Eso’s Chronicles 331 / 7 
Odds and Ends  
© Eso A.B.
All comments appearing within brackets [ ] are editorial in origin.

THE DEATH OF 1^st CHRISTIANITY (1)

We are told by the consensual historians of the West and East that in 1240 Kiev was captured by the Mongols of Ghegis Khan [John (possibly Angus) the King]. Russian mathematician and historian Anatoly Fomenko disagrees, and argues that the Mongols were never plentiful enough to make an invasion.

My own view agrees with Fomenko, but for a different reason.

In my view the Mongols were invented by the Russian Orthodox Church to cover up the fact that it had accepted the Western version of Christianity. In fact, the Mongol invasion was a continuation of the invasion that was  begun by Western un with the so-called 4^th Crusade (1204), which mysteriously stopped at the gates of Byzantium and did not continue on to Jerusalem as the organizers of the Crusade had first told.

The Christianity reigning in Kiev and Eastern Europe as a whole before 1204 and 1240 was forced underground and little by little over the next several centuries destroyed.

Let us remember the Crusade of 1208 against the Cathars (?Bogomils) in Languedoc, now France, and Yersika, now Latvia. These events were not new enterprises, but a continuation of the 1204 attack on Byzantium, which thereafter was renamed Constantinople. In southern France and the Baltics, too, the old or first Christianity was liquidated in favor of one invented by the West [with considerable help from one called St. Augustine and many other paid agents (Bishop Albert in Livonia being one of them)].

The ‘hereticism’ according to the consensual establishment (the boyars and princes with their lobbyist the priests and various specnaz groups of monks known as Holy Orders) came as ‘hereticism’ by way of the East, from Iran and Syria, and were known as Asian Manicheans, Neo-Manicheans, Massalians, Patarenes, Dualists, and more.

As for who these ‘heretics’ were in actuality, we may discover by taking a closer look at the name Patarenes. In fact, this group was known in then Livonia as ‘Pastaljāņi’ or later ‘Pastalnieki’. Even today, anyone who is long on his or her prayers is said to be saying ‘Pahtari’. The name ‘pastala’ in Latvian means a primitive form of a ‘shoe’ cut from pig leather http://www.kasjauns.lv/galerijas/pastala_by_linda_leen/peleka_pastala.jpg . It is still sold as a souvenir item in Riga to tourists. The nearest use today of the pastala is as a ballerina shoe, with the difference that it has a hardened toe.

The manner in which the name of ‘pastala’ found its way in the name of the Patarenes is when the consonant L began to be pronounced as an R. Thus, former Amsteldam is now known as Amsterdam, and ‘pastala’ became the root for ‘Pastarene’, aka the Traveling or Wandering weaver, aka the Wandering Jew—Ahasverus. Weaving, a necessary art in those days, was adapted by the Pastelenes in Livonia and elsewhere as their mobile tradesmark; it opened many doors to them and their Christian or Christian King John’s message.

Due to the dogmatic pressures of the Lutheran Church, the Latvians to this day do not connect one of their most sacred folk relics, the belt from Lielvarde https://www.google.lv/search?q=Lielvardes+josta&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=ldBPU-muL4nnywO3kIDACw&ved=0CCgQsAQ&biw=1093&bih=426 , as the work of the Pastarenes or Bogomils.

The 4^th or was it the 1^st Crusade(?) was a political movement on behalf of the elites that lasted a very long time. Thus, the 1240 invasion of Kiev by the ‘Mongols’ and the 1360 convocation of the Bulgarian Church Council, the latter (‘Orthodox Christianity’) especially aimed to condemn Judaism and Bogomilism, which appear to have had close contacts at that time. The hold on Bulgaria of the First Christianity was strong and thus especially abhorrent to the elites from the West.

The strength of the Bogomils arose from the fact that it had roots in the indigenous population—then still mostly people of the wood. For example, the Synodicon of the Tsar Boril describes Bogomils thusly*: “…those who on the 24^th of June, the birth of John the Baptist [I read it as ‘Ian the Basil’] practice magic and gather fruits and that night perform foul mysteries like the pagan [pa-yan] rites.”

