Zion (A Modern World)

[The Amyclae]

---

Zion
God's New Israel

---

In the beginning was the Book and it was a book that preceded all books: the Revelations preceding all revelations. Zion is the nation of the Book, because the mystery and commandment of it is not only a universal library but something even vaster. It is more enigmatic because it replaces the universe. The nation returned and returned--they came back to it again and again. Every time it seemed that its secrets were exhausted they discovered another, for today's world, and it filled them with optimism. This optimism was genuine and it fuelled more determination to uncover more secrets. Such is the Talmud.

Geopolitically, Zion is built on the wisdom that it has received. Rabbis quote often “When I was young, I admired clever people. Now that I am old, I admire kind people.” Such is the belief of Zion. It is a new nation but it is an old people. It admires the clever nations and the old people. When a nation is both new and home to an old people a friendship is easily developed. Old people never disappear. Tradition always stays. But when it can rejuvenate that is how History is made. The old nations, with new people, are the nations that Zion despises. Progressive amelioration of past sins by recreating, out of whole cloth, new people—such is the cornerstone of sin. Sadly it is also the cornerstone of the new century's secular religions. From such divisions does enmity grow.

Revelation and the Book are totally contemporaneous terms. Revelation begins with the Book. The Book is Revelation. To enter the Book is to enter history. The way one enters history that is in the process of being written is to hear Speech as it is being revealed—right here and now. To hear Speech is to be reminded that, as citizens, they may consider themselves Walmingtonians, Icarians, Hibernordians, or from even farther afield, yet as believers of the Book "we are all, in all places, strangers and pilgrims." For, simply put, they shall celebrate in Jerusalem—next year. Elijah will visit—next year. The captivity of Babylon will finally be erased from the memory common to all—next year. While in the world of the Gentiles there is no other alternative. While in this world a cup will be left for Elijah, a door will remain cracked open and the Seder plate will always be missing that crucial meat.

The Talmud contains wisdom, but it does not contain all wisdom. Wisdom is received through the experiences of the People, and that wisdom is true. Wisdom holds that “The worship of reason is arrogance and betrays a lack of intelligence. The rejection of reason is cowardice and betrays a lack of faith.” Balanced in equal measure is the quiet but earnest belief that reason and faith can be united. The synagouges are aflame with belief but also electricity. The Talmud may never be replicated by the unclean, but it can be transcribed onto a computer. The holiest Rabbi may never be able to walk on water, but he does not avoid the joys of a jet ski. Faith and scientific reasoning are united within Zion. There is not argument to the contrary within God's New Israel. Arguments imply that the words of men can affect, merely by their existence, the eternal truths that have guided the nation to the present point. Therefore there is no argument about the play of science and religion. Those conflicts are for those without faith, and those without science. For it is those who are without faith that realize, in the small hours of the night, their great divorce from commonality with tradition. It is those who are without science that realize the great division between themselves and society today.

Until then, however, they shall be Zion of Isaiah 59:19. The verse speaks of a glory that rises from "the sunne." It would be more beautiful than Tirzah, Holier than the Temple Mount, grander than the Mountain Sinai and more comely than Jerusalem. It would arise from the West and like the sun this new Israel will make the world brighter for its existence. In everything, through adhering to Revelation, they hope to conquer time. This sun will hold still above the heads of the world—an unending embrace of God’s created light. For if modern civilization is a conqueror of space, then they are the conquerors of time, which is the other half of the world so unjustly sidelined in the quest for technical superiority, often at the expense of spiritual equilibrium.

Four responses have been found wanting in the past. The first is to ignore or simply reject the modern-secular world. The second response may be described as the fundamentalism of the intellectuals. They long for past medieval glories; the glories that are already long gone. The third is a flight from the world. This is the response of those who tucked away the Dead Sea Scrolls, and the same result can be expected from any nation that attempts to do the same. The fourth, and last, is 20th Century liberalism. But wracked with compromise it wrote itself out of Jewish history and, eventually, secular history as well

Wisdom received, “Mundus vult decipi'—the world wants to be deceived.” Therefore to live without deception presupposes standards beyond the reach of most people whose existence is largely shaped by compromise, evasion and mutual accommodation. Can they—the world—face their weakness, their vanity and selfishness, without a mask? Such is the purpose of God’s New Israel. Such is the purpose of the Book and Revelation. What the sun provides is not only brightness—and the clarity that comes with it. But it removes all shadows. It pierces every veil. There is a great divide between conception of self, and reality of self. This nation of the West is the connector of these two worlds.

