Saturday, March 2, 2013

Eso’s Chronicles 143
The Earthquake of San Francisco as A Political Act (2)
© Eso A.B.
Looking At You!
Needless to say, the ‘political act’ has, in this instance, the aura of hope and prayer about it. It comes with no certainty it will ever occur.
Perhaps ‘the act’ will not turn out to be the Golden Gate Bridge crashing into the San Francisco Bay, or Mt. Fuji having a fiery blow out over Tokyo. One can in fact make a case for the Fukushima event, which is a consequence of a comvergence of acts by nature and humans: a convergence caused tsunamis, nuclear meltdown, human negligence, and hubris of the modern age. To the extent that the Japanese government continues to hide the real damage behind white sheets of purity, yet it is public knowledge that three of the six nuclear reactors suffered meltdowns, we can liken this to an unacknowledged seppuku by a modern government (Japanese) standing the Japanese people in for humankind. The catastrophe comes in a package neatly wrapped in white cloth. No one is likely to think that it contains a plastic bag of human blood.

The so-called “9/11 spectacle” predated the above actual or fancied catastrophes. However, 9/11--as the first event of a potential series, and because it was discovered (?) by the intelligence services before its execution took place--was seized and reengineered to suit the wealthy supporters of government who form the ‘deep government’ that underlies government as an institution. The reengineering, as we now know, consisted of a response that would react to ‘the act’ by declaring war “on terrorism”. The response would be of force majeure proportions .
The force majeure following 9/11 was registered on public’s consciousness through an immediate declaration of war by the U.S. and NATO on Afghanistan. It would be followed, later, by war on Iraq, Libya, Mali, Syria, and places hid from the public eye. These as if justified acts of catastrophe had for their underlying goal the destruction of Russia, which the West had failed at since the Viking incursions, and which had culminated in the French led Fourth Crusade (1204) against Constantinople.

While the Crusade against Constantinople and Eastern Christianity was not the initial  act (for the original see my ), and was preceded by a cluster of acts, the ‘1204 event’ was not unlike 9/11. While the killing of Basil in 1118 was a force majeure act that removed from the scene a defining political element (the body of the sacred king) which was akin to the disembowelment of a preexisting political system, the purpose of the ‘1204 event’ was to transfer the centre of power from the East to West in Toto. Ever since that time, this is where power has remained.

The political system that the force majeure act of 1204 instated came to be called by the name we know it today, ‘liberal capitalism’, aka ‘privatization’ of the planet.

Because the 9/11 event was an act of force majeure proportions, and because it was planned as an act of reinforcement to a system that had survived by a series of earlier elite-made catastrophes (WW1, WW2 among others), there was a sense of de ja vu about it. It is as if we have seen this objet d’art before—if not as an identical copy, then as a genre of media projecting and glorifying flatulence of mind, re “Pop Art” or what some philosophers have called ‘the Spectacle’. The hedonistic elements implicit in the latter have expanded their influence to where the mindset of 13-year old boys becomes bold enough to try fuck 15-year old girls deprived of any sense of public culture. How is a liberal capitalist government, a control freak in its heart of heart, to deal with this situation?

Enfants terribles'enfant_terrible of liberal capitalism, in the guise of President Bush and his Vice President Dick Cheney, must have had a feeling that things have gone far enough, and that a runaway hedonistic civilization has to be somehow be brought back under control. They were moved to prove once more that ‘government’ is, after all, more powerful than ‘art’. While the last word is not in as to all the details of 9/11 (some claim its ‘engine’ to have been a nuclear device), we know that initially the spectacle was ‘imagined’ by non-American and non-European ‘artists’ able to go beyond the imaginations of ‘pop artists’ proper (wrapping buildings a la Christo and Jeanne-Claude was as far as these had got ), thus giving Vice President Cheney the opportunity to put the finishing touches on 9/11 by ordering war games in the sky  on the morning that the attack on the WTC was scheduled to take place.

The thrust of my argument is that the coming of the ‘9/11 event’ was known and that the ‘deep government’ such the Bilderberg Group perceived its opportunity and struck.

The dumbing down of humankind, a process that has, by now, lasted at least eight hundred and five years, re from 1204, one of the first force majeur events, to 2001, a major second force majeure event, must be by any standart considered a success.

Actually, the ‘dumbing down’ is older than that. One of the first dates and places for its actual beginning is 1118 CE in Constantinople, now Istanbul in Turkey; a second date of note is 1215 CE and takes place at Runnymede in England. Not surprisingly, the names of the two kings who suffered the humiliation of violent separation from their people had similar names.

The Byzantine sacred king was known as Basil, while the king in the second instance was the sacred king John of England,_King_of_England . As the link notes, king John, a descendant of William the Conqueror, was excommunicated by Rome. This is nearly all the officially recorded information that we have on the displacement of old Christianity and economic order by what was to become known as liberal capitalism and its early ‘pop’ version of religion first housed at Avignon.

