Islam is relatively tolerant. It accepts Christians at least as dhimmi. Judaism absolutely forbids any foreign worship in the Land of Israel: no altars, temples, or places of prayer. Islam tolerates churches. Judaism, if it ever again takes hold of the Land of Israel, would demolish churches here.
Judaism is the very opposite of tolerance. Judaism is about purity, and purity is oh so intolerant of what it sees as impurity. “Live and let live” is antithetical to Judaism in the Land of Israel. “Let live” applies to Gentiles elsewhere: God gave them the seven moral laws of Noah, but otherwise they can live as they please. Judaism carved for itself a patch of land and applied to it zoning regulations. This land must be absolutely pure: an island of purity among the sea of anything.
Purity is about doing; tolerance – refraining from action. Tolerance is individual; any individual can be tolerant. Purity is necessarily collective: the finest person cannot remain pure in the evil environment. Even Lot had to leave Sodom. Modern people cannot hide in their apartments and engage in subsistence farming like Lot probably did; the continuous interaction with wickedness leaves purity no chance.
The Torah established the ultimately collective religion. Every major commandment is addressed to “thou.” Every Jew is responsible for everything that happens in his habitat. Recall the words we repeat every Shabbat: “Thou shall do no work on that day, neither thou nor thine son nor thine daughter nor thine servants, men or women, nor thine animals nor the stranger who lives with thou.” Animals are not subject to commandments; their owners are. Every single Jew is responsible for what happens around him: just as his animals must not work, so everyone in his sphere of influence, from the direct “your servants” to the remotest “stranger who lives in your land” must obey the commandments. Just as the Jews must punish thieves and murderers who have done no harm to them personally, so we must punish other transgressors even though their offenses are private and non-violent.
The concept of moral zoning is commonly accepted. Tolerant Americans banish non-violent striptease bars to the outskirts of their towns or downtown areas. Europeans won’t imagine homosexual gatherings in the government-owned cathedrals. Parental controls block the neutral, in libertarian terms, programming: there’s nothing objectively wrong in showing children sex scenes. Societies ban polygamy, a totally innocuous behavior.
Jews, too, commonly accept the responsibility for each other. Thus, for example, Neturei Karta is largely right in its criticism of the Zionist state. Neturei Karta’s speaker at the Iranian Holocaust Conference took a principled stand and refuted the revisionist attempts. Still, Neturei Karta was condemned for its cooperation with the enemies of Zionists, even if the Zionist government itself is an enemy of Jews. The common fate of Jews takes precedence over the Neturei Karta’s freedom of expression. Religion always takes precedence over personal freedoms. Any organization requires its members to submit to its charter. If conscripts submit to the army’s procedures even while disagreeing with policies, how much more Jews must submit to our religion?
Judaism doesn’t claim for itself the entire world or continents, but a tiny speck of land to set a morally exemplary society on. Those of different opinions can live on in Damascus or Toronto.
Those left must be forced to the moderate Judaism.