William Stoughten IV declared that he would build this early paradise and with the Talmud. He would build a defense around it, and the monuments within it, with the stones the world threw at the Book. He was, in part, right. A Janus-like prophet, facing secular and sacred history alike, he--along with a select band of ‘Immortals’--sailed from Icaria in the late 18th and 19th centuries. Their target was a selection of territories that were ruled by ethnic Slavs. Their victories were signs from the almighty YHWH that he, along with his fellow filibusters, were answering a call greater than their own. The defeats were only punishments of love--a father dismayed at his wayward children. The punishments confirmed the promise of a new Zion.

The nation of 19,000,000 is generally urban, generally suspicious but united in their hope for progress. Spiritually, materially and politically they will evolve gradually and steadily. The halakha, coaxed from the cherished covers the Talmud, gives them the avenue. It is up to them to use this Revelation to achieve God's plan. Once perfected Armageddon will come and the unrighteous will realize how far they had fallen behind the zenith of human perfectability. But, sadly, not a moment sooner. God's chosen people are, by their very definition, a small class of people. View it as chiliasm, but with a bit of Whig historiography thrown in.

Such is Zion.

[The Amyclae]

---

History, Interpretation and Typology of Zion
Making Sense of God's New Israel

---

There are two main historical events that anchor the historical Zion. They in turn provide the lens through which the subsequent interpretation—from the context and perspective of Zion—and typology makes sense.

The first event is the conquest of the territory that now constitutes modern Zion. William Stoughten IV started the conquest and his children continued his efforts. Beginning in 1880 and ending roughly around the year of 1920 these men, dubbed filibusters by the Icarian press, were in large part Jewish but were—perhaps more accurately—acting as ‘freebooters,’ or pirates. There was land, there were weak governments and the drama practically writes itself.

The second main event was the toppling of the teetering, nearly theocratic government in the 60s by hardliners from the kibbutzim. The kibbutzim system, which had found fertile participants and land apiece in Central America, had grown into a political movement after reaching a critical mass in the 1950s. With its self-assurance and self-righteousness the obstacles, as the then political-religious system of balancing interests was dubbed, became evermore tiresome to the kibbutz leadership. The wings that favored kinetic action finally triumphed and the Glorious May Revolution was held--briefly. A multinational coalition, spearheaded by Amerique, quickly toppled the government and replaced it with a less popular, if more democratic, system. More secular, however, than its prior non-communist forefather.

Conventional interpretation to the first historical event is comparatively simple. Shortly after landing, and after a rather convenient set of circumstances the small Slavic states that punctuated the Central American coast were integrated through immigration, conquest and a stable economic framework. As the formative Zion state developed a stronger sense of self-identity, and it became apparent that not too many people were particularly keen on dying from yellow fever, the place was advertised—quite literally—as a Jewish haven. Filibusterism became more mythological than practical and therefore many historians make the leap between success and Jewish immigration. Perhaps fairly, as internationally Jews are well represented in educated circles and have a (well deserved?) reputation for technical skill.

Zionim scholarship interprets the second of these two events as the natural tension between the two strains of Judaic thought that goes back to Mt. Sinai. On one hand the world needs to be improved. The only way that the end of times can arrive is if the world becomes ready for it. But on the other hand, integration with the world is assimilation. When the Jewish people become georgeous blondes, and perfectly assimilated, they will cease to exist. Yet to renounce the world is to prevent the world's, and by extension the Jewish people's, own salvation. Some from both sides edge towards extremism. Well justified extremism, as even the moderate polity acknowledges. But when put into conflict, as the two strains were, by factors bigger than all of them. Such is life.

Typologically the country is a lament. On one hand identifying the growing discrepancy between the fact of modern life and the ideal. It is not a historical position, but a mode of explanation. Their example is a strategy for prodding the world community forward, in the belief that the world’s Jews can be made to correspond. By bridging the false gap produced by Augustine, and his two cities, the world can be and will be made whole. “Everyman comes at the common results with most conviction in his own way. But he only uses a different vocabulary from your’s; it comes to the thing” and so the nation was a halfway point. Its aim was to encourage the self-realization inherent in everyone’s mind. This lament is distinguished from the nineteenth century ideologies such as national, internationalism, communism and capitalism, which, though still invoked by many as justifying causes, have lost contact with the major realities of our world .

