domain: literature

html_raw:
<!DOCTYPE html><meta charset="utf-8"><meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0"><title>Samson's Choice - The Degeneration of the Nation</title><link rel="icon" type="image/png" href="../favicon-192x192.png" sizes="192x192"><link rel="apple-touch-icon" sizes="180x180" href="../apple-touch-icon-180x180.png"><link rel="canonical" href="https://degeneration-of-nation.org/en/night-life43" /><meta property="og:image" content="https://degeneration-of-nation.org/img/samsondeath.jpg" /><link rel="license" href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"><link rel="stylesheet" href="../styles.css"><link rel="stylesheet" href="../column.css"><link rel="stylesheet" href="../article.css">
The Degeneration of the Nation

Samson's Choice

Is this serious? What, another Holocaust? Who the hell is writing this? What an illogical history, a nightmare. And the Air Force commander says: We'll intercept some. Some will get through. I'm sorry. The Arrow 3 system is limited. Let's pray to the Holy One, Blessed be He. And this religious statement from the Air Force commander seems strange to me. But according to protocol, there's no time even to process, let alone pray, but we must decide immediately, and two words appear on the screens

By: Samson the Unfortunate

"And the dead which he slew at his death were more than they which he slew in his life" (Source)

I dreamed I was the Prime Minister, and could finally establish during my term the state we had dreamed of and turn it into reality, but with my luck - Iran is just launching a large barrage of nuclear missiles at the central region. And they wake me up and take me almost by force immediately to the nuclear shelter bunker and we descend floor after floor after floor and above us the catastrophe is approaching. And I feel a kind of collapse of consciousness, a gradual but also very rapid sinking, perhaps it's just the speed of the elevator that seems almost like free fall, and only one thought comes to mind, in the tune of a small child who's disappointed: not again.

And the General Staff and the Atomic Energy Committee arrive at almost the same speed as me, and whoever isn't there is immediately brought up on a screen in front of me, according to the rehearsed protocol (yes, one thing works in this country, I'm surprised, only in a total catastrophe does everything suddenly tick like clockwork). And for a moment it seems to me that maybe it's all just a drill, or a prank that got out of hand, and I think: Is this serious? What, another Holocaust? Who the hell is writing this? What an illogical history, a nightmare. And the Air Force commander says: We'll intercept some. Some will get through. I'm sorry. The Arrow 3 system is limited. Let's pray to the Holy One, Blessed be He. And this religious statement from the Air Force commander seems strange to me. But according to protocol, there's no time even to process, let alone pray, but we must decide immediately, and two words appear on the screens: Second Strike.

And the Air Force commander says: Wing Two is ready. We're launching and fueling dozens of Jericho missiles. We have a few minutes before the first bombs land, and it's very likely that some of them are aimed at the Ela Valley base itself, and at the reactor in Dimona. You have a few minutes to give the order - we're waiting. At this moment, the missiles are being programmed with dozens of coordinates across Iran. Tehran will be erased. Also the other main cities. Dams, oil fields, the reactor in Bushehr, everything is targeted. And I look at him in horror and ask: What, what does it mean?

And he looks at me as if I've landed from outer space: Second Strike! It means millions of their dead for millions of our dead (he explains in a matter-of-fact way!), mutual destruction. And my lips tremble: Millions? Isn't one million enough? Isn't a hundred thousand enough? Maybe... And the Air Force commander says: If there are other targets - now is the time to say. There's no time. And I say: Maybe... maybe we should make a more cultural, more symbolic strike? And the Air Force commander says: We also have such a plan, for a comprehensive strike against Islam, in response to the fundamentalist religious motivation, so that this will be the last time someone with religious motivation thinks about a Holocaust (the word came out of his mouth casually, in military jargon, and I shudder). But I emphasize, this is not Option A. The plan includes all the targets sacred to Islam: the Kaaba in Mecca will be completely destroyed and cease to exist - over ten bombs, they will no longer have a pilgrimage, even to the sand that will remain, for hundreds of years there will be lethal radiation. The mosque in Qom and all the holy cities for Shiites will be destroyed. The Temple Mount will be flattened with conventional weapons. And I say: War with Saudi Arabia? With the entire Muslim world forever and ever? Are you crazy? And he says: I think you don't understand the new geopolitical situation. There is no more State of Israel. The only arena left is the historical arena. The Jewish people against all its destroyers throughout the generations. You're thinking about it in too tactical terms. We're talking about strategic weapons, more than strategic, historical weapons. And the words are taken from my mouth. The tactical argument versus the strategic one was supposed to be my argument, wasn't it? I was supposed to tell him that he sees everything through a narrow and shallow military perspective, but now he comes at me with meta-historical depth arguments!

And I say: Listen to what you're saying. Do you think the Jewish people can bear on their shoulders the moral significance of killing millions? Do you understand what you're saying? The meaning of a second strike is the destruction of the Jewish people - more than the first strike. Do you understand that we can survive a second Holocaust, but not causing a Holocaust. There is no Israel, that's it, only American Jewry remains. And I'm about to shout to get me someone immediately, but I don't know who to turn to, the Chief Rabbi? Who here is a moral authority in this country? Even a religious authority? Damn it. My brain is swirling. And I hear myself shouting: Get me Professor Yehuda Bauer immediately!

But the Air Force commander has no intention, and in his eyes also no moral authority, to let go of the discussion. And he raises his voice: Mr. Prime Minister, this is not your personal country, this is a historical decision, will we be like sheep to the slaughter again? If the Jewish people this time does not restore its deterrence against the second Holocaust - there will also be a third and fourth Holocaust. This is our opportunity to say never again. To show that a Holocaust of Jews also leads to a Holocaust of Gentiles. This is the moral thing! You have no authority at all to decide otherwise in the name of millions of murdered. After all the Crusades, the Chmielnicki massacres [Translator's note: A series of mid-17th century massacres against Jews in Ukraine], the pogroms, Holocaust 1+2, this is a one-time opportunity to stop this sequence. There is nothing more moral than the second strike. Do you think they didn't think about this discussion? Why do they dare to do this only to the Jewish people? Because they know what material we're made of, because they know we think we're made of spirit, so the material can be raised in the furnace. Not killing millions of Iranians now means killing many more millions of Jews until the end of history. If we destroy the destroyers once - suddenly no one will talk about our destruction anymore. All relations between us and the Gentiles will be reshaped. We'll show the world that true Jewish morality is actually a second strike, not turning the other cheek. This was the whole project of the State of Israel. The entire burden of the nation is on your shoulders - don't stammer now. And who knows - if we had taken revenge on the Germans in millions and not forgiven them - maybe we wouldn't be here today.

