The Jew as Demigod in Marxist Theology

In Marxism, the most important socialist thesis in the world, the Jew is a demigod from whom the world must be saved. Marx, in fact, focused on his former religious-ethnic identity as one of the central focuses of oppression from which the human race must be liberated. Universal redemption is also redemption from the Jew, as was conceptualized by Marx's mentor, Bauer, with the Jew constituting the essence and epitome of the bourgeoisie.

In this context, by promising a universal redemption, and since the focus is on redemption from the Jewת which constitutes an important methodological layer, though not as essential to the process as in Hitlerism (for in Marxism, redemption is achieved through a class struggle in which Jews represent its essence, but their Jewishness is not necessarily universal to the essence of class itself!), many Jews in the last seven generations have found themselves acting to diminish or openly deny the centrality of the Judaism-Bourgeoisie axis in the Marxist redemption, as it exists at least in its Western interpretation.

Although research has prominently exposed this essence in the last generation through the work of James Lindsay and especially in the work of the young English historian who publishes his comprehensive work under the moniker "Tik History," it was as if Jews on the left ignored the fact that Marx refers to their community of origin as a key factor that the class redemption must fight against.

The Jews were therefore not just a representation for the class redemption in Europe, but an actual political class from whose power one must be saved. Another possibility is that, alternatively, thousands of Jewish Marxist thinkers and hundreds of thousands of Jewish Marxist activists did not exactly understand this during a certain period in history (until 1925), lacking the ability to conduct a comparative analysis of the morphology, legal structure, categorical treatment, and confrontational characterization present in both Marxism and National-Socialism regarding the Gnostic role of the Jews as a demigod, upon whose socio-political defeat humanity's redemption depends.

The issue is that, aside from this position's limitation to a specific historical period (1880-1925), it is an unconvincing position in general. A simple reading of Marx's writings—not just a comparative reading of Marx versus Hitler (a comparison which highlights the shared Gnostic role of the Jews as a class that is the enemy of the race, on one hand perpetrating a racial-cultural mixing meant to destroy the Aryan race from which one must be purified, and on the other hand serving as the enemy of the proletariat, executing and perfecting the leveraging of capital as a substitute for labor to oppress and eliminate the proletariat, from which one must be saved)—already reveals Marx's eliminationist attitude towards the Jewish collective in society.

The Pathology of Self-Annihilation

For one form of psychological pathology, that of self-hatred, it is precisely the awareness of the eliminationist layer in Marx's doctrine that leads to its adoption. This is a layer that provides an ideology promising not only self-suicide (as a Jew), and not only a death sentence for the national collective (the Jews), but also the redemption of the entire world in the process. The Jewish-Communist achieves a triple redemption. He is freed from his personal Jewish being and sacrifices his national selfhood to enable a personal/national conscious-material liberation, which becomes a necessary condition for the tidings of world redemption. In this, he himself becomes a mini-Marx, who himself turned into Jesus (the Pauline Jesus, not the historical one) 2.0. (Marx took the transformation into the Pauline-Jesus to the extreme by not only destroying/sacrificing the core of his original being for the sake of world redemption, but by making this self-destruction/sacrifice a catalyst and overture for the world’s salvation).

One could argue, therefore, that between the two types of totalitarian socialism, Marx allows for death by suicide at the price of a human redemption of class equality, while Hitler allows for death by murder for the sake of a racial redemption of class supremacy. It is clear why, when the final product is so different and the psycho-theological mechanism so distant, few focus on the fact that in both Marx and Nazism, the Jew is the object of oppression requiring liberation and functions similarly in both narratives.

An Imperfect Symmetry

We are not facing a perfect symmetry. While Hitlerism necessitates the annihilation of Jews to achieve racial equilibrium, in Marxism, liberation necessitates the cancellation of Judaism as a class. While in Hitlerism the liberation is global, in Marxism it is a liberation whose heart may be on the European continent where Jews are a class to be saved from, but not every society must pass through the stage of advanced capitalism managed by Jews in order to be redeemed. That is to say: India, China, and Africa are capable of producing a proletarian revolution before late capitalism has ripened, and without the need to eliminate the Jewish bourgeoisie. In other words, the Jew—despite the importance of his downfall in the Euro-American order itself—is not an absolute essence of liberation. There are tidings separate from him, there is a new doctrine after him, even without his absolute elimination. And there is an existence for Jews as individuals without him as a class, just as with the Jesus of Paul. Paradoxically, from this, the Jew gets to become an individual only with the help of Marx's world. The only price is that he has no field of collective or Jewish otherness, and therefore he also has no self-essence. He must sacrifice his self-essence for the purification of the whole, and therefore his own purification requires making the non-Jew the master, since he himself, who was in the position of the bourgeois master, must convert himself into dissolution in order to be purified. That very dissolution of the whole is forbidden and dangerous per se in Hitlerism.