[The Amyclae]

---

Foreign Policy of Zion
Scholarly and popular views

---

Any discussion of Zion foreign policy needs the appropriate context. But the 'appropriate' context is debated strenuously. Some scholars, comparatively less sympathetic than the norm, have described any attempt to characterize the foreign policy of Zion as worthless. Any nation that looks past the present into a mythical future is an investigation into an intellectual cul-de-sac. The institutional hallmarks of Zion's foreign policy are opaque and contradictory, goes this line of reasoning, because Zion is on a quest fit for Lewis Carroll's Bellman.

That last bit may deserve some explanation. In the preface to the novel, Carroll advises the reader to "take the two words 'fuming' and 'furious.' Make up your mind that you will say both words, but leave it unsettled which you will first. Now open your mouth and speak. If your thoughts incline ever so little towards 'fuming,' you will say 'fuming-furious;' if they turn, by even a hair's breadth, towards 'furious,' you will say 'furious-fuming;' but if you have the rarest of gifts, a perfectly balanced mind, you will say 'frumious.'" In trying to balance the competing demands of its religious duty (which is altogether different than religious piety) and preserving its ancient traditions in the new environs of Central America the conclusion for Zion's Foreign Affairs is equally disjointed, frustrating but nonetheless evocative and to some extent sensible.

Some analysts, however, have coaxed more positive interpretation from the country's actions. The primary, and most convincing, line of reasoning is that to place one's self into Zion's shoes is to enter a binary world: those moving forward and those moving backwards. The former are, more often than not, those countries that have 'bought in' to Judaism's good-evil dualism and seek to ameliorate it in the ways any 'Whiggish' interpretation of history requires. Some faith, some ingenuity and some good luck. Those that look back span the spectrum: traditionalists who dislike change and some forms of liberalism that believe that change can happen yet there is no ultimate goal beyond a buzzword. Any setback in the two worlds' relations are not attributed to unfortunate policy choices by discrete political actors but is rather attributed to fundamental realities of the tension between the two religious/political systems.

At times this presents unfortunate manifestations. The system that confines religious impulses, and therefore allows the world to fall backwards, is said to require expansion at the expense of those moving forward in order to preserve the retrograde's system of domestic (and international) dominance. The theories associated with the work of Carl Friedrich or Hannah Arendt—which postulate that totalitarian regimes substitute foreign expansion for domestic development and individual freedoms—may be invoked. Backward regimes need to subjugate peoples and nations that are religious, and moving forward, because they need to substitute spiritual salvation with unrestricted materialism.

The reply to this unrestricted materialism, usually stemming from Zion itself, is that time must be always sacrificed for space, and if a legitimate nation would attempt the opposite then it must be proven, beyond any reasonable doubt, that the nation is not a legitimate expression of history. Secular regimes exist, it is thought, despite their repression and spiritual failures because they can sustain the illusion of national greatness and vanguard leadership through a plethora of meaningless consumer goods. Such nations are temporary and, naturally, are treated as obstacles.

In this view, the capability of Zion's foreign policy antagonists is assumed to be great, and superior to that of the Republic's capabilities. At the same time, however, the backwards powers are seen as inherently weak and beset with moral, ethnic and national problems. The notion of a ‘paper tiger,’ constantly probing for easy prey but quickly retreating whenever confronted by solid resolution and resistance, is generally introduced to suggest that (for the sake of the example) Progressive Bloc’s successes are not the product of ProgBloc superiority but derive from moral weakness and a failure to use the appropriate amount of power, faith or whatever word the reader deems most appropriate.

The evidence usually used to defend the claim is, ultimately, unprovable. One of the prime elements sustaining this viewpoint can be adequately understood as a form of historical experience. It is the foundation for the operationally more important elements contained within the second key factor, current experience, that involves major events and their lessons within the lifespan of the current generation. The appearance of development of these elements can be reasonably dated from the explosion of Enlightenment ideals from a generally centrist bent to one that is viewed—rightfully or wrongly—as dangerous extremism.

