of the impulse toward individuation and of respect for the life of the individual.

- Isn't Judaism better known for a detailed code of law than for anarchism?

Conspiracies

-In a collective, the individual is understood only as a function of the community, which thus establishes itself through itself, as it were -  as a community for the sake of the community. It is therefore based on coercion rather than on the free relationship between individuals. The individual's own movement remains unrecognized in a collectivist view of humanity. It is not perceived as a motive and stays excluded. In this sense, political scientist Bassam Tibi describes in his text “The Conspiracy” the suppression of one's own “history of the subject”  and the subjugation of the individual to the umma as a fundamental feature of Islamic society.

- The individual's motivation is suppressed and perceived as a disturbance of collective bloc. The individual's own movement, is thus projected outwardly as a threat. In this way, any change is perceived as the work of an external conspiracy. A conspiracy that is ultimately always attributed to the Jews, who introduced the individual's self-image in terms of freedom and independent movement into human history. And who are subliminally still identified with this.

- But are there no conspiracies? If one considers, for example, the emergence and media maintenance of the Corona craze and the statements of the WHO or the World Economic Forum, it is difficult not to recognize the realization of a plan and a strategy.

- Conspiracies represent nothing more than what has been suppressed from public consciousness. This means that they arise and can only act on the basis of the suppressed lives of individuals and are ultimately also conditioned by this. Namely, to what extent the individual allows himself to be determined by the collective mycelium and does not allow his own beginning—be it in agreement with the mainstream or in the reactivity of counter-collectives. 

- Conspiracies can never be the cause of a social catastrophe, just as a virus is not the cause of a disease; they are only the concrete means of fulfilling a rape that has existed long before. In this sense, the following applies:  The germ is nothing, the milieu is everything. (Claude Bernard)

In an autonomous independent structure, viruses not only have no access, they do not even arise in the first place. That is why both conspiracies and conspiracy theories are rampant in a collectivist system. This is also the case in the digital network of the Internet.  

- Again: How can the Jews, with their code of law and as a national community, stand for individuation?

- The impulse of individuation first had to be taken up by a people. God revealed himself to them as the principle of identity when he spoke to Moses in the burning bush, saying, “I am who I am.” If the people asked who had spoken to him, Moses was to say, “I am who I am spoke to me.” Man thus became an ego being a counterpart to heaven, separated from it as he became a counterpart from nature and separated to it. A boundary.

Therein lies his humanity—to be a living boundary and to take on and carry through this life on the boundary. (Romano Guardini)

- This impulse was first taken up by that people from whom Christ was to be born. In him, the God of identity himself became human, thereby giving every person the opportunity to enter into their own relationship with heaven and with their fellow human beings, regardless of clan or ethnic affiliation. Jesus often and clearly emphasizes this independence.

In Christianity, the ethical impulse of reverence for the life of the individual, introduced by Judaism, was given concrete form. Thus, when asked by the scribe what the most important commandment was, Jesus replied with those two passages from the books of Moses in which love for God and love for one's neighbor are mentioned. Jesus places these two commandments on an equal footing. 

- Rudolf Steiner comments: “The actual moral impetus for humanity was first prepared by Judaism, then further developed by Christianity.” (GA 193, p. 187) 

- However, by moral impetus he means ethical impetus, because morality, from mores, customs, can only refer to the customs of the community. Here, however, he means the relationship of the individual to heaven and to other people, i.e., ethics. 

 - The destiny of the people of Israel became the destiny of the individual human being in the development of Judaism and with the emergence of Christianity. This allegorical interpretation of the Torah was established by Philo of Alexandria, a contemporary of Jesus. In this sense, in late antique hermeneutics among Jews and Christians, the people of Israel represent the soul or the individual human being in his relationship to heaven, to his fellow human beings, and to nature.

- In the astrological system Munich Rhythm Theory, the connection between Saturn and Pluto is also interpreted as Egyptian captivity, in which the individual is subject to the bondage of a collectivist coercion.

- Hence the collectivist bloc's hatred of the Jews. This subsequently extends to Christianity as well. In his recorded table talks, Hitler explained that after the war and the final victory, the “church problem” would be addressed. Because of the commandment to love one's neighbor, which applies to all people, regardless of whether they are sick, disabled, of a different skin color or religion, Christianity is contrary to natural selection. "The war will come to an end, and I will see it as my last task in life to resolve the church problem. ... Pure Christianity leads to the destruction of humanity; it is naked Bolshevism in metaphysical garb,“  Hitler summarized. (”Monologues in the Führer's Headquarters," Werner Jochmann).

- Genocide researcher Gunnar Heinsohn also attributes anti-Semitism and the Nazis' irrational hatred of Jews to the essential element of Judeo-Christian ethics: In his book “Why Auschwitz?”, he explains that hatred of the “sanctity of life” and the respect for the life of the individual human being was the fundamental motive behind the Nazis' genocidal anti-Semitism. According to Heinsohn, this unconditional appreciation of life was first introduced into human history by Judaism and later adopted by Christianity.

