What is the future of Israel?

On four learning methods - which are four basic learning cultures

This is what remains: What is Jewishness? Not a specific content, but the chameleon-like remnant of the cultural chameleon, which it failed to get rid of. That is: its method (Source)

The coronavirus - as a simultaneous global crisis with prominent quantifiable dimensions - allows for the first time a relatively objective mathematical comparison between cultures. Its graph actually divides the world qualitatively into four types of cultures: East Asia, Europe and the Old World, both Americas (England is an interesting intermediate case between Europe and the USA), and one more strange and unique case - Jewish culture. If anyone had doubts whether the Jewish state belongs to the West or the East, and perhaps even saw this as the root of the rifts in Israel: left versus right, secular versus religious, Ashkenazi versus Mizrahi, etc. (which in turn reflect ancient deep trends that can be traced back to the kingdoms of Israel and Judah and even to the clash between Mesopotamian and Egyptian influences in the Bible and so on to the first principle) - the last decade has given a strange answer to this: neither this nor that. There is a development here that is unique in relation to the large blocs - and Jewish culture is truly different. Not East and not West, and not even mixed.

The thing that determines more than anything the long-term development of a culture is its internal method, more than any random external circumstance. Because if everything was just influences and reactions and combinations of circumstances - and other historical ideas whose explanatory power is very weak and can fit any development - we would expect scrambling, dilution and complete unification in the long run: the thought that everything is just interactions and a network of mutual influences is an empty linguistic-communicative perception. In contrast, the method essentially defines the internal uniqueness of a certain culture - because it is difficult to change the method of change itself and therefore it continues to influence (in humans, the unique method is called: personality). And since the method is the hardest part to change in any learning system - it is the one that usually leads to its loss (and not some mistake or another in the learning itself - such a random error will eventually be corrected after paying its price). The method is always the less adaptable part of the system, for example the character of an individual, or the basic dynamics in a relationship (or family), or the culture of a commercial company or public organization, or the culture of a people and its national character, or the character of a biological species (yes, even a tiger has a character. Is it not politically correct to claim that a tiger has a character?). Evolution, for example, allows adaptation, but there was very little change and adaptation of the evolutionary mechanism itself, and in cases where it itself was challenged, wide-scale extinctions occurred - almost without adaptation. A failure in the method is almost always a circular failure, and therefore it is terribly difficult to get out of it (this is the reason why it is so difficult to get out of a philosophical paradigm, like the philosophy of language). If so, how do we characterize cultural methods?

The crudest division of learning methods into four basic types is as old as the days of the Sages, and it is the one that deciphers the unique Israeli idiocy which is also the unique Israeli wisdom: "There are four types among students: Quick to hear and quick to lose - his reward is canceled by his loss. Slow to hear and slow to lose - his loss is canceled by his reward. Quick to hear and slow to lose - a wise man. Slow to hear and quick to lose - this is an evil portion." The root of the division is that in every learning system there are existing internal patterns, which have already been acquired and learned and it preserves them, and new patterns that are acquired and learned from outside, and a basic parameter of the learning algorithm is how sensitive it is to new information, that is: how quickly it learns. The innovation of the above Mishnah in Pirkei Avot is that speed is not everything in learning, and there is actually an advantage to imperviousness. Because if a system hurries to learn and abandon its old patterns - its reward comes out in its loss. For example, there are people who are butterflies in relationships who fall in love easily to the point of exhaustion - and with the same speed become disappointed and abandon, and there are people who fall in love slowly and then their love persists, and there are swans who marry their first love and love forever, and there are also those who find it very difficult to fall in love - and very easy to be disappointed. Are they an evil portion?