But there is another possibility. There is also the possibility that in certain historical circumstances, as was the case in Eastern Europe, Marxism—while ignoring its antisemitic content—allows, at least from a governing and structural standpoint, for equal rights for Jews in a pre-liberal society. And this was indeed the case in Eastern Europe, where Jews would accept Marxism without recognition, ignoring the theoretical eliminationist foundation of Marxism towards their own essence.

The Split Jewish-Marxist Identity

In this, the Jew, upon arriving at Marxism, exhibits a self-split. Both the Jew who wants to eliminate himself finds something in Marx, and the Jew who wants to exist in equality finds something in him. The question is, is the elimination of Judaism necessary for the realization of Marxism? To this, Ber Borochov and the Zionists answered "No," and to this other communists, including Jews in the Soviet Union, answered "Yes," at least for many years. And one can see that the hatred for Israel today is in no small part a derivative of this exact internal Marxist conflict, which today conceptualizes Judaism not as the enemy for being the head of capitalist exploitation, but as the enemy for being the head of the colonialist class. And as they stand as the heads of oppressive super-structures, it is no wonder that many Jews with a tendency for world redemption through self-annihilation (the Jesus archetype, internalized by Jews) will find themselves on one side or the other of the Marxist identity. Whether as those who admit fully that the world is based on dynamics of exploitation and oppression, and thus will have to apologize for finding themselves (by sheer coincidence!) as Jews, in the same role as their bourgeois ancestors in Europe as oppressors. Or as those who admit fully that the world is based on a dynamic of exploitation and oppression, at the head of which stands the Jewish bourgeoisie (Zionism), somehow, time after time. This really leads the Jew to the creation of a conscious Jesus who wishes to survive (with the strange thought that he can save the world as long as he is alive!?), unlike his Norman Finkelstein-like brother who is a conscious Jesus wishing to be crucified, knowing that only his death, based on a Pauline narrative, can save humanity.

But since today Jews do not live in pre-liberal societies where they lack legal equal rights, and unless they are living under the delusion that America is about to become a post-liberal society, they have no reason to use Marxism, unless they live in Europe, where for a long time Jews have been second-class citizens in a certain way. And then they must decide what kind of identity they want to adopt, and whether they truly believe, in light of the combination of the struggle against Israel with radical Islam, that the redemption of the classes might truly depend on the crucifixion of the Jews.

Such a position, facing the rising danger of Islamic fascism, is not necessarily logical even according to classic Marxian logic, especially in light of the fact that on a physical level, a colonialism financed by vast Arab capital is currently taking place in Europe itself. This raises a possible suspicion that although the bourgeois Judaism is certainly a problem, it is possible that today the problem is becoming bourgeois Islam, and therefore there is a need to rethink both Marx's relationship to bourgeois Judaism, and perhaps even for a neo-Marxist theory that wonders how Marx himself would have related to Islam as a cultural, economic, and reactionary-religious force.

The problem is that because Marx is frozen in time—aside from perhaps neo-Marxism and post-colonialism, which have been hijacked on one hand by political Islam and on the other by postmodernists—without a direct address by Marx to the Muslim problem, all we can do is adopt a critical or conservative attitude towards Islam if we are not Marxists, or interpret Islam according to the Marxist delusion that sees the world as a reflection of power relations. In that case, we could claim that it is precisely the Jews who are the weak, and the Muslims who are the strong, using the Palestinian issue to turn the tables.

A Deeper Motivation: Subverting a Marxist Destiny

But if we return to a philosophical analysis, and especially to the relationship of Judaism to Marxism, another, deeper possibility arises, which I wish to describe here.

It is possible that there are Jews who, because they know that in Marxist theology they are in fact the demigod from whom the world is supposed to be saved (the bourgeoisie of the capitalists), they in fact act consciously and join, and lead, Marxism in order to fight the historical destiny that Marxism itself designates for them.

This is a more primary form of the split today between Jewish Marxists that actually began with the existence of the Frankfurt School, whose leaders were not necessarily anti-Zionist. They, similar to Ber Borochov or Berel Katznelson, are those who come to Marx and tell him that his analysis is correct—but not absolute. The Frankfurt School claims that not only is it correct economically, it is also perhaps correct culturally, but in Cultural Marxism, there is no Jew who is a demigod. In the economic Marxism, however, there is. Thus, in Zionist-Marxism, the Jews are not a demigod; they remove themselves from the European affair in which they are a demigod and focus on themselves.