He cites as an example the rejection of human sacrifice, which was still practiced by other peoples, such as the Germanic tribes, the Celts, and even the Romans, during the first centuries AD, and only came to an end with the spread of Christianity. The same applies to the rejection of the killing of unwanted children. The Greeks mocked the Jews for keeping all newborns alive. Heinsohn also states that the Jews were one of the few peoples who never committed a genocide. Heinsohn counters the objection that the Bible does indeed report genocides by saying that it is not a historical testimony, as evidenced by the fact that the tribes or peoples allegedly exterminated by the Hebrews reappear a few pages later. (Heinsohn, Lexikon der Völkermorde [Encyclopedia of Genocide])

- Are the Israelis not accused of committing genocide in the course of the war against the palestinians?

- Israelis have been accused of committing genocide since the founding of their state, and this accusation is part of routine anti-Israel propaganda, for example in Turkey or in the rhetoric of the TV station Al Jasirah, which is financed by Qatar and functions practically as a propaganda channel for the Muslim Brotherhood. The situation is similar among the offshoots of the socialist spectrum. But even elsewhere, the claim that the Jews or the Israelis “also” committed genocide is met with a strangely eager willingness to agree. 

- Regarding the situation in Gaza before the Hamas massacre, columnist H.M. Broder says that "Gaza is not a slum; life expectancy is higher and infant mortality is lower than in neighboring Arab states. And as for the ‘genocide’ that Israel is committing in Gaza, it would be the first in the history of genocides in which the affected population has multiplied: from about half a million in 1985 to over two million today." 

 - Israel's actions against Hamas cannot be considered genocide or war crimes. In response to the attack by Hamas on October 7, 2023, which has since neither released all hostages nor surrendered, the Israelis are attempting to eliminate the terrorist organization. They are using smart bombs and warning the civilian population of attacks. If civilian targets are destroyed, it is because Hamas has deliberately set up its command centers and rocket bases under hospitals, etc. Nevertheless, there has been relatively little collateral damage, for example compared to the actions of the US in Iraq, Turkey in the Kurdish areas, or Russia in Chechnya and Ukraine. The fact that the term is even used in connection with Israel's actions is a consequence of the propaganda induced by Hamas and its supporters, which is all too readily taken up by the media.

- In fact, no other military operation has spared civilians and alleged civilians in such a manner, warned them, and provided them with aid supplies as Israel's action against Hamas in Gaza. The fact that the number of Palestinians killed in attacks is based on information provided by Hamas, which does not distinguish between Hamas terrorists and civilians, deliberately locates its command centers, weapons depots, and rocket bases under hospitals, UN institutions, schools, and mosques, has prevented independent reporting for 20 years, and even tries to blame the Israelis for the victims of its own misguided rocket strikes, seems to play no role in public reporting. Even the false report of an Israeli rocket attack on a hospital with 500 victims, which actually turned out to be a misguided Hamas rocket hitting the parking lot of the hospital in question—without any fatalities—was repeated by German public broadcasters days after the official correction.

 - Heinsohn sums up that National Socialism sought to destroy the Jews in order to wipe out the ethic of the sanctity of life and respect for the individual introduced by Judaism. According to Heinsohn, the aim was to eliminate the software by destroying the hardware.

- This interpretation remains within the conception of Judaism and Christianity as a doctrine. It does not capture the living reality of the impulse of individuation, of becoming a person, which was once communicated to humans in God's address to Moses and which prepared the way for the birth of the Son of Man.

 The fourth collective

- Yehuda Bauer wrote his essay on the three totalitarian systems of the twentieth century shortly after the turn of the millennium, in 2003. (Der dritte Totalitarismus, Die Zeit, 32/2003)

The fourth collective had already begun at that time, but its totality, with which it would overshadow and change the lives of individuals, was not yet foreseeable.

The internet, and especially the mobile internet with its global collectivism, only began to dominate people's everyday lives in the following two decades. Unlike the previous collectives, which were based on an authoritarian, centralist leadership principle, this fourth totalitarianism is decentralized. It does not need a leader. The antagonism between the state and the masses that previously characterized totalitarianism no longer exists here.

Rather, collectivization spreads from within itself like a mycelium, thanks to the technical prerequisites of the Internet. It is no longer a totalitarian state that stands in opposition to the masses, but technocratic networking. 

This mycelium forms the fourth collective, far more comprehensive and fundamental than the previous ones. At the same time, it is intangible, an anonymous, sprawling network, feeding on the occupied present, persisting in the abolition of paths and places.

- With the advent of the internet, it became trendy in a new way to be against Israel. This is the case, for example, with numerous gay and lesbian associations and gender ideologues, who would not be able to live unscathed for a week under Hamas. The hatred of Jews on social media platforms such as TikTok, X, and others is astonishing; those who are not active on these platforms only notice it through its effects. After Nazism, Stalinism, and Islamism, the internet represents the fourth collective. An mental occupation without ideology, a trend—shaped solely by the digital abolition of places and differences. That is the occupied present.           Cordyceps >>

- Why the occupied present?

- The incompatibility expressed by the fact that places are far apart is short-circuited and suppressed on the internet. A false present emerges in which the experience of the differences between places is not included. A friend who has lived in Spain for 30 years said that it was only during the power outage in Spain in May 2025 that he felt he was really somewhere else, really away and separated from his relatives and friends in Germany, with whom he had communicated almost daily via the internet until then.

