I don’t think that I have that attitude.
You only have a few posts here and you’ve zeroed in and put a lot of effort analyzing an offhand comment about Jews Molyneux made in a blog in 2005. On what criterion do you believe this to be so important?
It’s very easy for me to infer that this is because of the very high sensitivity toward criticism of the designated ‘minority groups,’ as is now so fashionable.
The primary thing is that that mindset is hardly limited to the Jews.
Nowhere does he say it is, in the next sentence he lists other groups where collectivist thinking also exists. I think his overarching theory is that psychoanalysis did not challenge it (although to the extent that collectivism can damage the health of an individual should be of great concern) because collectivism is a normal part of their religion.
Whether this is a result of their Jewish upbringing or outlook is open for debate. I do know that many Jews the world over are educated for an in-group centric view, and this is accepted today, as are all minority displays of pride and in-group behavior.
The other big issue is that you’re pointing to Israelis, who live in a relatively dangerous country, rather than Jews in general.
Israel was intentionally set up as a religious/ethnic state to begin with. Zionism is inextricably connected with Judaism. Israel is like their promised land or something.
My cursory knowledge of psychology, especially as it applies to religious beliefs like the afterlife, leads me to believe that being part of a ‘chosen people’ and other religious myths have a powerful effect on one’s psychology and behavior. The wars, migrations and political events through history tells us that religion is very powerful. That religion would not play a part seems to be a much more implausible idea.