The idea was that if government were purged of its Christian character that Jews would rise to the heights. They also bought the myth that Jews under Islam flourished. So there is an unacknowledged anti-Christian sentiment at work. Also unacknowledged, as Barbara Tuchman ointed out, Zionism owes a tremendous debt to British Judeophilism, examplfied by the Balfour Agreement. Liberal Jews, like the Arabs, think it can be explained as British perfidy, because the Brirish also promised the Arabs very much. The truth is that Lawrence made promises he had no right to make and through his celebrity sold this version of history to the left. So Zionism had been tarred with the anti-colonialism of that is part of the mindset of the Left. The non-jewish Left has never trusted Jews, because they think that Leftish Jews are untrustworthy, that they were willing to sell-out their own people for their self advancement. This is undeniably true of the Stalinist Left.
The idea was that if government were purged of its Christian character that Jews would rise to the heights.
This is not only false but sounds much like mid-1800 anti-Semitic propaganda. No, no Jews had an idea of "purging the government of its Christian character." What is the "Christian character" of those English kings that expelled Jews for centuries and of Cromwell that allowed them back? What does the "Christian character" of the English court have in common with that of the French? No much: one allowed Magna Carta in 1215 and the other was overthrown in a revolution of 1789. What does "Christian character" of Spanish Isabella (called the Catholic for her expulsion of Jews and Roma) have in common with that of the Dutch monarchs, that allowed the expelled into Holland? Nothing at all. What is the "Cristian character" of the Russian court?
There is no such thing as the "Christian character" of the government. Our form of government was heavily influenced by a particular stream of the Christian, largely English, thought. All other, equally Christian, governments held an opposite view of the world.
And, no, European Jews did not want or demand weakening of Christianity. They wanted the end of expulsions, robbery, rape and murder. The "Most Christian" monarch of France did not even want to entertain the thought, and it was the revolutionaries of 1789 who granted Jews equal rights. These rights were brought to Germany by Napoleon but denied again after his defeat. It was actually some influential Christian thinkers that demand equality for the Jews at the time. Most "Enlightened" Jews in the fist half of XIX century converted to Christianity. Those that did not invented a more secularized, Reform Judaism. Nobody I know of has advocated that "government [be] purged of its Christian character" --- whatever that means.
You have turned Jews from victims of the Church policy to attackers of Christianity.
"hey also bought the myth that Jews under Islam flourished."
Who are they? And when did "they" allegedly buy into that idea?
The safety of a Spanish Jew under Islam was indeed incomparably greater than in contemporaneous Europe. Yes, their culture flourished in Spain and Northern Africa. This is largely because the Eastern countries were incomparably more enlightened than the West at the time. You sound as if the "idea" is somehow false and Jews merely "bought" into it.
"So there is an unacknowledged anti-Christian sentiment at work."
This is simply a defamation. There is deeply rooted apprehension of any strong expressions of any religiosity. Every Easter, Jewish mothers in Eastern Europe prohibited their children to play outside: they may be harmed by a "Christian" returning from church to avenge the death of Christ. For almost two millennia then living Jews were declared collectively guilty in the death of Christ, and their oppression was justified on those grounds. The more strictly a ruler bought into this logic, the more oppression he inflicted.
As a consequence, German and East European Jews acquired apprehension of religiosity. There is no "anti-Christian sentiment."
"Zionism owes a tremendous debt to British Judeophilism, exemplified by the Balfour Agreement."
Another nonsensical statement. There was no such thing as British Judeophilism. In mid-1800, as part of the continuing Enlightenment, it became acceptable not to hate or oppress Jews; it became OK to state that one stands for equality of all religions. Just like those standing up for Blacks were called "n-lovers," the opposition often referred to liberals as Judeophiles. Yes, they could even have Jewish friends.
You make it sound like those "Judeophiles" were ruling the country. Where have they gone immediately after Balfour? England was so rampantly anti-Semitic in 1920s-1930s.
You also make it sound as if Balfour was some kind of a gift to the Jews. Perhaps as a gift to the Jews they also created Jourdan?
"Lawrence made promises he had no right to make and through his celebrity sold this version of history... So Zionism had been tarred with the anti-colonialism of that is part of the mindset of the Left."
Another conspiracy theory. Zionism is anti-colonial as a consequence of it being heavily influenced by socialism. As I said earlier, it was liberals and socialists that advocated for equality, being thus natural friends of the Jews. In addition, in the second half of XIX century, socialism was strongly influenced by Marx and took strong hold in the minds of Europeans, both Jews and Gentiles. That is when Zionism was born, and many Zionists were socialist. As such they opposed colonialism.
The non-jewish Left has never trusted Jews, because they think that Leftist Jews are untrustworthy, that they were willing to sell-out their own people for their self advancement. This is undeniably true of the Stalinist Left.
You should try to read fewer conspiracy theories. What you stated is the opposite from the truth. Great many of the socialists, social-democrats, anarchists and communists were former Jews -- that is, Jews born to Jewish parents. Many of these people were leaders of the respective movement -- so much for the distrust. In fact, the present-day anti-Semites in Russia love to point out how many of the Russian communist leaders had Jewish surnames.
You appear to have a complete misunderstanding of the socialist and communist movements. Two of the central parts of those ideologies are secularism and internationalism. A Russian communist born into a Jewish family and a German communist born into a Christian family have this much in common: both view themselves and each other as (i) non-Jewish and non-Christian respectively, and ((ii) members of one world without national boundaries.
Russian communists, whether born into Christian, Jewish or Muslim families, were destroying churches, synagogues and mosques with fervor. They did not think they were fighting their own people but enemies of the people --- od all people.
There was no distrust of Jews among the Russian communists. There was envy (Jews tend to be over-achievers, and were prominent in particular in the Communist Party) and ancient hatred. It is funny but true that many Russians Communists admitted to hating Jews "because they killed Christ." Some things never die. The Stalinist Left proved nothing else in that regard.
What you plug in here is an age-old trick: Jews deserve the treatment they had for millennia. I find it interesting that your post contains not a single true fact but quite a bit of bias.