-The blockage of incompatibilities suppressed in the technocratic network gives rise to subliminal aggression. This is becoming increasingly apparent on social media platforms and forums.

Initially perceived as democratizing, the internet now represents an impersonal autocracy of the digital network that interferes in the lives of every human being more than any previous regulation. And it allows a form of anti-Semitism to emerge on social networks that surpasses anything that has gone before. In addition to the relevant hostility toward Israel in public broadcasting and the corresponding reporting in most official media, the counter-collectives  also stand out.

The counter-collectives

- The counter-collectives are home to the outcasts and the alienated, who cannot bear the strangeness of the official world and the media spotlight and who gather in communities of like-minded people to find a little comfort and validation. Such counter-collectives often develop a specific, know-it-all anti-Semitism, as the collectivist mindset there forms a quasi-closed hothouse.

- This applies, for example, to circles and platforms resisting the measures of the corona madness, esoteric forums, and, last but not least, astrological forums, where a simplistic view of the Middle East conflict is expressed, often devoid of any historical or geographical knowledge, but strangely persistent in its anti-Semitism.

- As in the left-wing spectrum of opinion, the erroneous cliché of the indigenous Arab inhabitants of Palestine/Israel being driven out by a Western Jewish immigrant society is taken for granted. There the kurds butcher and Hamas supporter Erdogan is quoted as a witness against Israel, as is the Hamas propaganda channel Al Jasirah.

Such sources preach a complete distortion of the history of Israel and the Arabs and construct their own historical reference. The message is that Israel is a colonial state.

- A look at travelogues and accounts from the 18th and 19th centuries reveals a different reality. There, the country is described as largely barren and deserted, as in Mark Twain's 1869 travelogue, which describes the region around Jerusalem and the entire coastal strip between Jaffa and Haifa as far inland as a deserted wasteland: “A deserted land, whose soil, despite its fertility, is completely overgrown with weeds... Silent, mournful spaces. We finally arrived at Tabor... We did not encounter a single soul along the entire way.”   (“The Innocents Abroad,” Mark Twain, 1869)

- Similar to the even earlier report by the Dutchman Adrian Reland from 1714, which mentions a predominantly Jewish and Christian population in the cities, including Gaza.

It is obvious that not a single city or settlement has been founded by Arabs in the past centuries. According to Reland, there are no place names of genuine Arabic origin; all place names are meaningless Arabic variations of originally Greek, Latin, or Hebrew names.   (“Palaestina ex monumentis veteribus illustrata,” Adrian Reland, 1714)

- A large proportion of the Arab population can be traced back to immigration from neighboring countries during the 19th century and not to the Islamic-Arab conquest of the 7th century.

According to the British consul, approximately 18,000 people lived in Jerusalem in that year (1865),

8,000-9,000 of whom were Jews. At the end of the 1880s, approximately 43,000 people lived in Jerusalem (28,000 Jews, 7,000 Muslims, 4,000 Greek Orthodox Christians, 2,000 Catholics, 510 Armenians, 300 Protestants, and 100 Copts). In 1882, during the first major wave of Jewish immigration to Palestine, several hundred thousand Arabs lived in Palestine, the majority of whom had also settled there only a few decades earlier. "The vast majority of the Arab population in recent decades were comparative newcomers – recent immigrants  or descendants of immigrants who had come to Palestine in the last seventy years." (Martin Gilbert, Atlas of the Arab-Israeli Conflict, New York: Oxford University Press 1993, p. 24)

In the 18th and well into the 19th century, the land of Palestine was a barren and sparsely populated country, consisting mainly of swamps and deserts, and it was scarred by wars.

Jörg Rensmann, The Myth of Nakba

- Jerusalem, which appears to be so important in today's Middle East debate, was of little significance to the Islamic world for centuries. After the local Christians and Jews rejected his demand to be recognized as a prophet, Muhammad changed the direction of prayer and designated Mecca, with the Kaaba, as the religious center of Islam.

Unlike in Judaism and Christianity, Jerusalem is not mentioned by name in the Koran. Its importance as the third holiest site in Islam, alongside Mecca and Medina, only emerged in the nineteenth century.

Even during the attack by the six Arab states after the founding of the State of Israel in 1948, the Jordanian army had little respect for the “holy site” and no qualms about using heavy artillery in Jerusalem, which the Israelis avoided despite heavy losses.

- Perhaps also because they didn't have any?

- Immigration from neighboring Arab countries increased when the country prospered as a result of Jewish return and cultivation  from 1890 onwards. However, Mehmet Ali Pasha, who ruled Egypt as a vassal of the Ottomans, had already initiated a major transfer of the Arab population to the West Bank, i.e., to Judea and Samaria, in the first half of the nineteenth century.

It is difficult to say when and whether a Muslim majority population had formed, as no census had ever been conducted under Ottoman rule and the first reliable survey of this kind was carried out by the British in 1920 after the start of the British Mandate. (Tilman Tarach, “Der ewige Sündenbock”)

When the UN proclaimed a Jewish and an Arab state on the former British Mandate territory of Palestine in its 1948 resolution, this two-state solution was accepted by the Jewish population, the later Israel, but not by the Arab states. Contrary to the previous agreement, they attacked the newly proclaimed Jewish state. At that time, the US was still skeptical about Israel. American fear of communism made the kibbutzim appear suspicious. Although they had de facto recognized Israel, they refused to grant a de jure recognition or any assistance.

