Friday, May 10, 2013

Eso’s Chronicles 164
The Forgotten Christians of Tibet (7-3)
© Eso A.B.

One may argue that the Civil War in the West has already begun. One of the screens that divert the eye from focusing on it properly is the sham war that the West is waging against the Muslims in the name of pseudo-Democracy, even while a hundred Tibetan Christians have immolated themselves to protest the destruction of their culture by a pseudo-communist Chinese government.

Unfortunately, the self-immolations of Tibetans are not backed by a clearly defined political agenda or, for that matter, on an understanding of the history of human sacrifice—either self-sacrifice or that of children and soldiers. One suspects that the reason is the universal ‘lock down’ of thought regarding evaluatinon of tactics for survival which are not convenient to governments based on capitalism.

The link at Google , while touching on the history of Tibet and interest groups sympathetic to the Tibetan struggle for independence and/or autonomy, has not deduced from the sacrifice and struggle goals that would touch on the interests of other people. After all, the Tibetans are not the only ones whose interests have been transgressed by the wanton self-interest of government cliques. Such self-interests include

1.    disregard for environmental interests and culture of life in nature;
2.    disregard of rights for a community to determine whether it desires to inherit, maintain, and further a culture that pre-existed the arrival of capitalist novus ordo;
3.    denial to a given community of rights to economic improvement across all social groups simultaneously and so as for improvements to endure and be lasting;
4.    denial of resources for studies and conferences which develop well thought out programs toward an improved culture of life;
5.    denial of presenting a sustainable program of economic equality, its example set by the domestic culture of life styles among the leadership and their families;
6.    rejection of solutions which deny war as one such by retooling the means of resistance consistent with principles of self-sacrifice (self-caused-death);
7.    rejection of disciplinary systems (not exclusionary of a painless death penalty) which continue to disregard items 5. and 6.

While at this point of planetary emergency, my interests span all points above, I am most interested in re-thinking the place of self-caused-death as a tool in avoiding death of others as part of a solution. At this point in our culture of death, it is essential that the slide into chaos is arrested and sectarian secular terror (which includes secularism acting as a religion of which neo-Christianity is a prime example) is be shown as the anarchy it is and brings. As mentioned in my previous blog, the criticism may begin with a look at the Chinese government, which charges me and those like me with murder, re: anyone aiding immolations will be charged with murder. (see next to last paragraph of link) Generally speaking, ‘aiding’ is tied to the word ‘abetting’, which in American law means “aiding and abetting a criminal” . Is resisting oppression a criminal act? No doubt, for a slave-owner it is so.

What about the U.S. governmeant?  UN human rights office says that force feeding prisoners constitutes ‘torture’. If the UN speaks true, then a U.S. government sponsored culture of terror (at least for those who become its prisoners) is opposed and fought by a culture of not-violent-terror practiced by ‘enemy combatants’. This is certainly contrary to U.S. projections of itself. Surely then anyone who supports Tibetans who have in the past and may in the future self-sacrifice themselves is along with the immolators to be considered an ‘enemy combatant’. Yes?

A murder charge and being for that reason on the receiving end of torture for harming no life but taking charge of one’s own cannot be other than motivated by the desire of the Chinese and U.S. governments to impose on everyone a sterile and deadly superego created (machine style) out its own super-self for the future ad infinitum.

Such dreams of perpetual power are nothing new. These begin in ancient times, when cultural heroes such as Gilgamesh and Enkidu of the kingdom of Uruk (on the territory of today’s Iraq) went on journeys to find the ‘plant of immortality’.

That journey, however, resembles the expeditions of the marauding Vikings: the adventures include rape, theft, violence, and death. The King of Uruk and his companion foretold, in their own way, the future.

The ancient story begins with, first, with king, Gilgamesh, presenting an animal herder, Enkidu, of the country side with a temple prostitute. When Enkidu discovers that a prostitute’s favors and his pleasure of them have no lasting power, i.e., cannot give him with eternal life, he and Gilgamesh share in the same intelligence and become fast friends. They agree to go and try find the plant of immortality no matter where the search takes them. When they arrive in Lebanon, Gilgamesh and Enkidu, apparently in the belief that the secret of immortality is hid in trees, begin to ax the country’s cedars. A giantess named Hum-baba (?Great mother), guardian of the cedar forests, comes to defend the trees, but is soon mortally wounded and dies.

Humbaba is an unmistakable prototype for what later, in another story, becomes the Sphinx. The killer of the Sphinx is prince Oedipus, who is in fleeing death by amorality. By the time the epic of Gilgamesh reaches Greece, it has grown in sophistication: the search for the plant of immortality leads not only to the death of the forest, but Oedipus’ sexual adventures with his mother go beyond the pleasures of sex by seeking immortality by replanting one’s self, so to speak, in her womb. What Oedipus learns is that none of the children born to Iocaste are his replicas, but individuals in their own right. When Oedipus’ wishes fail to materialize, the city of Thebes and the wood, at the centre of which once stood the Temple of the Sphinx, turn to desert

Still, literary critics continue to divert the attention of theatre goers from the fact that for playwright Sophocles’, the main theme (though the background is obscured by the actions in the foreground) is the role of death, and how its importance is ignored by those who seek power. The play ends in tragedy, the nature of which is not understood to this day.

Sophocle’s gives the riddle of his play an implicit resolution by allowing Oedipus’ daughter Ismene to escape death (evidently to later tell what really happened). But because Sophocles gives Ismene a minor role in the play proper, so do our critics give her no mind. Our mindset, kept in a hypnotized state by secular Christianity (in its Lenin-Stalin, Mao Tse Tung, and Nixon-Regan masks), cannot shake off the False Flag of the Christian lamella or, if you will, saran wrap. While the Chinese Government’s plan for the Tibetans is seen by the latter as a death trap, and the bravest of them are offering their lives in non-violent sacrifice to save their community, the Chinese leadership, obsessed with immortality clings to power through the barrel of the gun.

No comments:

Post a Comment