As in any good story, there is no shortage of unofficial information, which, given writers who have managed to escape being ‘dumbed down’, can produce other endings than those given heretonow. For example, the wreck of the White Ship , which caused the drowning of the heir designate of England William Adelin. While never proven, there is a suggestion that the wreck might have occurred due to an act of sabotage by non-Catholic Christians of the Byzantine Empire. For sure, the ship left the harbor without receiving the blessings of the Catholic clergy and most of those aboard were perhaps deliberately inebriated at the time the anchor was hauled. Perhaps equally deliberately the ship soon struck a submerged rock and sank with most aboard.

The ascent of Catholicism may be viewed (with prejudice) in the context of the attempt in our day to ‘globalize’ the political and economic system of our planet by the descendants of those who caused so much anarchy that followed the seizure of England from the real and true forebears of king John by the Norman invaders. The latter sere were descendants of the Viking marauders, who went up the Seine river  and downriver of the Dnepr and Volga, bringing with them not only trade in furs, wax, and slaves, but a culture of profit making, if not by peaceful trade, then by outright thievery and violence.

Tragically, the above dates (1118 & 1215) may be seen not simply as tragedies affecting two kings, but as tragedies that struck and affected the fate, governments, and times of humankind led by leaders who were in effect heirs to a right wing (and Viking) Liberal Revolution. One will benefit from reading the article on the Magna Carta at Wikipedia . It includes the following:

Magna Carta was the first document forced onto a King of England by a group of his subjects, the feudal barons, in an attempt to limit his powers by law and protect their privileges. It was preceded and directly influenced by the Charter of Liberties in 1100, in which King Henry I had specified [no doubt as a result of coercion] particular areas wherein his powers would be limited.” My bold face and italics of the word ‘forced’ to point out the paucity of references to what was a dispute of monumental proportions, but with hardly a direct reference of it left in our day.

One may also discover the rise of liberal capitalism in a third king. This is the French Louis XVI, who was decapitated by a guillotine in 1793. What is astonishing is that according to eye witnesses, many of the crowd who witnessed the king’s guillotining, despite many screaming “Vive la Republique”, dipped their handkerchiefs in the king’s blood. There can be little doubt that the act meant to secure a sacred relic and for the person involved, because though the office of the king had become greatly besmirched, the common man continued to remember his sacred mission.

In spite of the dramatic events, a little reflection shows that the French Revolution was the consequence of a long period of governing systems condoning legalized theft, which fact also unleashed the Russian Revolution a century later. As noted, the cause of these anarchistic eruptions was the victory and instatement of a liberal capitalist ‘robber culture’ (eventually camouflaged behind such words as ‘competition’, ‘invention’, ‘creativeness’, and even ‘democracy’).

Today the alternative to a martyr king is a liverless ‘philosopher king’ or university academic. Men who once were princes and cardinals, advisors to the king, come in our day reincarnated as scholastics retooled into professors, who—much as they may try—cannot rediscover their roots. As close to the Real story as their fictionalized stories may on occasion come, they miss the connection for the lack of a conjunction. A good example is the philosopher Slavoj Žižek, who often comes remarkably close to identifying the problem, but nevertheless misses hitting the nail on the head. This is particularly true when it comes to perceiving the political role of the sacred king. Žižek’s identification with liberalism, especially its human rights aspect, is so deeply seated that he refuses to make any political connection with its opposition, the community.

Writes Žižek:

“The deepest identification that holds a community together is not so much an identification with the Law that regulates its ‘normal’ everyday rhythms, but rather identification with the specific form of transgression of the Law, of its suspension (in psychoanalytic terms, with the specific form of enjoyment.”*

Žižek goes to identify the ‘specific form of enjoyment’ with the Ku Klux Klan’s ‘nightly terror’ manifest in the lynching of helpless blacks. In short, instead of accepting a sacred king’s self-sacrifice as “…the specific form of transgression of the Law” (of ordinary and natural Real), Žižek cannot accept this without inserting a clause that makes the community a consequence of “solidarity-in-guilt” due to a common transgression. For Žižek my need to have my own room and my solidarity with its other occupants (be they brother scouts, sorority sisters, or wife and children)  makes for a Nazi community; a community that at some point in its existence will face such stresses that it will seek among its own a scapegoat to collectively murder.

For Žižek, the ‘stresses’ that arise in a ‘for profit’ liberal capitalist community may not be solved by a sacred self-sacrificial king, but the king necessarily fails and needs to be (will be) murdered, thus, perpetuating the mystery of why the problem has no solution. Even though Žižek knows of the topological circle, his identification and acceptance of the Christian False Flag story of the creation of Jesus Christ, keeps him --along with the Politburo—stuck in the door of the Vatican. Writes Žižek in a lament over nationalism:

“…the recourse to nationalism itself emerged in order to protect us from the traumatic disorientation from the loss of the ground under our feet by the disintegration of the social order, of the Lacanian ‘big Other’ epitomized  by Really Existing Socialism.”**

But what if ‘Really Existing Socialism’ does not exist and the only suitable economy for humankind is a Subsistence Economy? What if the charisma of the sacred king cannot be replaced by any kind of other political system or democracy without betraying it to liberal capitalism?
* Slavoj Žižek, “The universal exception”, Continuum, p 28.
** Ibid., p 30.


No comments:

Post a Comment