Nevertheless, Israel prevailed in what initially appeared to be a hopeless war against superior Arab forces from six countries — Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, and Saudi Arabia — so that by the time the ceasefire was declared on July 20, 1949, Israel controlled several additional territories, while the West Bank and East Jerusalem were occupied by Jordan. Egypt, in turn, occupied the Gaza Strip.

- The war led to flight and displacement. Around 800,000 Arab refugees were counted after the end of the military conflict. They were joined by around 900,000 to one million Jewish refugees from Arab countries, who are rarely mentioned and who were taken in and integrated into Israel. The Arab refugees, on the other hand, were largely settled in camps by the UN and Arab countries and have since been kept in refugee status, which is unique in the world in that it is inherited, so that the originally reported number of 800,000 refugees has now grown sevenfold.

- The designation of the Arab refugees from the former British Mandate territory as “Palestinians” and the associated concept of a Palestinian people only emerged later, in the 1960s, with the formation of the PLO, the Palestinian Liberation Organization, under the protection of the Egyptian ruler Nasser, who sought to weaken Israel. Previously, the term “Palestinians” referred to both the Jewish and Arab populations of the geographical area of Palestine, which had been under British mandate since 1920 and had previously belonged to the Ottoman Empire. Under Muslim rule, which began with the conquest in the 7th century, the country was known as Djund al-Urdun - the district of Jordan. The term was not clearly defined geographically and, like the Roman Palaestina, also referred to the region east of the Jordan River, i.e., parts of present-day Jordan.

The term Nakba

- It is characteristic that the 1948 War of Independence is referred to in anti-Israeli propaganda as the Nakba – the catastrophe – a term that also only came into use in the 1960s and which cultivated the narrative of the expulsion of the Palestinians in the Arab-Muslim hemisphere. Published by the Muslim Brotherhood and the propaganda channel Al Jasirah, these distortions and historical omissions are presented in the style of factual historical TV documentaries, which Al Jasirah knows how to imitate perfectly. 

The fact that after the 1948 war, the West Bank and East Jerusalem were occupied by Jordan and the Gaza Strip by Egypt does not appear in these accounts. Nor does the expulsion of Jews from Arab countries, as well as from Samaria and Judea in the West Bank, an area inhabited by Jews for thousands of years. Nor is there any mention of the expulsion of the Jewish population of East Jerusalem, where the Jordanian occupation destroyed synagogues in 1948 and paved the streets with gravestones from Jewish cemeteries. Nor is there any mention of the 1929 massacre of the Jews of Hebron, which led to the expulsion of the Jewish population that had lived there for three millennia.

- In fact, the term Nakba is an example of the retrospective stylization of the conflict associated with the founding of the State of Israel and the subsequent attack by the five neighboring Arab states. Which proves once again that no one would be interested in the Palestinians if Israel were not the state of the Jews.

- The fate of the Palestinians would have been stylized as little a catastrophe as the other conflicts among the Arab population of the region. In some of them, Palestinians were no less involved or affected. This was the case, for example, in the brief Jordanian civil war, when the PLO attempted a coup against the royal family. In September 1970, this led to military action by the government, in which, according to estimates, up to 40,000 Palestinians were killed. The PLO then fled to Lebanon, which led to conflict with Lebanese Christians and Druze and escalated into the Lebanese civil war. After the PLO and allied militias launched sustained artillery attacks and terrorist attacks against Israel from Lebanon, the Israeli military also intervened in the civil war in 1982.

Or the Hama massacre in 1982, in which the Syrian government crushed the Muslim Brotherhood uprising there. There were 20,000 fatalities after the military advanced on the city with tanks and heavy artillery.

None of these conflicts were recognized as Nakba. This term was only coined in connection with Israel.

- The media always refers to the “West Bank” and not to Judea and Samaria, which are the names of these regions since biblical times and are used not only by the Jewish population but also by parts of the Arab population. None of these conflicts were recognized as Nakba. This term was only coined in connection with Israel.

- The media always refers to the “West Bank” and not to Judea and Samaria, which are the names of these regions since biblical times and are used not only by the Jewish population but also by parts of the Arab population.

- The West Bank, East Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip only became “Palestinian land” when they were conquered by Israel in the Six-Day War of 1967. Jordan and Egypt generously relinquished their claim to occupation and declared the territories to be Palestinian land. In this way, they had with the ongoing refugee status.a bargaining chip against Israel. Nevertheless, shortly after the Six-Day War, Israel offered to return the occupied territories in exchange for peace. However, in the so-called triple “no” of the Arab states at the meeting in Khartoum—no to peace with Israel, no to recognition of Israel, and no to negotiations with Israel—any peace treaty with Israel was rejected. After the Yom Kippur War of 1973, only Egypt and Jordan changed this stance.