And I say to him: What is this, Abba Kovner? [Translator's note: A Jewish partisan leader who planned revenge against Germans after WWII] So why only the Iranians? Why not show the whole world that we've gone mad, after all, the whole world led to this strategic situation, the whole world stood by during the Holocaust, and stood by now too. From them we should exact the price. How far can your missiles reach? And he says: To any point in our hemisphere, and even beyond. And I say: Cool. So why not target all the cultural capitals of the world? Why not take revenge on Russia, with Moscow and St. Petersburg? And Beijing, do you have the coordinates? All these collaborated with the Iranians. And the Europeans who thwarted attempts at crippling sanctions and NATO action, let's target them too, let them learn. Even Washington, who were quite indifferent. Let them all understand that the Jews are crazy. That if they are destroyed, the whole world will suffer this time. That the revenge will be global. If we're already going for the Masada option and grand finale of the Jewish story, then we might as well go big. Let them all understand that if Jews are slaughtered - everyone is slaughtered. That you can't just sit quietly on the side and tut-tut every time, as they've become accustomed to, in every genocide. We'll create a new balance of deterrence between injustices and the world. And we'll make a proper nuclear winter. So that at least from the perspective of Earth and global warming and animals we'll come out right. And maybe one day it will turn out that the Jews did this planet a favor.

But it seems they're no longer listening to my confused speech. The Air Force commander is making final coordinations with the Navy commander, all the submarines have left the docks loaded with nuclear Jericho missiles, including hydrogen bombs, and they can be launched all over the world, telling the submarines to simply disappear into the sea and not create any contact with the outside until reaching launch, and they won't be able to be stopped. And the Air Force commander says to me with a terrible look: Come on, time's up, we need to decide on the targets or give up on everything... and understand that culturally the Jewish people is simply not built for self-defense, for revenge, that we're simply not capable. Actually, I feel that I can't really give... the "order". I really want to but the words get stuck in my throat. What sin did millions of Persian mothers commit. Maybe the leftist is coming out of me, but it's just a bit too much... And then they inform me: Even the historian Professor Yehuda Bauer - Israel's greatest Holocaust researcher - was killed in the second Holocaust.

And I don't know why the death of this individual, the old Tycho [Translator's note: Possibly referring to Tycho Brahe, the astronomer], dizzies me. But suddenly a unique, breathtaking historical insight is rising in me. And I scream at them: On Germany - on the German sons of bitches! On them throw all the bombs, hydrogen, nitrogen, whatever you have - kill, destroy all the Germans may their name and memory be erased! What do I care about avenging Tel Aviv? Auschwitz I want to avenge, Auschwitz!! In furnaces you'll burn these Germans, they're the ones who invented the patent of Holocaust, avenge my grandmother! All the submarines made in Germany, all the missiles, immediately - now - launch - burn the Black Forest, let the Rhine evaporate entirely, by order I tell you the ninety-nine [Translator's note: Possibly referring to the 99 names of God in Islam] - Munich, Hamburg, Stuttgart, Cologne, Frankfurt, Dortmund, the Ruhr region turn into a nuclear fireball, let there be no German city without a mushroom cloud, and Berlin, Berlin destroy to the foundation, to dust, turn it into one huge field of ash, I want a Reich of nuclear radiation for a thousand years, that will never be rebuilt, let Germany burn in the fires of hell. And the Air Force commander, practical as he is, asks: But what about all the Israelis in Berlin? And I say: They - they can go to hell.

Nightlife


source: degeneration-of-nation

source_format: html

domain: commentary

html_raw:
<!DOCTYPE html><meta charset="utf-8"><meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0"><title>What Would a Jewish State Look Like? Part 2: The Halacha State - Introducing the Kabbalah State - The Degeneration of the Nation</title><link rel="icon" type="image/png" href="../favicon-192x192.png" sizes="192x192"><link rel="apple-touch-icon" sizes="180x180" href="../apple-touch-icon-180x180.png"><link rel="canonical" href="https://degeneration-of-nation.org/en/alternative-commentary34" /><meta property="og:image" content="https://degeneration-of-nation.org/img/grapes.jpg" /><link rel="license" href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"><link rel="stylesheet" href="../styles.css"><link rel="stylesheet" href="../column.css"><link rel="stylesheet" href="../article.css">
The Degeneration of the Nation

What Would a Jewish State Look Like? Part 2: The Halacha State - Introducing the Kabbalah State

Halacha, as a diasporic way of life, is gradually becoming obsolete in our times, and its relevance to a halachic state is laughable. In contrast, Kabbalah was a pioneering movement in human history, predating the computing revolution by being the first to formulate ideas of spiritual technology, transforming laws into corrections and tools. Therefore, in a Kabbalah state, legality would be entirely different from a Halachic state (which would merely replace the source of legal authority). In Kabbalah, unlike legal law, the law is organic to reality, like scientific law. Thus, a Kabbalah state would allow for quasi-scientific conduct and spiritual engineering, this time using information age technologies as the state's foundation

By: The Invisible State

Under the Vine - The utopia of the nomadic people was anti-state, and saw spiritual rather than political orders as the social basis. A state-hater shall live  (Source)

What is the source of alienation that the law creates between the individual and the state? The idea of an external law, which must be enforced upon the person, and which can be violated without being caught and without punishment, is foreign to both religious and scientific conceptions of law. Like scientific law, religious law is not external to reality, but describes the way reality itself operates - if you sin, you will be punished, and if you do good, you will be rewarded. It doesn't need to convince the person to obey the law and respect its authority through ideology; rather, obeying the law is in the person's best interest. The idea of a human law that has a metaphysical break between it and reality itself, and therefore needs justification, like the idea of a person who has a metaphysical break between their perception and reality, and therefore needs justification - is a modern secular idea.

And while Halacha still needs an external mechanism to the natural world, of reward and punishment in the afterlife and a God who judges and sees everything from above, on which the law is founded, Kabbalah sees the law as an immanent part of reality, simply existing within it. You didn't sin against the law - you damaged reality itself, and you didn't obey the law - you fixed a hidden flaw in reality. In this, Kabbalah is much closer to the scientific perspective than Halacha, and it is indeed a phenomenon that grew alongside the scientific revolution, even preceding it in certain ideas (for example, the existence of hidden properties within material reality that are not directly measurable, like energy). The connection between scientists like Newton and Copernicus to Kabbalah and esoteric doctrine is a chapter that secular scientific history has obscured for understandable reasons.