So too with the Frankfurt School. After 1917, when many Jews joined the "proletariat" and removed themselves from the Jewish bourgeoisie, this move was supposed to enable the de-demigod-ization of the Jews in the eyes of Marx's students. Therefore, like the Zionist-Marxists who removed themselves from their exploitative role in the European class struggle, "we too adopt a Cultural Marxism, in which our Jewishness is not a real factor." And just as we, the Zionist-Marxists, fight against British imperialism to achieve our redemption, so too through the Cultural Marxism of the Frankfurt School, the exploiter/capitalist becomes a different entity; he is changed doctrinally, not just contextually (as in Zionism). He is internalized through the capitalist man himself and his formations, in a new stage of oppression. That is to say, Cultural Marxism had to create a new category, a theoretical innovation, of exploitation in light of which we see the class struggle (without the need to become Zionists), whereas Zionist Marxism simply had to remove itself from the struggle altogether.

In this, both of them changed the destiny of the Jews within Marxist theology—likely also, to a considerable extent, one can suspect as a hypothesis, out of a recognition of the problematic class-position of the Jews in both early and late Marx.

Therefore, and not only for this reason, there are quite a few Jews who have perhaps become Cultural Marxists. And in doing so, they may be perceived by other Marxists as those who prefer their own race/nation, and who are willing to manipulate Marxist orthodoxy for the sake of their race/nation.

The Present-Day Trap

Cultural Marxism not only frees the Jew from the demigod function (thereby creating among left-wing antisemites a sense that Jews, by being the pioneers of Cultural Marxism, are paradoxically indeed this demigod by betraying Marxist orthodoxy to save their own skin, and among right-wing antisemites a sense that because Marxism [created by a Jew] hates non-Jews itself, it is now just creating another form to realize itself—thus intensifying antisemitism from the right and the left, even in a post-liberal world), it also, of course, serves the known goal of creating class redemption in a capitalist world.

But now, today, in a world where Cultural Marxism is kneeling before Islamic post-colonialism, in which Jews are the demigod, it is difficult for leftist Jews to free themselves from the situation they have fallen into. They are returning to the place they were under classical Marxism—with Zionism being successful, and with Cultural Marxism being a "conceptual construct of white-Western people"—with no way to escape.

This is true whether they are the type of Jewish-Marxists who seek to eliminate their personal and general selfhood for the redemption of the world, or whether they are the type of Jewish-Marxists who seek a kind of civil equality and the right to a distinct self-existence. If they are Jewish-Marxists who do not want to be annihilated and only joined for the sake of equality, thereby using Marxism as a means for their own liberation which is supposed to exist parallel to the liberation of the entire world (like Jesus), then they recognize that this is the stage at which they must get off the bus and return to their Judaism.

But if they are Jewish-Marxists who want to be annihilated (Pauline types), but require that the annihilation occur within a more encompassing ideology—they are in a different problem. They have entered a crossroad where they must kill their Jewish brothers without being suspected of being Jews themselves, because their very Jewishness is contrary to the realization of the general redemption. They can no longer hide behind the redemption of the classes to cancel their self-identity, hoping that no one will understand that even though they themselves joined the most antisemitic ideology in modern history besides Nazism, they are still Jews. Even the expression "I am a Jew and..." will not necessarily save them at this stage, as we will explain below. Because after Zionism is no longer the problem, the opponents of Zionism will do a little thinking, return to their ideological source after this intermediate stage of eliminating the Zionist demigod, and will rediscover an attempt to eliminate Judaism itself.

They also will not be able to hide behind a cultural liberation in which they no longer become the demigod (even though by the very transformation of Marxism into the cultural field, critics of Marxism will see them as the destroyers of culture), and so they are happy. For now, with the State of Israel, they are in fact realizing the first stage in their self-annihilation. They are raising against themselves an expanded coalition of people who see them as a bottomless evil in need of elimination. They are approaching the stage where the ever-increasing hatred towards them proves the approaching redemption of the world from the Jewish problem, as Marx foresaw in 1848, in which the lower classes unite against the world's Jewish finance capital. Why?

Because from the perspective of the critical coalition operating through post-colonialism (i.e., third-world Marxism), anti-Zionism brings closer the stage of unmasking all Jewish forms of war against the world—including, paradoxically, Marxism itself! Which will now become an important tool both in the annihilation of Jews from the outside, and as a tool by which Jews can annihilate themselves from within.