In fact, there is no ideal learning type, and each learner is suitable for a different type of systemic challenge. The faster the environment itself changes, the more preferable the learning cycle of the butterfly is over the swan or the penguin, and there are situations where the cautious one who never trusts, the mouse - is the one with the winning method. But the typical learning graph of the four types of learners reveals to us a very basic division of world cultures, according to their adaptation graph to a new systemic challenge, which they all encountered at the same time: the corona crisis. Far Eastern cultures are those whose method strictly preserves their internal tradition (which is therefore very long) but also hurries to adopt new patterns, which is often understood as superficial copying and empty imitation - quick to hear and slow to lose. This is the secret behind their economic capitalist or scientific success compared to their political and social conservatism (a combination that in the West is a contradiction in terms). Japan is the paradigmatic example of this matter, but also China, the two Koreas and the Asian tigers, and in the future also India. Europe, on the other hand, as the old continent (also demographically) and fixed, was as always very slow in its late response and internalization, but from the moment the state mechanism went into action, it maintained its achievements and acted with efficient and systematic consistency - slow to hear and slow to lose, his loss comes out in his reward.

On the other hand, the Americas, the cultures of the New World, are a more interesting case, which created a unique non-adaptive response to the coronavirus (and not just with Trump, but in all of Latin America). The basic method of American culture is quick to abandon patterns easily (and anyway there is no significant ancient tradition and cultural weight in the New World), thus creating an impression of dynamism, because nothing persists, but on the other hand it is very stubborn and relatively impervious to external considerations and changes, out of a hollow ethos of success and fundamentalism of self-belief. Hence the famous American stupidity, cultural superficiality and lack of depth in the view of the world and other cultures - slow to hear and quick to lose. Apparently to the surprise of the Sages, this is actually a very successful method in our world today, because it allows very few internal inhibitions (preservation of old patterns) and on the other hand very little consideration of external pressures and circumstances (little learning from outside - and a lot of self-motivation). This is the narcissistic method of the successful CEO, or the power of the American tourist, who learns nothing from the other culture, but tramples the world with his Americanness, or of the naive and idealistic American conqueror (such as Graham Greene's "The Quiet American"), or just the violence of society (in both Americas). The coronavirus is a unique rare external challenge (biological and not human), where dismissal and ignoring and continuing "in your own way" do not help in coping with it (but they certainly help in economic coping - the Fed simply inflates the stock market as if there's no tomorrow. Party!). Therefore, America is the mother of low culture and its great distributor in the world, to the horror of all other cultures, simply because one who has no internal depth and doesn't care what others think of him from outside - is good at porn. Is there a better definition for Facebook than slow to hear and quick to lose? Lack of awareness is a much stronger force than awareness (not to mention awareness lacking awareness... another American excellence). But what about the fourth type?

There is one people that was scattered and dispersed among the nations, and its sons assimilated themselves culturally with the speed of a chameleon in all countries, and their religions are different from every people. Israeli innovation, Jewish neuroticism, the hysteria that alternates with complacency that alternates with shouting and winking and impulsiveness and then panic again, the rapid assimilation and settlement within other cultures and the constant desire to emigrate, to resign, to be someone else and then something else again, the start-up nation and the unique failure against the coronavirus after the unique success against the coronavirus - all stem from one root: from the method. Quick to learn and quick to lose - his reward comes out in his loss. After all, what remains Jewish in an assimilated Jew? Only: the very ability to assimilate itself. This is his method (even without any Jewish content). Therefore he can be more German than a German, and then more American than an American, and then again a chameleon without affiliation, and always: an excellent cultural and business entrepreneur and eternal immigrant (or at least an eternal backpacker). But did the state solve the problem of the rootless detached? No, it just copied it to the state space: a rootless and detached state. Therefore in Israel there is only short term and only sprint: the first place in the world - in the second wave. After all, what happened to the coronavirus? The worst thing that can happen to a problem in Israel: it turned from an external learning challenge (new and shiny!) to an internal challenge (a bit old and boring). And see what a wonderful metamorphosis. As long as the crisis was perceived as an external threat, like terrorism, the response was total mobilization and absolute panic. The moment it became an internal problem, what happens to every internal problem in Israel happened to it: foot-dragging and disregard for what has already been learned and neglect of the nuisance. Who cares?