The Kabbalistic world of legality has another similarity to the scientific world, which is the connection between law and technology. Once the law is the foundation of reality, it can be used to creatively manipulate reality. For example, one can use the laws of the upper worlds to achieve goals in this world, in the field called practical Kabbalah, or through various corrections to change the upper worlds. This idea allows us to look at the state as a kind of developing spiritual entity that can and should be changed, something that the Halachic conception of law sees as invalid, hence the inflexibility of Halacha in adapting to the modern world. According to Halacha, the law is fixed and produces nothing but obedience to God, while according to Kabbalah, the correction progresses and improves, and each time different actions must be performed to advance the construction of the spiritual entity and bring about a messianic-futuristic era.

A law programmed into the system has a tremendous advantage over an external law: it cannot be transgressed, and therefore there is no need to obey it. For example, if in the past I had to take my salary from the employer and then pay tax to the state, I could have stolen the money, or someone could have stolen the money from me, and there were many potential breaking points of the law along the way. On the other hand, if the salary is transferred automatically by bank transfer, and so is the taxation, I have become a law-abiding citizen against my will, and the law has become immanent. Information technology allows the state's law to become a law of nature. And it's not just about transferring money. Blockchain technology can also turn contracts into self-fulfilling systems, as well as other social mechanisms, such as secret voting. In blockchain elections, it will no longer be possible to cheat - with mathematical certainty. And with zero-knowledge interactive proof technologies, like those developed by Shafi Goldwasser, it will no longer be possible to commit crimes and cheat even in the computation itself. Such control technologies will make increasingly large parts of the law immanent to reality, and the state will become a kind of spiritual software - and the idea of ideological justification for the law will gradually die.

In such a state, many disputes about the proper law will turn from ideological disputes (and therefore sterile and harmful) into scientific disputes, decided through experiments. Today, for example, it is difficult to divide the state into a random experiment with two tax rates, and check which of them leads to faster growth, or how two growth rates affect other parameters. Therefore, in the absence of science - the dispute becomes ideological. In contrast, in a programmed state, driven by scientific experimentation, such an experiment is easy to perform, and its results are quickly measurable. Thus, increasingly large parts of state management will become optimization problems, solved by data experts, and eventually by algorithms, rather than by the gut feelings of countless ignoramuses. An automatic learning system can change tax rates according to various parameters, with efficiency that a human cannot compete with. Thus, a political problem can become a scientific or algorithmic problem, and technology will be able to gradually reduce human control over another human, until the gradual reduction of politics, which is the sick evil of humanity.

Technological development allows for a functioning law without a persona behind it, and this is actually just a continuation of a very deep and long-term trend in state development, from the personal to the impersonal: from the rule of the father and the charismatic tribal leader, to the rule of the dynastic king, to the rule of the oligarchy, to the rule of the people, to the rule of bureaucracy, and to the rule of the completely impersonal learning algorithm. This trend will gradually reduce the political domain and leave more and more unsolved political disputes in the individual's domain, thereby increasing their freedom - and more importantly, their intellectual freedom. Slowly, the perception will prevail that problems that cannot be solved by algorithms - such as matters of faith and culture - are not within the state's domain. The state will be perceived as the domain of automatic social regulation, too complex for human control, as the stock market is perceived today, or as traffic will look in the era of autonomous vehicles (which will eliminate traffic laws along with crime and enforcement in the field). Such a state will gradually become an organic body, which although has extensive and efficient control and monitoring mechanisms, they are not personal, just as no cell in the body controls all others, or no neuron in the brain controls others. There is no prime minister in the brain, so there can't be a Bibi [Translator's note: referring to Benjamin Netanyahu, Israel's long-serving Prime Minister] in it either, and this not only doesn't impair its effectiveness and adaptability - but enhances them.

How is this related to a Jewish state? Well, the greatest flaw of the state today is its takeover of private consciousness through the political domain and its blatant personalization. The illusion of influence in a democratic state causes individuals to waste endless unnecessary energies on harmful or inefficient political engagements (for example: discussion on Facebook). The importance of the Jewish anarchic vision is not only rooted in the disappearance of human control over humans, which is a problematic issue on any scale, from patriarchy to the state, and from Ben-Gurion to Bibi. The Jewish vision is critical mainly to the spiritual world of the person, which is severely polluted today by the state. The vision of a man under his vine and under his fig tree is not only a negative vision, of getting rid of foreign rule and "foreign worship", but it is a positive idea that allows engagement with the spiritual world under that vine and reading a book in peace under that fig tree. And you shall meditate on it day and night.

In the past, religious law was harshly criticized precisely because of the internalization of its mechanisms and commandments by the person, which became mechanisms of oppression and self-supervision, and severely affected the individual's consciousness. The external secular law was supposed to free us from all this. But the actual result is the opposite: the state has penetrated the consciousness of individuals through current affairs to a monstrous degree, even perverse (there are people who listen to the news every hour on the hour, and few abstain from news for a whole day). Many people around us live in a false consciousness determined by the orchestrated scandal of the day, which has no connection to their real lives, and this is seven times worse for Jews, due to their argumentative, factional, and dispute-loving nature (which enjoyed better days in the past, for example in the world of the Talmud). Therefore, the emancipation of Jews from the state is of critical importance for the continuation of their cultural heritage. They find it difficult to separate the private and cultural sphere from the public, so instead of the public sphere taking over the rest, as in totalitarian regimes, it should be gradually reduced in favor of an invisible state - a Kabbalah state. In such a state, without oppression from above - whether coercive or cognitive - the world of the spirit will rise and flourish on its own.

Alternative Current Affairs


html_raw:
<!DOCTYPE html><meta charset="utf-8"><meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0"><title>Why is the coronavirus good for the economy? - The Degeneration of the Nation</title><link rel="icon" type="image/png" href="../favicon-192x192.png" sizes="192x192"><link rel="apple-touch-icon" sizes="180x180" href="../apple-touch-icon-180x180.png"><link rel="canonical" href="https://degeneration-of-nation.org/en/alternative-commentary58" /><meta property="og:image" content="https://degeneration-of-nation.org/img/coronaphoto.jpg" /><link rel="license" href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"><link rel="stylesheet" href="../styles.css"><link rel="stylesheet" href="../column.css"><link rel="stylesheet" href="../article.css">
The Degeneration of the Nation

Why is the coronavirus good for the economy?