In the interests of religious utopianism, especially the pious strains that proliferated at the turn of the century on the diminishing frontier, and American continental hegemony (always eager in promoting thorns in the side of European interference and colonialism in the Americas) the American Republics wholeheartedly supported and backed Zion's creation. Some historians have pointed to the origin of Zion as starting in the Republic of America, with support for the expedition and adventurism and continues to this day with unconditional support for Zion.

[The Amyclae]

---

Sacred Versus Symbolic. Religion in Zion
The Two Systems of Zion

---

At the beginning of this era there was blasphemy. The sanctuaries of this world—justice, peace, belief—were abused and desecrated. And then desecration degenerated to a level without precedence.

We have long neglected to consider the Name in earnest. We have trifled with the Name, using it lightly, bearing it lightly. Now judgment is upon us.

Through the millenia, His voice has wandered throughout the world. How it was trapped and imprisoned in the temples! How it was misunderstood and distorted, cheated and transfigured! --And now we behold how this voice gradually withdraws, grows faint and is muted. The Jewish teachers tell us: Wherever Israel had to go into exile, the Eternal went with them. The divine consequence of human fate is for us a warning and a hope.

Zion is two political systems. These two political systems have a common root: the destruction of the Second Temple in 100AD. That is to say, they are two manifestations of 'modern' Judaism. Yet in spite of this common heritage, the national government is a fusion. Both approaches to Judaism have built a professional and personal alliance, therefore these two approaches to Judaism are in tension.

This tension, to be fully understood, starts with understanding both types of theology.

The first of these is prophetic theology derived from divine revelation. It is the belief of the kibbutz system. The second of these is religion interpreted by social philosophy. It is the belief of the conventional nationstate that self-identifies as the Jewish Republic. Briefly put: the kibbutz system, and the various divisions that exist within it, infer the existence of God from the unending Voice from Sinai. They are the particular echo for this generation's needs. The Jewish Republic infers the existence of God from human encounters. The dialogue of history provides the face of God.

The division extends through the political realm, but the fissure begins in the Talmud. It begins at the most basic point: what is the Talmud? To those who believe that Judaism is an echo of Sinai, the Talmud is a communication from God. To those who believe that Judaism is a social philosophy the Talmud is another form of dialogue. If history is the face of God, revealed through dialogue, then the Talmud is the voice that face speaks. But it is not divine. It is mediated through people.

Both sides have heard the Divine but from opposite sides of the Mountain. Both strive to restore a sacred energy in a fragmented and chaotic world. They both are confident that they can trust the living God or a universal human spirit as the source of faith in ultimate meaning—or we may not and thus decline into spiritual and moral irrelevance.

If the Talmud is dialogue, goes the prophetic (or 'kibbutz') counter-argument then is there not some sort of acquiescence to 'symbolism' that imperils the acknowledgment of God as an objective reality—let alone as the primary source of prophetic authority? In any dialogue there needs to be two entities. These entities must be represented by symbols. Yet in the Talmud, the conversationalist (i.e. Yahweh) is beyond symbols. Therefore, the symbol is smaller—much smaller—than reality. So much so that when it came down to brass tacks, no one needs to follow the pontification of symbol and man. Therefore, the Talmud cannot be a dialogue. It is not a discussion because It is divine.

For those who believe, sincerely, in the Jewish Republic's model this is a grim diagnosis. God is in exile! The rabbinic and Kabbalistic doctrine of the Shekhinah, God's indwelling Presence, is in jeopardy! That news is terrible and an indictment of the very foundations of the secular allusions couched carefully in the political framework of the Jewish Republic. To interpret the calling required by his people's forced emigration the nation must turn away from the modern tools that have been carefully calibrated since the Enlightenment. Ultimately, nationhood is a product of the Enlightenment. Few think it is easy to acknowledge both rabbinic orthodoxy and liberal compromise.

The division extends in the history and purpose of Zion. For those who believe in the prophetic nature of the Talmud, and Zion, both are are a rebuttal to the blinding light of European civilization, which prevented the Jewish people from appreciating the value of the small fire of the Jewish people's eternal light. Europe's Enlightenment was not a liberation but instead the start of spiritual confusion, where many overlooked the incomparable beauty of the old, if poor, home of Sinai's echo. But when 'we' compared our father and grandfathers (the teachers and rabbis) with European intellectuals—the comparison was not dishonest. Things were left behind not because they were true but because they were old.