The 24^th of June marks the date of the summer solstice, and it is still celebrated by the Latvians (as Jāņu diena) and southern Slavs as ‘Ivani deni’.

Because the 2^nd Christianity of the elites (then called Catholics, now fully secularized as Globalists) eventually prevailed over the 1^st Christians, the latter became increasingly identified with pagans (pa-yans), with magic, and popular superstitions. Indeed, there came a time when Bogomils lost all leadership and their most important rite became a ‘folk festival’.

As for the leadership of the Bogomils, most of them met their fate on a pile of burning wood. This was the first ideologically motivated act of deforestation. It is from this time on that the People of  Byzantium and now the entire world were subject to taxation of the State at its will.

*Most of the information in this blog taken from Dmitri Obolensky’s “The Bogomils”. 1948, Cambridge U. Press.

Eso’s Chronicles 242/ 28
Addendum 5—Ecce Russia III!
© Eso A.B.

Some readers may think that I am prejudiced against the Catholic Church, because I have made a number of disparaging remarks regarding it. However, all such statements on my part should be read from the perspective of judging the Church to be a deliberate creation of Western, especially Frankish occupiers of the northwest regions of Europe, who proceeded to create a secular device with which to entrap and ensnare a population unaware of the corruption of early princely courts.

And though there exists conclusive evidence that the Catholic Church deliberately exterminated early Christians who populated a world then not yet demarcated and divided among the princes and barons, once the original bloodbath was over and a loss of memory of events had set in, there were many Catholics who are to be counted among the truly religious, though perhaps not completely absolved of guilt, because the new fangled theology was originally enforced with such vehemence, because it brought with it taxation, and the Eastern Christians were opposed to it. Re:

Matthew 22: 15-22. When asked whether taxes should be paid to Caesar, Jesus asked whose image and inscription was on the coin. "Caesar's," came the answer---The Lord then said, "Then give to Caesar what belongs to Caesar and to God what belongs to God" (Mt. 22:21).

This passage of the New Testament is generally interpreted as a fair answer to an admittedly sensitive situation. Unfortunately, both the question and answer skirt the fact that originally the people were not taxed money (because they had none), but they were taxed the lives of their reindeer and other herds for the sake of the animals’ pelts. In short, to pay taxes was originally associated with killing, which is probably also the beginning of meat eating on a large scale, because the people of the woods did not herd their animals for the sake of their meat, but to benefit from the milk of the cows of reindeer, horses, and buffalo. Such meat-eating as occurred was as a result of sacrifice of the castrated males of the herd. The dawn of human consciousness is closely associated with the killing of animals who had become close to their keepers, and such rituals as described in the following link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bear_worship have little or nothing to do with ‘bear worship’, but are about holding life sacred.

The device of creating a ‘new’ religion is comparable to the corruption currently rocking the Vatican http://rt.com/news/pope-francis-capitalism-tyranny-324/ with regard to the investigation of its bank. The scandal associated with the last has much to do butler http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-25121121 of a now retired Pope and which alleges that a number of members of the curia (civil service) had organized their own ‘little borgias’ and the Pope did not know how to cope with them. As the new Pope Francis is said to have stated: "The court is the leprosy of the papacy." Indeed, the events behind the stage of any theatre or ritual are what have forced more than one honest sacred person of early governments to lose their heads. If it were possible to make a similar investigation of the ‘court’ of ‘little borgias’ in Washington, it is likely to produce a scandal of cataclysmic proportions.

While Paul Virilio, the French thinker, who I quote in the preceding blogs, points to the military as the leprosy of many a government [re (p173): “….the nondevelopment of Russian civilian society… gives the military free reign….”],  the tragedy of the phenomenon is that it has resulted not only in the fall due to exhaustion of the Soviet Union, but the loss of what was its most valuable ingredient—that of offering the uncommitted world an alternative society to fascist capitalism.