Why is the coronavirus beneficial for humanity? Why is the coronavirus the best thing that has happened to us? Why is the coronavirus a blessing? Why is the coronavirus good for technology? Why is the coronavirus good for culture? Why is the coronavirus good for capitalism? Why is the coronavirus good for thinking? And most importantly - why is the coronavirus good for the philosophy of learning and the Netanya school of thought. On development during Sabbaths, holidays and in isolation

By: Day 0 in isolation

When would I have had time to write this, if not for the coronavirus? - Photo: Electron microscope  (Source)

What really influences the development of the world - is it technology, economy, politics, or perhaps some of the types of explanations common in historical research? If we sit at home (during the coronavirus period, for example) and do nothing, and let's say we lose about half a year or maybe even a year (let's assume) of global activity until the end of the crisis. Does the world lose development? Is, for example, technology waiting and delayed? Are the economy or science stuck? Will all of history from here on happen a year late, and will the year 2100 actually be 2099? And if not, and in the range of 2100 nothing will change, what is the significance of a year in the world's development? Is it possible that it has no significance? If so, why and how does the world develop at all? Is economic growth really declining? - This is not about the short term (where it's obvious) - but in the long term, won't there be increased growth later, after the crisis, that will quickly catch up to what we lost during the crisis? (This is a known phenomenon, for example after wars). And if so, what is the significance of all the factors for growth and development, if even a whole year of paralysis changes nothing?

If a real epidemic, like the Black Death, which destroys tens of percent of society's human capital, is not considered in retrospect as a regression in world development but as a catalyst - what are the real factors for development? And why in certain cultures is it accelerated, and in others it stops and they fall behind? Is it a collection of random factors? Why, in fact, was there more development in the West? (Hopefully this is clear at this stage in world history). Why, in fact, is development accelerating? (Hopefully this is also clear). When did it actually start to accelerate, and why? Can we, for example, identify which revolution was more critical than others? For instance - was the printing revolution more critical than the scientific revolution or perhaps the industrial revolution, and created a higher coefficient for acceleration, or perhaps it was the discovery of the New World, or the Renaissance, or secularization, or the Enlightenment, or perhaps the Copernican revolution (Kant or the original Copernicus, you choose)?

And in general - what is the value, if any, of comprehensive theories, or comprehensive descriptions, like Yuval Noah Harari? Is it inherent charlatanism, which is gaining popularity in a global era, or is it a preliminary field that is still searching for its basic theories, like biology before evolution? And in general, is it a coincidence that evolutionary development created historical development, or is there a deep connection between them (when it's clear that history is not evolution)? The same questions we asked about Western culture can be asked about the development of culture and the beginning of history itself, and try to identify what is actually the critical factor (is there even one? Can there even be one? - Writing? The empire? The transition to idol worship?...). And just as we asked about the revolutions in the West, we can ask about the revolutions in human development: Is it the linguistic revolution, agricultural, the emergence of intelligence, sociality, tool use, development of the prefrontal cortex, the emergence of consciousness, love, unique human sexuality, the emergence of art, etc. - what are the turning points, and can we even identify the critical ones among them (and perhaps quantify it), and if we can't - why, and what is the significance of that?

Similarly, one could ask about evolution itself, and look for turning points within it, whether it's the emergence of eukaryotes, mitochondria, the Cambrian explosion, the presumed transition from RNA to DNA, the emergence of mammals, amphibians, the emergence of the brain, sexual reproduction, the very creation of life, and so on and so forth - where exactly is the turning point, which apparently didn't happen in countless other places in the galaxy? And how can we describe development more comprehensively, without turning the explanation into a catalogical collection of random details (and random mutations!) of billions of years of evolution?

These questions arise, in an almost equivalent manner, also in current physics. It's not just about the variety of theories on the development of the universe, attempts to explain why its development is accelerating (i.e., what is the source of dark energy - about 70% of the universe), how symmetries were broken and particles gained their current mass, why time flows only forward, and what topology the beginning of the universe took - all these are natural developmental questions for natural science. But as physics tries to progress towards its primary foundations - it turns out that the big questions, like combining the two great theories of relativity and quantum into a unified theory - are actually developmental questions, relating to the beginning of the universe's development, and also the meta-question about the fine-tuning of the laws of nature, from a wide landscape of possible universes - is a developmental question, and they have exactly the same types of problems as in economic, historical and evolutionary development. Why, in fact, these laws of nature and this development - is the universe special? Can we define which laws or constants are critical factors for the development of an interesting universe, or one that has life, and therefore caused it, and which are random? Can there be other universes and how do they look and develop - what are the turning points in the development of a universe? What caused the laws of nature to be tuned to such values, some hair-raisingly precise for the creation of life (the fine-structure constant for example)? Are the constants of nature really constant, or are they developing, and how?

And we won't be surprised that the same developmental questions in sciences also arise in literature, art and culture (for example, the weight of masterpieces in development, what causes certain genres to rise and others to decline - is it just fashion or are there essential internal factors, on the importance or unimportance of the lone genius as a turning point, whether culture would have developed in these directions anyway without random achievements, whether there is something special about Western culture, whether culture is developing faster than before or vice versa, and what contributes to cultural development - and what doesn't). All these developmental questions, in various fields, repeat themselves: why did this happen, why did this particular developmental branch succeed and not another, is there something predictable about it, and can long-term development be generalized to more basic principles than countless cases? For example, the "why specifically" question in physics would ask whether our universe is unique, and this uniqueness led to its successful development (life is a kind of "achievement" of the universe), and the "why specifically" question in culture or history would ask why specifically Western culture: what is its uniqueness, and what in this uniqueness explains its success. Not to mention the most threatening biological "why specifically" question, known as the Fermi paradox, which distills the question of development to its most threatening limit: if we don't have an answer to the "why specifically" question - we shouldn't survive. Because why did we specifically develop, and there are no aliens?

If so, perhaps we should actually ask: why are these questions arising today, and creating widespread interest in searching for answers? It's not just the "Yuval Noah Harari" phenomenon, but also much more serious and challenging people than him, like Prof. Ronnie Ellenblum and Prof. Joel Mokyr and Prof. Avner Ben-Zaken and others, who are currently creating comprehensive developmental theories with enormous scale implications, from which deep developmental ideas can be derived. If we generalize all these intellectual and scientific efforts in various fields - we can call this big question: the question of development. And if so, why, 150 years after the theory of evolution, has this question become especially burning, and influencing not only the content of intellectual discourse, but the very form of intellectual thinking, even of the general public? On the type of questions being asked?