Because this is the fastest learning culture in the world: the first to identify and adopt and the first to abandon and forget what it has learned and repeat the same history again. A country where there is not a drop of governance and institutions that can be relied upon, and everything is close and yalla yalla and mess and improvisation and patch-up and screw-up and chutzpah and slap on the back and buddy and lack of interpersonal boundaries and social networking abilities at lightning speed between strangers without shame and with national moods changing like a weathervane, when scandal chases scandal and everything is always boiling and bubbling and lacking continuity and startups turn into exits and not into giant companies and many patents are registered and there is little long-term planning and cultural memory is completely amnesic. Welcome to a culture that learns too quickly.

So what will happen with the culture with the lowest inhibition in the world? Seemingly, as development in the world accelerates, the advantage of Jewish culture over the Gentiles will grow, and the importance of innovation will increase at the expense of conservatism, and the advantage of learning over fixation will be like the advantage of light over darkness. But in fact, culture needs darkness. The ability of Jewish culture to maintain a state beyond the very fact of its existence, that is to maintain a long-term learning framework with a deep cultural tradition of value - is in great doubt. Bibi is not an unfortunate case that happened to us, just as Trump is not an unfortunate case of America - but a distilled essence of the national character. Therefore, if Jewish culture desires cultural life, it must actually increase within itself the conservative and traditional elements, and learn from East Asia. Fast learning is not identical to wisdom, and sometimes stands in contrast to it (this is one of the explanations for the difficulty of the brain to learn things that a computer learns quickly - biology often preferred stability over efficiency).

Real learning is not just increasing the flexibility and speed parameter to infinity, but depends precisely on the depth of learning - on its ability to challenge basic and fundamental patterns and not just abandon them casually. Not just replacing the old with the new, but a meeting of the old with the new - and their mating (as opposed to the struggle between them). The real challenge is to bring together "slow to lose" with "quick to hear" - and here even Far Eastern cultures often fail, unable to create a mating between the old and the new, but rather a parallel existence - disconnected, on planes that do not meet (hence the lack of depth in their learning of the new - in cheap imitation. Yes, ease of learning is also a curse!). Can our impulsive culture - light-minded and light-thinking - undergo this deep metamorphosis?

Well, there is always a possibility that there will be some Napoleon who will change the character of the state by the force of his personality and organizational ability, but what are the chances of that? The only person who is a genius who not only grew but also succeeded in the Israeli system in recent decades is not even a person but a potato, answering to the name Eisenkot. One should never underestimate the abilities of a super-planner and super-manager with credentials, but even more so one should not underestimate the power and persistence of a cultural method, and one brilliant strategist will not be able to stand in the breach even if he stands at the head of the government (and the proof - the masses have not even heard that a genius has grown in our garden, and their ability to distinguish between the abilities of senior system officials is zero. Only in Germany can a potato be chancellor).

There is always also a possibility that a cultural genius will appear, like Maimonides, Freud or the author of the Zohar, who by the force of his unique-supreme achievements will transfer the Israeli culture to a track of synthesis between the new and the old, and will increase its deep conservatism and deep innovation (as opposed to superficial conservatism and superficial innovation). But the flawed education will not hurry to produce such a person in a cultural republic of little value and weight like ours, which suffers from exactly the same disease: quick to hear and quick to lose (is it even possible for a book to have cultural importance and significance in our places? The function itself does not exist - every new voice is swallowed in the noise). And in general, is the only chance waiting for the Messiah?

Meanwhile, as demographic trends continue, Israel will become one of the youngest countries in the world outside the Third World, with a large population with low education who think they know everything - which will in turn create a society with an impulsive and short-term learning style. It is becoming clear that the real damage of external security problems (the preoccupation with "occupation") was the neglect of internal depth problems as long as it was possible to deal with them - before the population loses the organizational and human capital imported from the diaspora, with the advancement (which is diminishment) of generations. The professor grandfather, his high-tech son, and the grandson - an intellectual toy thug (that is: a spoiled baby, childish and whiny but also insolent, arrogant and loud, who is the first to adopt every trend and gadget and the first to lose and abandon it: the first to Zion).