- The West Bank, East Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip only became “Palestinian land” when they were conquered by Israel in the Six-Day War of 1967. Jordan and Egypt generously relinquished their claim to occupation and declared the territories to be Palestinian land. In this way, they had with the ongoing refugee status.a bargaining chip against Israel.  Nevertheless, shortly after the Six-Day War, Israel offered to return the occupied territories in exchange for peace. However, in the so-called triple “no” of the Arab states at the meeting in Khartoum—no to peace with Israel, no to recognition of Israel, and no to negotiations with Israel—any peace treaty with Israel was rejected. After the Yom Kippur War of 1973, only Egypt and Jordan changed this stance.

- The name Palestine was given to the region by the Romans, who, after suppressing the last uprising of the Jewish population in 135, wanted to erase all memory of the land of Israel and the Jews. From then on, they called the land “Syria Palaestina,” in reference to the Philistines, a seafaring people, presumably of European origin, who once ruled Gaza.

- In fact, a heterogeneous population, such as may have existed in the region over the centuries, is most likely to be found in present-day Israel, where 20% of the population consists of Arab Israelis, who are represented in parliament, the judiciary, the authorities, the police, and the military.

In this way, Israel is the only country in the region where Muslims can vote freely and be elected, and where Arabs, Christians, and Muslims can currently live under constitutional, liberal-democratic conditions. In this way, Druze and Bahai in Israel enjoy freedom and protection, while they are subject to persecution in the surrounding Islamic countries.

- In 2023, the conflict over the Armenian enclave of Nagorno-Karabakh had escalated. Azerbaijan had finally imposed a blockade on the region, preventing food and medical supplies from reaching the Armenians. A former chief prosecutor at the International Court of Justice in The Hague considered this to be genocide through planned starvation. In September 2023, a large-scale military offensive took place, during which the Armenian enclave was conquered by Azerbaijan. Around 200,000 Armenian Christians were displaced by September 27.

This was ten days before the Hamas massacre and the subsequent Gaza war.

The issue barely made it into the news and was hardly covered in the media, not least because the German government had diplomatic scruples about Azerbaijan, a country rich in raw materials, as well as Turkey, which had supported Azerbaijan.

- As expected, after October 7, in the conspiracy theory greenhouse, people were quick to interpret the Hamas massacre as staged or deliberately allowed to happen due to the ignorance and paralysis of the Israeli authorities in response to previous warnings and the lack of military coordination. This was despite the fact that in the run-up to any terrorist attacks, such as the Bataclan attack, the Magdeburg Christmas market attack, or the Berlin Breitscheidplatz attack, there had been a multitude of warnings and puzzling official decisions that had made the terrorist acts possible.

Unlike in the case of Israel and the massacre on October 7, conspiracy theories were hardly heard here.

- At the same time as the Gaza war unfolded in the aftermath of October 7, civil war escalated in Sudan between the government and Islamist militias supported by Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Russia, ultimately leading to the collapse of the state. The death toll is estimated at 30,000 by the end of 2023, with over 100,000 displaced persons, and 638,000 people affected by severe hunger there in 2024, according to UNICEF.

None of these conflicts, including the civil war in Yemen or the Turkish attacks on Kurdish areas and their occupation, has been the subject of debate or triggered mass demonstrations in the same way as Israel's fight against the Hamas dictatorship in Gaza to prevent future massacres.

- The reason for this comparative lack of interest in other conflicts, it is said, is the fact that no Jews are involved, but rather Muslims are fighting Muslims or Muslims are turning against Christians.

- When it comes to Jews and Israel, the international community always seems to develop a passionate commitment to parties whose declared intention is the destruction of the Jews, as stated in the Hamas charter. UN bodies act as representatives of the worst human rights violators. They pass resolutions that are particularly hostile toward Israel. These include such strange accusations as the discrimination against women – signed by Iran or Saudi Arabia. In fact, the Jewish state is condemned more often by the UN Human Rights Council than all other countries in the world combined. Israel and its alleged or fabricated violations are a permanent item on the agenda.

At the same time, these bodies have never passed a resolution condemning Turkey's border shifts in Syria and military action against the Kurds, or even mentioning human rights violations in Algeria, Saudi Arabia, China, or Pakistan. The UN Human Rights Council represents, as it were, the organ of a globally institutionalized anti-Semitism. 

- In the Western hemisphere, however, there is another motive in addition to instinctive collective hatred of Jews: Jews are particularly resented—because they subliminally represent the impulse toward individual emancipation—when they themselves form collective societies. The delusion of a powerful international Jewish network and conspiracy—contrary to the anti-Semitic reality in international bodies—seems symptomatic here. 

- Added to this is the insinuation of moral arrogance on the part of Jews as the “chosen people,” which readily ignites a willingness to prove moral transgressions on their part. 

A similar motif is the discussion of abuse in the church, which is reported on particularly eagerly, even though the number of cases is statistically lower than in other institutions, such as sports clubs or schools.

- But can criticism of Israel be equated with anti-Semitism?

- Israel is clearly criticized more than other countries, as can be seen from UN resolutions alone. The very term “Israel criticism” attests to this: a Google search for the word returns an incomparably high number of results within seconds, exceeding any other combination of words relating to a nation and the term “criticism” by more than a hundredfold.