Why do people seek big explanations, in an era of countless details and information - this is probably a self-answering question. But why specifically developmental thinking? Why even in computer science, is the idea of algorithm development so central (and known to us as the field of computational learning)? Even in mathematics - the kingdom of timeless eternity - there are developmental ideas regarding (for example) the central question of creating prime numbers and their distribution. And wouldn't it be correct to conceptualize the field of complexity, the conceptual basis of computer science, as a question of the development of computation, and what are the critical factors in it, as opposed to the random ones? And what characterizes specifically efficient development (P), and distinguishes it from that which is not (NP)? (The most basic spiritual question in computer science - and perhaps in the world - which probably requires a complete intellectual revolution: this is not just another question in mathematics, but the number one fundamental question, and its solution is beyond our intellectual horizon).

The most obvious answer to the question of the rise of developmental thinking and the era of developmental questions is that something happened to development: it is accelerating. Development is noticeable to the eye, and it is both frightening and exciting, and we are interested in understanding how development works, and how trends in it operate. We are riding the tiger, which is no longer dozing or dragging lazily, but galloping - and we want to understand how to control it, and if it's even possible, because it seems we've lost control - and development controls us and is stronger than us. The tiger is leading us - and not us it - and we don't know where, and it seems that the answer may not please us, but we can't stop, and we don't even want to. Therefore: it's so important to understand the tiger.

We can no longer regard the development of technology as an independent force of nature, which we don't understand but enjoy its results, and trust that we've always enjoyed them as it happened (more or less) until now - we want to understand development, but we lack a proper conceptual framework for it. We move between over-generalizations and excessive detail lacking the ability to generalize, between unbridled charlatans and overly restrained responsible researchers, from whose level of detail of insights we learn nothing, and on the other hand those from whose level of detail of insights - and predictions - we can learn everything. Yuval Noah Harari is not such a central icon because of his personal uniqueness or marketing genius (he's quite an ordinary person) - but because of the need for Yuval Noah Harari, which is not related to him at all. He is the symbol for a certain type of intellectual yearning that has become central: not to succeed big - but to explain big. To shorten the history of humanity.

If so, we must ask what is the conceptual framework with which we should approach the question of development, now that we've identified it as a central question, which breaks our main types of explanation: the detailed, the narrative, the statistical, the scientific in the form of law, etc. No one, for example, believes anymore in the naive possibility of finding scientific regularity in history. The attempt to find such regularity failed not only on the scientific level, but even more so on the social level: after Nazism and Communism, no one wants to approach simplistic explanations, and certainly not deterministic ones, because the damage of these explanations has been proven (surprisingly!) to be exceptional in the number of people it eliminates - it turns out that the power of developmental explanations is enormous. Therefore, the aversion to general developmental explanations was very strong since the mid-twentieth century - and only in our days, with the acceleration and the rise of the question of futurism with greater force (including post-humanism), it is rising again in its full intellectual power. Let's note the dominance of the developmental question: the very engagement with the developmental question produces from it a developmental question: why specifically now? And developmental answers. Sometimes it seems that we are no longer capable of thinking outside the framework of the burning developmental question and the burner it has opened behind it, which sometimes illuminates and sometimes consumes, without a proper and valid conceptual framework.

The answer proposed by the Netanya school to the developmental question is one, and it stands out in the power of its conceptual strength and its simplicity: if we want to understand development - we need to look at development as learning. Since the theoretical side of the answer has been elaborated in the collection of essays
(here),
we will focus here on applying the answer to the questions we opened with. For this purpose, we will ask an opening question: Did the Jews lose progress because of the Sabbath? For example, did the Jews lose economic development and growth compared to other societies that didn't rest one day a week? Let's imagine two factories, one resting on the Sabbath and the other working - it's clear that over time one factory will develop a cumulative production lag, and therefore an increasing economic lag compared to factory two. After seven years, one factory will be a full year behind in revenues, investments and output compared to the other, and the gap will only grow over time. It's clear to us that this description doesn't fit the development of a society, or historical development, and the question is why: what really causes development and affects its speed, or in our conceptualization - how does learning occur and what affects its speed.

What happens during the coronavirus is that there are two types of processes, or in abstraction two types of brains, each affected differently by the shutdown. There are processes in which no learning takes place, like an industrial production process, and these processes stop, and open an increasing lag over time. But these processes are not the ones that really affect the speed of human development - because they are not learning processes. The sources of human development are not rooted in creating economic value, but in something else entirely - in the overall learning of humanity as a system. If we break this down, for the sake of illustration, into individual brains, we'll find that human development doesn't happen when the brain does what it already knows how to do, but when it learns something new - and better: innovates something in the world, that is, innovates something for the system. That's where the learning of the system takes place.

Technological or economic or historical development happens, for example, at the moment when one of the brains in the system reaches new thinking, and each brain has a limited speed at which it can do this. There are those who are not capable at all, and these people indeed contribute nothing to general learning and history - and come and go from the world as they came, without developmental-learning importance. But even the shared developmental effort of all brains - the learning effort - is fundamentally limited because of the limited ability of every human brain for new learning, as it is driven precisely by the power of this learning ability. This is actually the variable that controls development - the speed of learning. This speed is of course influenced at the systemic level by many factors, since it's a system: the learning speed of individuals (which is influenced by their perceptions of innovation and their learning tools, like the scientific revolution or the Enlightenment or skepticism, and their human capital, including - God forbid - their intelligence), the ability to preserve past learning and spread it in the system (for example: language, writing, printing, journalism, electronic communication, the Internet, social network, etc.), the system's ability to block innovation or its desire to encourage it (capitalism, the start-up ethos, the scientific community, the republic of letters, and so on), and more.

For example: technological development is not an internal force of nature to history, or a product of science, or of the economy (or vice versa) - all these are products of learning, and specific learning domains. But the force that drives the economy or technology (for example) is not the monetary incentive itself. The incentive may encourage learning and increase the likelihood that it will occur (and much more so - the likelihood that it will be realized and spread in the system), but it doesn't create the learning itself. There may be an incentive - and there will be no learning, the solution will not be found, because the brain didn't learn, because it was, for example, educated in conservative and fixed thinking. Even a scientific perception itself doesn't create the development of technology or the economy, because there may be a new perception in science - and it won't translate into learning in practical fields, because the interest is not accepted, or because it requires more perceptual changes (which are not scientific), or any other learning-blocking reason (for example: lack of incentive). Even the competitive structure itself or the market doesn't create learning - it only enhances it, and the likelihood that it will be realized, and even creates good thinking patterns for learning in the brain (like considering alternatives), but nothing replaces learning itself as the force behind development, but only enables it.