Israel is a pyramid game, where the achievements of the present are built on the education of the past - and on the abilities of the extinct generations at the bottom of the pyramid. Everything starts (and therefore ends) with education and learning. The Jews excelled in this and hence their achievements (there is no genius) - and the Israelis excelled in lack of education and superficial learning that comes (and goes) "easily". Their elite was an external import from the diaspora, where it was built above the culture of the Gentiles - they will not have another one produced internally. As long as the Jewish method was connected at the base to heavy cultures (and the peak: Germany), and was the first to learn and innovate and initiate in a fixed system - it worked. But alone? The education and cultivation system itself underwent an accelerated process of barbarization - each generation more ignorant than its predecessor, and we will yet miss Bibi.

The results of rotten education are longer-term than any demography, because this is culture. Therefore in the foreseeable long term - Israel will remain a failed state, and the Jewish people will remain a successful people (as long as they manage to integrate into other cultures and be the innovative and entrepreneurial element within them). The hybrid structure of Jewish culture, of a state that has a people (and not just a people that has a state), that is, a structure of diaspora, will perhaps allow the Jewish state a kind of parasitic-to-symbiotic existence with global culture, exactly like Jewish existence in the diaspora itself. Therefore, the establishment of the State of Israel will not create a reverse transition from thesis to antithesis - from exile to state - but its historical end is to reach synthesis: diaspora. For the talented individual (who is of course a very dynamic Jew with chameleon-like abilities) there is no reason to stay in a failed state - and in a failed culture.

Because the time has come to give (at least to ourselves) a true account of Hebrew culture. Enough time has passed for us to conclude that Hebrew culture has produced very poor products compared to world Jewish culture in the same period (except perhaps in the field of poetry. And perhaps because it is the hardest to compare cultures). The most basic conclusion is the abandonment of Hebrew as a single mother tongue, in order to increase the transitivity of the culture. The revival of Hebrew was a terrible historical mistake, precisely because it succeeded (in creating a people that doesn't listen to anyone): its reward came out - in its loss.

But could such a proposal even have come to mind in another, rooted culture? What is really the future of Jewish culture, if there is no cultural future for the Jewish state? Our detached one will do what he always does: abandon. Make an exit. And give up on the episode of Hebrew exclusivity - the greatest damage caused by the philosophy of language to inherently bilingual and inter-cultural Judaism - in favor of learning. Hebrew should have remained a preserved sacred language - so that we could create a fruitful dialogue between it and the secular language: the language of the world. This dialogue simply did not occur within Hebrew itself, whose contribution to world culture is negligible, and which has long forgotten where it came from (and this despite the fact that the language had "all the data", because what determines is not the language but the m-e-t-h-o-d). Therefore the Agnonian project failed - because we are quick to lose, just as we are quick to hear (and Hebrew became a spoken language). The Zohar was wiser than him, and chose to forge an entire language - that is, to create a foreign language as a sacred language. Thus the Zohar was saved from the destruction created by the revival of Hebrew, which was the burial of the sacred and the destruction of the conservative and deep cultural foundation of Judaism (whoever still seeks holiness today - seeks in the Zohar). In this, Hebrew exacerbated the problem of the rapid transition of our method - and made our culture disconnected from the great cultures that nourished it in fruitful symbiosis. And the result: lack of culture.

If so, our hope is not yet lost. The Holocaust made us immune to enormous self-losses, and we can afford to lose and lose again and lose even the harmful Hebrew itself, because we are spiritual chameleons, and because language is not important - only learning. Unfortunately and fortunately, we will not be able to change our method, because it is who we are, and therefore we must find better conditions for its flourishing. Therefore, out of recognition of our limitations and strengths, we must distance ourselves from everything related to the world of the state (and its politics) - in an exilic (and for the meticulous: parasitic) existence within the state itself. This, while opposing the language of the majority and the street and its hollow culture - and connecting to world culture (and especially to the rising power of Far Eastern and philosemitic cultures, at the expense of the sick and antisemitic West). The exilic-cultural existence precisely within the State of Israel is the paradoxical peak of Jewish existence. His loss came out - in his reward.