The adjective “Israel-critical” can also be found in the online edition of the Duden dictionary. There it is defined as: “Critical of the state of Israel.” On the other hand, terms such as “Turkey-critical,” “ USA-critical” “Russia-critical,” “China-critical-,” or “Iran-critical” do not appear there at all, nor anywhere else with any notable frequency. As I said, if Israel were not a Jewish state, no one would be interested in the fate of the Palestinians.

- Why is that?

The sense of guilt in the industrial society

- Every technical methodology involves a suppression of the growned gestalt. For this reason, the museums were created at the same time as the factories—the aim was to preserve the suppressed gestalt in a bourgeois manner and cultivate it in the ornamental garden of the art world. This is why industrial society has a fundamental sense of guilt. This unease stems from the technical short circuit of the path and the use of the machine. Friedrich Georg Jünger commented on this:

“Even the smallest technical work process consumes more energy than it produces ... Technology does not create new wealth, it depletes the existing wealth ... The feeling of metaphysical hunger that grips us when we look at the machine corresponds to physical hunger: food is becoming scarcer.” (The Perfection of Technology / Friedrich Georg Jünger)

- The sense of guilt in industrialized countries demands a scapegoat. And this seems to play a significant role in the one-sided reporting on the Middle East conflict. Namely, the idea that a modern industrialized country is fighting a clan society that has remained seemingly primitive, with donkey carts. That is why the Palestinians have been supported by the UN and other bodies for decades. As a result, the standard of living in Gaza before October 7, 2023, was significantly higher than in neighboring Arab countries. There was better education and healthcare, and life expectancy was 74.6 years, several years higher than in neighboring Egypt. In the West Bank, it is 75 years, higher than in Turkey. Unique in the world, a special aid organization was established solely for the Palestinians, the UNRWA. In the schoolbooks published by this organization, Palestinian children are taught to hate Jews, and several members of the institute were proven to have participated in the massacre of October 7.

- This is fatal for the Palestinians, as despite having a higher standard of living than in neighboring countries, they live in a protected timelessness in which independent individual and social development is hardly possible.

- In its one-sided view of the Middle East conflict, global industrial society wants to rid itself of its feelings of guilt and projects them onto Israel. By condemning Israel and romanticizing Hamas, it hopes to rid itself of the guilt of the repressed gestalt.

- But why should this projection be focused on Israel and the Jews in particular?

- The state always strives to reduce the individual to a function of the community. Thomas Hobbes spoke of the “state machine.” Leviathan >>

The formation of a state therefore inherently involves a collectivist affiliation. An affiliation that Israel must abstain from. It contradicts the nature and history of the people of Israel to establish a state construct. Rather, it is necessary to develop a federal community. This was also the concern of the representatives of the cultural Zionist movement, including Martin Buber. In contrast to Theodor Herzl's political Zionism, they sought a non-state, rather federal community in which individual associations would organize themselves into larger associations, also and especially in confederation with the Arabs of the region. 

This was in the spirit of the biblical federation of the twelve tribes, whose cohesion was not based on community for community's sake, but resulted from a spiritual orientation, a turning toward the principle of identity.    martin buber und theodor herzl >>

- This established cultural cohesion of the Twelve Tribes was abandoned when the people felt weak in the face of attacks by the Philistines and demanded of the prophet Samuel that they wanted “also have a king like the other nations”.

- Theodor Herzl articulated his concept of providing the Jews with a nation state like the other peoples in a similar way, arguing that this would remove the basis for anti-Semitism. In this way, the nations would get rid of the unloved Jews and they would have their own state.

First Zionist Congress, August 29, 1897, Basel, 09:00 a.m.

- In the astrological picture of the first Zionist Conference, the contemporary situation is illustrated by the position of Neptune and Pluto in the sign of Gemini. Neptune and Pluto had come into conjunction six years earlier. An epochal constellation that indicates the development of nation states in which, in accordance with the sign Gemini, which stands for the regulation of the communal, the idea of the purity of a national unity is to become a collective regulation, with which the foreign, not belonging to the collectivist concept of the people, is to be made the bearer of the repressed and ultimately expelled or eliminated.

In the course of the French Enlightenment, Rousseau's slogan "back to nature" had already defined the people as the "natural" determinant of the state.

- The conference was a reaction to this development. The idea of national purity had shaped the climate that had led to increased persecution of the Jews. When Herzl suggested that the Jews should be sold a piece of land so that they could emigrate there, he was not initially thinking of Palestine, the then still Ottoman Djund al Urdun, but of other sparsely populated regions, such as in Africa or South America. Only later did his intentions turn to Palestine, which was then named in the conference program.

- It was the hostility towards Jews that became apparent in France in 1894 in connection with the Dreyfus Affair that prompted Herzl to write his book “The Jewish State”. This affair, which began barely three years earlier, becomes acute in the horoscope of the congress with the Neptune-Pluto connection, triggered by Scorpio, which, rhythmically rising clockwise in the first house, rules the seven-year phase before the event.