Therefore, if technology is developing at an increasing speed - we will identify its source in increasing learning ability, which causes exponential acceleration (because learning causes more learning, including learning how to learn). And if the West demonstrated exceptional development - we will identify this in its learning ability. And if evolution changed phase several times - we will identify this in new learning abilities that were added each time. There were many changes that created man out of evolution, but this phase jump has one comprehensive explanation - a jump in the learning ability of man as a species, which is man's advantage over animal learning (whose innovation approaches zero). This learning ability is what created a period where the speed of learning is much higher (by orders of magnitude), and there is also acceleration in it (it's difficult to talk about significant acceleration in evolution before man, and if there is, it stems from the increasing complexity which is itself a learning process). If there is any natural division of history into periods - it is a division according to different learning speeds and accelerations. And what is the innovation of life itself in relation to other phenomena in the universe? Only learning - very inefficient compared to human learning - called evolution. Learning is the fundamental principle of development in the world. And the conceptualization of development as learning solves all the questions we opened with.

For example, the coronavirus itself stopped the economy, and also stopped all institutionalized technological development (the kind that requires high technology, which doesn't happen at home). One might have thought that it indeed created a halt in development, and naturally ask the series of opening questions. But do they sound like valid questions if we replace the word development with learning? Would we have thought that the coronavirus stopped learning in the world? Learning is happening in full force all the time, even on the Sabbath, and maybe especially on the Sabbath. In fact, a different kind of time, or any change, is actually a catalyst for learning. Here, this article was written precisely because of the coronavirus. The epidemic asks questions, gives time for thinking, and takes things out of their usual context (a known trick for creativity), and allows time for writing and dissemination. Is it possible that the coronavirus actually contributes to learning? Is it possible that a sabbatical year actually contributes to economic development, in the long run, just as the Sabbath may not help the Jew in the short economic term, but certainly it cannot be said that the Jews were less economically successful than the Gentiles? Even the least creative people - the coronavirus filled with ideas like a pomegranate, and they indeed flooded social networks with them, developed models, learned biology, became interested in economics, read graphs, filled gaps in mathematics they hadn't touched since high school, and specialized in public policy and regulation. Who knows how many genius ideas were conceived during the coronavirus period, which we'll only hear about in the future? As the viral post asks: Isaac Newton invented calculus, the theory of gravity and Newtonian mechanics in a year and a half when he was hiding from an epidemic - what did you invent during the coronavirus?

Yes, during the coronavirus a lot of books were read, and maybe more than (say) in the two years before it, and probably also written. The home stay also almost necessarily imparted - like throwing a child into water to learn to swim - invaluable skills of self-management and self-learning in all age groups of the population. I even bet that the children who stayed at home - and at least those from the top decile in their learning abilities, which is more important for future learning than all the other deciles combined - received learning several times more quality from their parents than from the education system (all over the world). But the main thing - it's not just (and mainly) about more time for thinking and personal learning. It's also about the increase in beneficial forms of learning in the system, that is - in systemic learning. The coronavirus is the great victory of the network, and of distance learning, and of remote work and remote collaboration - that is, of the ability to spread learning in the system. The coronavirus is also the great victory of the learning method called capitalism (the only method that disconnects the expressions hunger and epidemic), and of globalization and international cooperation and the exit from the narrow perception of nationalism. Not because exceptional international cooperation happened in it (on the contrary) - but because the form of thinking, all over the globe really, in parallel and in synchronization, became for the first time one that sees the entire world system as what it is: one big learning system.

All inhabitants of the world understand that the spread operates as a system and so do the ways of dealing with it: all over the world they compare the performance of countries (the new world competition), are interested in foreign news, in the global economy, and everyone also knows that the effort for a solution is scientific (the most systematic learning method of all), all-human and cross-border. Every stupid viral video from isolation that runs all over the globe and every additional news item on the subject of the coronavirus contribute to the view of all humanity in its own eyes as a species, and to the erasion of differences, and to the imprinting in consciousness of our identity as the human species, and not just as Russian, or Hindu, or black. Only a common enemy (and preferably of the existential kind) can unite human beings, and in the absence of aliens - we have coronavirus, and we're all in the same boat. Everyone understands that the threat or solution can come from anywhere: from India, France, Israel, or maybe Argentina. And everyone understands that it's not their religion or nation or particular belief principles that are the relevant variables for understanding the situation and getting out of the situation, but the speed of global learning - which competes with the speed of the virus. Only when human learning catches up with evolutionary learning - will we return to normal productive activity, and much less learning-oriented, as we are accustomed to.

Alternative Current Affairs


text:
The Degeneration of the Nation

The Four Species

Historians do not understand Nazism. These were not race laws - but sex laws. The different sexuality is the secret of the Jewish people's survival, the one that prevented assimilation through intermarriage for two thousand years. There are two sex cultures here that created parallel types of masculinity and femininity

By: Bad Black Shoe

The obsession with the etrog's [citron fruit] nipple (Source)

I dreamed that I was finally sleeping in the sukkah [temporary hut for the Sukkot holiday], without my wife's snoring, and could chat with the secular female friend before sleep. Although she already has another boyfriend, and she was actually the one who didn't want to, she keeps writing to me that it drives her crazy why he - her ex - is with her - his new one. Fifteen years older than him. Please, can you explain to me what he's doing with her?

\- Because she's a queen.

\- He has a thousand girls who would die to be with him. I see them sucking up to him on Facebook, and considering that they all know what he's got down there, it's really embarrassing. And she's an ugly fat woman and he's not even ashamed of her. He posts pictures with her holding him with that disgusting nail polish.

\- For a queen, it's not necessarily bad that she's ugly, quite the opposite. These are things you won't understand as a woman. Only men can understand this. After all, it works on control. What's more humiliating, a bad black shoe of a young chick or of an ugly mother?

\- But he keeps writing to me that he's suffering when she's with her secondary partners, even though he's the primary. He's totally vanilla. And she's a type C lawyer: Divorced with three.

\- Well, that's great, a bad lawyer. Can't you understand that? You also don't know what the contract between them is. And what it does to him to see her with the secondaries. Women can't understand. Little girls might be in love with their fathers but don't suckle from them, so it's less infantile. You can't understand what breasts are. Even of a fat woman. Sometimes the most obvious things are also the most embarrassing. Like those two protrusions in front. That even ultra-Orthodox women can't hide. And then you see a huge and skinny Torah scholar and next to him a giant woman, overflowing in an inhuman way, each one the size of my head, and you immediately understand. The sexuality of the Jewish man is completely different from that of the Gentile. With us, women rule. Have you ever read the stories of the Patriarchs and wondered what kind of sexuality was there?

\- Patriarchal?