The Inescapable Hatred

From the perspective of Islam—even if you are not Zionists, after Zionism you will be perceived as a problematic factor both legally according to Islam, and in terms of Muslim socialism which sees you as the bastion of global-bourgeois control.

From the perspective of the American Left—without a state, you will return to being a capitalistic category, an interest-bearing class, responsible for managing capital, and which is also part of the oppressive white man's conspiracy that uses you in the same way European kings used you to oppress the lower classes.

From the perspective of the American Right—you will return to being a religious category suspected, one way or another, of having dual loyalty without converting to Christianity. And even if it is proven that you are not loyal to another state, you are at least loyal to another God—and therefore your existence must be gotten rid of.

In essence, within each of these coalition factions, the hatred of Israel is the epitome of another, preceding hatred that finds a new manifestation. It rides on a Marxist practice of self-annihilation created by Marx, which is validated by Pauline Jewish-Marxists. It focuses on Zionism, and even after it, and after revolutionary Marxism has done its job for each of the currents using it to conceptualize their work, the Jews will be found hated either in theology, or in economics, or in race, even after Zionism.

In a certain sense, it is possible that Marxism, if it is truly catholic (universal), will also need to continue inventing Jews as some stage on the way to its redemption after Israel is eliminated. Just so it can claim, like Augustine, that its struggle or justice is justified.

Therefore, joining any of these categories is a conscious assistance to self-annihilation, and moreover, also an assistance in the dismantling and fragmentation of the world for the sake of the forces that join the Marxist ideology, which is itself the dismantling of the world in its realization. It is in fact a religion of converts designed to eliminate the demigod-other, just like Catholic Christianity, and which sits to a considerable extent on Gnostic structures of elimination and Catholic political structures, but also on a creative and destructive energy of a psychopathological problem of the Jew with his own ethnic identity. A problem similar to the one from which Paul suffered. From there stems the practice of self-annihilation that begins with the Jew Marx and is adopted by the white man as a whole. And from there also stems the accurate critique of the far-right, which failed to identify the root of this self-elimination moment, until the writing of this article, due to its lack of understanding of the internal-Jewish dynamic that drives it.

A Struggle Against the Image of God

But this is not only an internal Jewish dynamic, since making the world's redemption dependent on one's own suffering, and thereby becoming Jesus, although it began within Judaism, does not end there. It sees Judaism only as a certain stage. For the Gnostic-Platonism of Marx is realized to a large extent, but not absolutely, in the Jew, against whom the Good struggles and is defined by its contrast to Evil. Platonism as the class-state superstructure (which lacks the supreme good of the Politeia), and Persian Gnosticism as the question of absolute good and evil, which realize the marking of 'Good' versus 'Evil' through struggle, reach catharsis only through a struggle within the Platonic superstructure that reaches its consummation against the Jew. The struggle against him constitutes a kind of validation of an anti-humanist conception in which man has no image of God (Imago Dei)—not in Platonism, not in Gnosticism, and not in Marxism—and in which the inventor of the Image, the Jew, is defeated.

In this sense, Marx preceded both Nietzsche and Jesus in his seeing the struggle against the Jew as a struggle against the very concept of the Image of God; against the concept of man being holy or a son of God. And is there a greater struggle than this, in the Jew turning this very struggle of his against the image of God within him, into the purpose of the entire human struggle?

In many respects, given that Judaism once again produces an ideology that justifies self-sacrifice and the sanctification of victimhood (Marxism), similar to Christianity, it is again perceived as a repressive force according to a vulgar Nietzschean conception. This time, the new invention is also a tool to undermine the Christian order that it itself created in the first place. That is to say, the Germans barely overcame one essence seemingly created by Judaism, which demands self-sacrifice and servitude and which ruled their lives for a thousand years, and now, with the decline of that former one, poof, another one is created, which also dismantles the previous structure and which is "forced" upon them again from the outside. Only now, the savior-god-in-the-flesh has become the flesh saved by man, who becomes god.

In this sense, Hitler's attempt to stop the Marxist Soviet Union was like the Germanic-barbarian attempt to stop the Christianization of Rome. An attempt to stop a new theological order developing out of Judaism within the German sphere of life. This analysis is what causes Hitler to identify the global destruction (of the race) created by "Jewish Bolshevism," which mixes the races and exhausts the strong ones, and necessarily leads to the need for a Final Solution to save the world. Hitler's critical view of Marxism is thus intertwined with his characterization of Judaism as a specific essence, without understanding that what pushed Paul and Marx to create restrictive theologies was more of a psychological-ideational deviation than a Jewish essence.

Indeed, in Christian leftism there is a sick theology; in Jewish leftism there is a sick theology and pathology.