The Jewish-Alsatian officer Alfred Dreyfuss was accused of espionage in September 1894 on the basis of fabricated evidence and in connection with anti-Semitic intrigues within the army. The arrest and subsequent conviction on December 22, 1894, combined with an anti-Jewish campaign throughout France, coincided exactly with the triggering of Neptune, 2.7 years before the Congress.

- It can be seen that today the state of Israel is suffering a similar disenfranchisement as the Jews as individuals over the centuries. Hence the statement that Israel today is the Jew among the states.

- At the time, Martin Buber described the founding of a Jewish nation state as “national assimilation”. Several years before the founding and before his emigration, he had a discussion with Stephan Zweig about the future of a Jewish community in the Holy Land. Zweig was alienated by the idea of a Jewish nation with “parades and cannons”. Buber replied that he knew nothing about parades and cannons, but he did know about new, old forms of Jewish community, based on the free structure of the associations. Things turned out differently.

- Buber later argued against the founding of an Israeli state. And when it could no longer be prevented, he advocated a bi-national Jewish-Arab state, following the example of other states with mixed ethnicities, such as Belgium or Switzerland. But he was not listened to in this either.

- Every state amounts to reducing the individual to a function of the community. Therefore, the demand for a non-state community is more uncompromising for the Jews than for other peoples, as they have brought the emancipation of the individual into human history. This also applies to the Germans.

- Why for the Germans?

Michael

- Because of the language. The relationship to the addressed is similar. German, like Hebrew, has an etymological transparency in which the binding nature and meaning of the words reveals what is being addressed, shines through, as it were. It is a window. Unlike English, for example, which tends to be more reporting and conveys consens. The clear, even harsh, setting off of consonants in German is also similar to Hebrew. The language here is a third between two.  

Perhaps it has something to do with the fact that Jews are particularly fond of the German language.

And perhaps it has something to do with the Archangel Michael, who is the patron saint of both Jews and Germans.

- The original Reich idea of the Holy Roman Rich was also that of a federative community with a common spiritual orientation. 

- The view that the nations have a guardian angel goes back to the Book of Daniel, 12:1, where it says: "At that time the angelic prince Michael will arise to stand up for the children of your people.

- Michael corresponds to Saturn and therefore to the fourth of the four astrological quadrants. He separates subject and object and opposes them. During the battle in heaven, he pushes the dragon down with the words Mi Cha El? - Who is like God?

- In the fifth century, the archangel Michael revealed himself in a grotto on the Gargano on the Lombard Adriatic coast. Since then, one of the oldest and most important pilgrimage sites of the Middle Ages has been located there, the St. Michael's Grotto of Monte Sant'Angelo. It was here that the cult of St. Michael originated, which was to have a formative influence on Christian Europe. In 1022, Emperor Henry II visited the site and asked the archangel to act as patron saint of the Germans. If they should prove themselves worthy, was the answer. Since then, Michael has been regarded as the angel of the Germans.  Der SCH-Laut >> 

- Michael stands for the determination of the boundary between I and you, inside and outside, earlier and later, for the determination of the individual in his own movement and his separation from the allreadygiven. And thus he stands for language, which separates and mediates between subject and object; it is the bond between the speaker and the addressed.

- The Jews' love of the German language is well known.  Around 70 percent of Jews in the world today belong to the Ashkenazim. These are the descendants of the Yiddish-speaking German Jews who migrated from the Rhineland to Eastern Europe, as far as Russia and Siberia. Many of them later emigrated to America.

Yiddish represents the German of the 16th century, with Hebrew, Polish or Russian interspersed. The Ashkenaz people, always mentioned positively in the Bible, were identified with the Germans in medieval Judaism.

The Jewish community of Cologne is the oldest Jewish community north of the Alps to be mentioned in documents. Ina document by Emperor Constantine from the early fourth century defines the position of the Jews in Cologne's citizenry. As the city was temporarily the capital of the Frankish Empire and Frankish rule extended from Cologne and the Rhineland, and later from Aachen, the Jews of the Rhineland are likely to have played a part in the development of the German language.  One of the earliest writings in the German language is a text in Hebrew script: the Worms Machsor from 1270 contains a prayer written in Hebrew letters in German. The same applies to the Duktus Horant from around 1300, which contains a version of the Gudrun song. It was rediscovered around 1890 in the storeroom of the Cairo synagogue.

- One of the pioneers of the Zionist movement was the Jewish doctor Leon Pinsker. In view of the anti-Semitic pogroms in Russia, he wrote the pamphlet “Autoemancipation” in 1882.

On the opening page is a sentence by Rabbi Hillel: "If I don't help myself, who will? And if not today, then when?"

Pinsker saw anti-Semitism as a consequence of Jewish status:

“This ghostly apparition of a walking dead, of a people without unity and organization, without land and bond, which no longer lives and yet walks among the living; this strange figure, which can hardly find its equal in history, which is without model and without image, could not fail to produce a peculiar, strange impression in the imagination of the peoples as well.”

- This view was later echoed by the People's Zionists around Herzl. It presupposes an equation of people, culture and state and represents a reaction to the incipient nationalism of the 19th century. The cultural uniqueness of Judaism and its significance for individuation, the dialogical principle, as emphasized by Martin Buber, hardly plays a role in it.  Instead, the Jews are seen as one people among others who are treated with hostility because they have no place and therefore remain alien in their own way. If it did not continue to cling to this uniqueness - or if it had a place - there would be no hostility towards Jews, according to this view.