\- Come on, don't believe the brainwashing. Read with open eyes. Sarah, Rebecca, Rachel, and Leah spun them around like marionettes. You see it in the basic myth about the woman who got excited by the snake and wrapped Adam around her little finger. Do you know how many ultra-Orthodox couples engage in power dynamics without ever having heard of BDSM? And if the balabusta [Yiddish: housewife] is the main breadwinner - then all the more so. The most obvious things are the most hidden, and vice versa. Have you ever seen a synagogue full of men enthusiastically shaking their lulav [palm branch used in Sukkot ritual] with two clumps of leaves dangling on both sides? It's embarrassing how obvious it is, until no one sees it. But if you've thought about it once, you can never forget it. And the obsession with the etrog's nipple. What, don't you see what's really happening there?

Go through them one by one and you'll see that throughout the Bible there's a consistent pattern in gender relations: the woman wraps the man around her finger and although he has the formal authority - she's the one who controls and leads. This is Jewish sexuality - from Esther, Ruth, Rahab, Bathsheba, Delilah, Zipporah, Jezebel, Tamar, Hannah, etc. - to Woody Allen and Hanoch Levin. It's not a deviation, it's the norm. And this is exactly the reason for antisemitism throughout history. That's why historians don't understand Nazism. These weren't race laws - but sex laws. What caused the Holocaust is that the shikses [Yiddish: non-Jewish women] actually preferred Jewish men and vice versa, and this threatened the sexuality of the Germans. As long as the Jews just embodied a sexuality different from that of the Gentiles, they were just persecuted and humiliated and degraded, like they do to homosexuals. The entire race theory is just a secondary derivative of sex. The entire Nazi ideology is just an exaltation of extreme and militaristic German sexuality and the degradation of Jewish sexuality. And even on the Jewish side, the separation from the Gentiles stemmed from the anxiety that they would take the girls.

The different sexuality is the secret of the Jewish people's survival, the one that prevented assimilation through intermarriage for two thousand years. There are two sex cultures here that created parallel types of masculinity and femininity. The secular think that sexuality is external attraction, so their four species (mathematically it's always 2x2) are: straight man, straight woman, gay man, and lesbian. But when you understand that sexuality is internal attraction, then the four species are the four ideal types of femininity and masculinity: Gentile - strong and crude masculinity, Gentile woman - weak and delicate femininity, Jew - weak man, and Jewish woman - strong woman. The Gentile is the phallic lulav, and the Gentile woman is the fragile etrog that needs to be wrapped. And the Jewish woman is the proud myrtle, Hadassah in the Torah is Queen Esther, and the Jewish man is the pathetic willow, which is even beaten on Hoshana Rabbah [last day of Sukkot] in order to break the gevurot - the masculinity. That's why your ex, the macho man, is attracted specifically to a strong, dominant woman, a queen - it's the spark that always remains in the heart of every Jew. From the Chazon Ish [prominent rabbi] to the Prime Minister.

Nightlife

html_raw:
<!DOCTYPE html><meta charset="utf-8"><meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0"><title>The Four Species - The Degeneration of the Nation</title><link rel="icon" type="image/png" href="../favicon-192x192.png" sizes="192x192"><link rel="apple-touch-icon" sizes="180x180" href="../apple-touch-icon-180x180.png"><link rel="canonical" href="https://degeneration-of-nation.org/en/night-life5" /><meta property="og:image" content="https://degeneration-of-nation.org/img/etrog.jpg" /><link rel="license" href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"><link rel="stylesheet" href="../styles.css"><link rel="stylesheet" href="../column.css"><link rel="stylesheet" href="../article.css">
The Degeneration of the Nation

The Four Species

Historians do not understand Nazism. These were not race laws - but sex laws. The different sexuality is the secret of the Jewish people's survival, the one that prevented assimilation through intermarriage for two thousand years. There are two sex cultures here that created parallel types of masculinity and femininity

By: Bad Black Shoe

The obsession with the etrog's [citron fruit] nipple (Source)

I dreamed that I was finally sleeping in the sukkah [temporary hut for the Sukkot holiday], without my wife's snoring, and could chat with the secular female friend before sleep. Although she already has another boyfriend, and she was actually the one who didn't want to, she keeps writing to me that it drives her crazy why he - her ex - is with her - his new one. Fifteen years older than him. Please, can you explain to me what he's doing with her?

- Because she's a queen.

- He has a thousand girls who would die to be with him. I see them sucking up to him on Facebook, and considering that they all know what he's got down there, it's really embarrassing. And she's an ugly fat woman and he's not even ashamed of her. He posts pictures with her holding him with that disgusting nail polish.

- For a queen, it's not necessarily bad that she's ugly, quite the opposite. These are things you won't understand as a woman. Only men can understand this. After all, it works on control. What's more humiliating, a bad black shoe of a young chick or of an ugly mother?

- But he keeps writing to me that he's suffering when she's with her secondary partners, even though he's the primary. He's totally vanilla. And she's a type C lawyer: Divorced with three.

- Well, that's great, a bad lawyer. Can't you understand that? You also don't know what the contract between them is. And what it does to him to see her with the secondaries. Women can't understand. Little girls might be in love with their fathers but don't suckle from them, so it's less infantile. You can't understand what breasts are. Even of a fat woman. Sometimes the most obvious things are also the most embarrassing. Like those two protrusions in front. That even ultra-Orthodox women can't hide. And then you see a huge and skinny Torah scholar and next to him a giant woman, overflowing in an inhuman way, each one the size of my head, and you immediately understand. The sexuality of the Jewish man is completely different from that of the Gentile. With us, women rule. Have you ever read the stories of the Patriarchs and wondered what kind of sexuality was there?

- Patriarchal?

- Come on, don't believe the brainwashing. Read with open eyes. Sarah, Rebecca, Rachel, and Leah spun them around like marionettes. You see it in the basic myth about the woman who got excited by the snake and wrapped Adam around her little finger. Do you know how many ultra-Orthodox couples engage in power dynamics without ever having heard of BDSM? And if the balabusta [Yiddish: housewife] is the main breadwinner - then all the more so. The most obvious things are the most hidden, and vice versa. Have you ever seen a synagogue full of men enthusiastically shaking their lulav [palm branch used in Sukkot ritual] with two clumps of leaves dangling on both sides? It's embarrassing how obvious it is, until no one sees it. But if you've thought about it once, you can never forget it. And the obsession with the etrog's nipple. What, don't you see what's really happening there?

Go through them one by one and you'll see that throughout the Bible there's a consistent pattern in gender relations: the woman wraps the man around her finger and although he has the formal authority - she's the one who controls and leads. This is Jewish sexuality - from Esther, Ruth, Rahab, Bathsheba, Delilah, Zipporah, Jezebel, Tamar, Hannah, etc. - to Woody Allen and Hanoch Levin. It's not a deviation, it's the norm. And this is exactly the reason for antisemitism throughout history. That's why historians don't understand Nazism. These weren't race laws - but sex laws. What caused the Holocaust is that the shikses [Yiddish: non-Jewish women] actually preferred Jewish men and vice versa, and this threatened the sexuality of the Germans. As long as the Jews just embodied a sexuality different from that of the Gentiles, they were just persecuted and humiliated and degraded, like they do to homosexuals. The entire race theory is just a secondary derivative of sex. The entire Nazi ideology is just an exaltation of extreme and militaristic German sexuality and the degradation of Jewish sexuality. And even on the Jewish side, the separation from the Gentiles stemmed from the anxiety that they would take the girls.

The different sexuality is the secret of the Jewish people's survival, the one that prevented assimilation through intermarriage for two thousand years. There are two sex cultures here that created parallel types of masculinity and femininity. The secular think that sexuality is external attraction, so their four species (mathematically it's always 2x2) are: straight man, straight woman, gay man, and lesbian. But when you understand that sexuality is internal attraction, then the four species are the four ideal types of femininity and masculinity: Gentile - strong and crude masculinity, Gentile woman - weak and delicate femininity, Jew - weak man, and Jewish woman - strong woman. The Gentile is the phallic lulav, and the Gentile woman is the fragile etrog that needs to be wrapped. And the Jewish woman is the proud myrtle, Hadassah in the Torah is Queen Esther, and the Jewish man is the pathetic willow, which is even beaten on Hoshana Rabbah [last day of Sukkot] in order to break the gevurot - the masculinity. That's why your ex, the macho man, is attracted specifically to a strong, dominant woman, a queen - it's the spark that always remains in the heart of every Jew. From the Chazon Ish [prominent rabbi] to the Prime Minister.

Nightlife


html_raw:
<!DOCTYPE html><meta charset="utf-8"><meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0"><title>The Future of Black Judaism - The Degeneration of the Nation</title><link rel="icon" type="image/png" href="../favicon-192x192.png" sizes="192x192"><link rel="apple-touch-icon" sizes="180x180" href="../apple-touch-icon-180x180.png"><link rel="canonical" href="https://degeneration-of-nation.org/en/night-life48" /><meta property="og:image" content="https://degeneration-of-nation.org/img/goelhadam.jpg" /><link rel="license" href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"><link rel="stylesheet" href="../styles.css"><link rel="stylesheet" href="../column.css"><link rel="stylesheet" href="../article.css">
The Degeneration of the Nation

The Future of Black Judaism

During that period, the entire Earth dries up, and there's no mikveh [ritual bath], because rain stops falling, and the Jews become extinct. And even when they're provided with a thin pipe to stream water from space to the skies, they say it's vessels, drawn water [which is invalid for ritual purification]. And women travel to distant stars to immerse, but don't manage to return in time. Because the distances between women and men are astronomical. And all life is slow and limited to the speed of light, because space is already a different kind of exile, much darker and deeper

By: Blood Redemption

The Empty Space - and my heart is hollow within me (Source)

I dreamed that I murdered my wife, murdered her by mistake, unintentionally, without meaning to. And I flee from the blood redeemer [avenger] all over the world, to a distant city of refuge - to a Jewish community in space. Because redemption is for blood spilled on the earth. And even the Jews already know not to put all their eggs in one basket, with all the holocausts and extinctions and unintentional murders and Jewish blood spilled like water. And that star rotates s-l-o-w-l-y, and they pray the morning prayer once like in our seven weeks, and Sabbath only happens once a year and lasts almost two months, and people celebrate only one New Year in their entire lives, and one Passover, etc., and once every seven generations there's a generation of Shmita [sabbatical year], when they don't work or water the land, and almost everyone dies.

And during that period, the entire Earth dries up, and there's no mikveh, because rain stops falling, and the Jews become extinct. And even when they're provided with a thin pipe to stream water from space to the skies, they say it's vessels, drawn water. And women travel to distant stars to immerse, but don't manage to return in time. Because the distances between women and men are astronomical. And all life is slow and limited to the speed of light, because space is already a different kind of exile, much darker and deeper. Not just the exile of the Shekhinah [divine presence], but its actual disappearance. Because if the breaking of the vessels of destruction led to exile outside the land, after the Holocaust, exile outside the solar system gradually began. The sparks scattered into infinite darkness, and continue only to move further and further away at the speed of light into the black space.

But everyone still thinks that the best young men are found on Earth, the best yeshivas, the very best matches. That's where Judaism began, after all, that's the source of the spring. It's the last connection to the ancient culture, even when the future is already light-years away from it. That's where our original heart is. And the eldest daughter wakes up at night and gets into our bed, because here my wife is beside me in space, and nothing has changed. It was just a mistake, a complete mistake. Without any intention. And the daughter cries, she thinks her fiancé sent her an email on Sabbath from Earth, because how could the light have reached through the darkness, and she's just waiting and he's actually been secular for a long time and didn't tell her.

And she asks: Look at the time of the email, isn't it a time when it's Sabbath on Earth? And what should I tell the daughter. Email? You haven't met for years. Why are you even waiting for him? He ran away from you long ago not just to another continent, not just to another planet, but to another world. What does secular even mean in space? When we were in the land and God was in the heavens, it was still close (relatively), it was still possible to hear him (barely), and there was even a chance, unlike God in space. And that's precisely why he became blacker and more ultra-Orthodox than ever. Because if once he was hiding deep within matter, and there was still a chance for redemption in the world, now he's already hiding in the absolute void. And who knows if the young man sent the email by mistake, without intention, without any desire to hurt, and broke her heart. But he sent her the email years ago, and it's only arrived now, so what's the point of even crying.

Because even when love dies, it's limited to the speed of light. And according to the theory of relativity, years can pass until the death of a love on Earth reaches space, and all that time the love in space is still alive. After all, the whole idea of light-years is that in the truly distant darkness - years become distances, years of darkness. And I myself no longer believe how far I've drifted from my previous life into the dream. How far the speed of darkness can carry you, because I'm already years of darkness away from who I was, once, on Earth, with a wife and daughter, and a Sabbath table, and living waters, and long emails, who remembers. And my wife is sad all the time, and won't say why. And I ask what did I do to you? And she just says: You don't love me. Maybe you loved me once, I don't know. And it's not clear if you ever loved. And I ask but what did I do to you? And she just says: You didn't do anything. And one night, after many years, my wife opens her heart to me, and I see a knife inside it.

Night Life