Similarly, the view that by adhering to the code of law, the Jews had  preserved their culture and denied its natural demise, while other cultures had accepted it. The associated compulsion to regulate occupies consciousness and prevents the flow of life. This is the source, so the view, of the hostility towards the Jews.

- A view in which the peculiarities of the cultures appear not understood, neutralized as it were, similar to the club colors of competing football teams, without a statement in the sense of a development of the human being towards individuation, and without the significance that Judaism and Christianity have for the emancipation of the individual and for the formation of an I-consciousness, as shown in the image of the Egyptian captivity, for example, as the equivalent of the Saturn-Pluto connection, which is about the liberation of the individual from the heteronomy of the collective.

- In this respect, it only appears to be a contradiction if Judaism is said to have produced respect for the life of the individual and at the same time is characterized by a code of detailed regulations:  It is the contradiction of a development. And the crisis associated with it.

- The opposition arises precisely from the conflict between the individual and the imprint of the community.

This is why the sign of Leo, in which the freedom of immediate life is inherent when it is on the Ascendant, has Capricorn in the fifth house - because here it is a matter of determining the impulses of the soul and the free movement of the individual.

- If the determination of the individual in the sense of a movement brought forth from within is not permitted, it must become the external determinant of community regulation - Saturn, as the determination of the individual, becomes the external compulsion to regulate. A social exoskeleton like an insect state.

However, this conflict can only arise where the impulse of the individual's own movement and respect for the life of the individual emerges and becomes conscious in the first place. For this reason, Egyptian captivity had to be the prerequisite for the impulse to I-, the impulse to identity, to approach the individual.

With the receipt of the tablets of the law on Mount Sinai, man was addressed for the first time as an individual in relation to heaven. The laws were not essential, but rather the dialogical relationship that was initially expressed in them. Similar to a child whose development towards independence may initially be accompanied by parental instructions. And who later confronts them as a person.

- Thus, when the Torah was proclaimed at Sinai, man, although still among the people, was addressed for the first time as an individual in a personal relationship with God.  A Pharaoh was no longer the mediator and representative of the deity, but each individual among the people - this is explicitly emphasized -  heard the address.

- For this reason, when there was a shortage of water for the second time during the wilderness wanderings, Moses was no longer to strike the rock with his staff to bring forth water, as he had done at the beginning of the wilderness wanderings and decades before the Sinai event, but was to speak to the rock. The staff was previously a sign of the power that the leader of the people had. Now Moses was to put it aside and speak. Only he and Aaron had the staff, but the language was given to everyone. 

- The autocracy was to end. Moses, however, did not follow the instruction and insisted on the privilege of being the mediator and leader of the people. He struck the rock again with his staff so that water came out. Because of this transgression, he was not allowed to enter the promised land.

why moses was not allowed to enter the promised land>> 

- The later emancipation was articulated by the prophet Jeremiah:

I will put my teaching in their inward parts and on their hearts I will write it. .. Then no longer will one teach his neighbor or his brother, saying, "Know the Eternal! For they will all know me from the least of them to the greatest of them. (Jer. 31:34)

The early church was also aware of this essential anarchism. Gregory of Nyssa, who was highly esteemed in the Orthodox Church, categorically formulated an ethical insight that was independent of authority: 

More than anything else important is that we are subject to no necessity and in bondage to no power; but it is for us to do according to our own counsel and pleasure. For virtue is a matter of free will and not subject to any rule. What is born of compulsion and force is therefore not virtue. (Gregory of Nyssa, de hominis opificio)

--------------

 - Judaism brought the destiny of the individual to humanity. Hence the biblical reference to the chosen people. With the address at Sinai, man had become a counterpart. Because it had previously become a reality experienced by the Hebrews, the subject-object relationship could be conceived in Greek philosophy.

- The code of law is only the other side, is the compensation for the suspression of the determination of the individual in which the determination is replaced by the determining factor of the rules.

- At the same time, this conflict can only arise where the determination of the individual is required at all. That was the Exodus from Egypt and the proclamation of the commandments at Sinai. In Judaism, this is also celebrated in the same way, namely as God's address to the individual. This is the liberation from Egyptian captivity, which stands for the captivity of the individual in the function of the collective.

- The Jews brought the impulse of liberation from Egyptian captivity, from the liberation from heteronomy through the collective, into the world, but as a community. This was necessary so that the Christ could emerge from the Jews and so that the individual's impulse of individuation could become reality with Christ. Hatred of the Jews is hatred of man, of the human, of that which cannot be regulated. It is hatred of Christ. (Leon Bloy)

- By bringing the impulse of individuation into the world, the Jews as a people find themselves in the zone of danger. They must refrain from any collectivistic determination and form a community solely out of the evolved relationship between individuals. Only an evolved, federative community can meet this requirement.

- Escaped Egyptian captivity, not yet arrived at the destiny of the individual, where nothing can happen to them because they do not belong - the fate of the Jews stands for the fate of man in technocratic heteronomy.

***

(C) Herbert Antonius Weiler, August 2025