Unfortunately, President Putin, the head of a stabilized post-Soviet successor government, appears to be a whole hog capitalist in a fascist sense. Again Paul Virilio (p189): “Fascists are those who go to the end of their aspirations. Extreme sports are fascist sports. And a science of the extremes is a fascist science….we are engaged in this kind of delirium. ”

The unspoken ultimatum of President Putin of which I write in blog 241, was stated from the perspective of a ‘fascist delirium’, no doubt driven to it, because Putin did not perceive that an alternative to Capitalism exists in an alternative history and by substituting militaristic and technocratic confrontation with a reinvestigated history, which is likely to discover that the ‘false flag’ of Catholicism and globalization is also a ‘buried flag’.

Needless to say, before President Putin can proceed, he has to take advantage of the recent statement by Patriarch Kirill--the head of the Orthodox Church--that the Church intends to maintain a separation of church and state http://rt.com/politics/patriarch-church-merger-russia-256/. The West is used to accepting such a separation as a consequence of implementing the capitalist agenda, but it was not always so, certainly not in Russia and Europe before the advent of Catholicism, and not always detrimental when it came to the interests of the community. In this regard one may note that Patriarch Kirill, for all his devotion to Orthodoxy, and resistance to Soviet Renovationism, which aimed to inhibit the independence of the Church, is a product of the era of post-schism, which era has accepted the Catholic version of the life of Jesus as dominant, and has to this date refused to reexamine the theological differences brought about as a result of Western Crusades against Jerusalem-Constantinople (1204), and, instead, has acceptance the transference of Jerusalem to Palestine with silence.

To wage a non-violent and successful war against the military alliances of the West, it is necessary for Russia not only to reexamine history as rewritten and then exposed to forgetting by the Catholic Church and its unholy alliance with a capitalist, ‘democratic’, and urbanized West; but it is also necessary to reexamine much of the literature produced under the dominance of Westernized theology, as this writer has already done with “Oedipus Rex Rewritten”, and resetting the context of Latvian folk literature from that of peasant oral history to that of highly developed oral literature, not to mention perspective on Christianity.

Eso’s Chronicles 220 / 6
Comeuppance! (6)
© Eso A.B.

While resistance to Christianity borne of (or  begot by) capitalism is as old as neo-Christianity itself, it almost ceased during the 20^th century, when (paradoxically) many rebellious authors produced a number of books that hinted that the history of Christianity as presented in Western Universities was not quite up to standards and, thus, not quite up to correct answers.

This writer was among the avid readers of these books, beginning with Albert Schweitzer’s “The Quest of the Historical Jesus” and the more recent by Bart Ehrman, “Lost Christianities”.

What is wrong with most accounts about Jesus is that ll follow the same chronological outline as presented by the Catholic Church, which to this day claims to be the Mother of all Christian orientations http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mother_Church .

Among the first challenges to affect the Catholic origins theory is the Russian mathematician turned historian Anatoly Fomenko. Though not the very first critic (Isaac Newton—17^th cen.—was earlier), Fomenko’s criticism is well researched and lengthy. He is one of the latest doubters of the veracity of history as presented by the academicians of the West, who indeed never outgrew Catholic scholasticism and to this day mirror its prejudices. Though academicians haughtily ignore Fomenko (because as a Russian he is believed to think in reverse gear), refusing to listen to him evidences arrogance and colonialist chutzpah that has not yet been outgrown.  Like it or not, Fomenko has shaken the West’s identity and its version of history.

I presented a brief summary of how we arrived to the false flags that fly over Western government buildings today. A couple of blogs back (218), I wrote how the Franks (some will say it was the Goths) turned themselves into the French, took control of the West and then turned on the East whence they had come. [Nevertheless, some claim they came from the north and across the Baltic Sea and were known as Scandze—instead of Vikings.) The real story, as it has imprinted itself in this writer’s mind, went something like this:

After being chased from Byzantium by the Turks and settling in Europe in an area now known as the Benelux countries, the Franks http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=br_70Kbdpow , in order to set themselves apart from the Christians in the East, set about creating a new Christianity. To this day every European is taught to know these Eastern Franks as the founders of the Holy Roman Empire, a realm never yet real, but continuing to exist in the fantasy of European politicians as the European Union. That is to say, the Crusades, begun by the French, as confirmed by the President of the U.S., George Bush, will go on http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=br_70Kbdpow .

Following the dictates of Western educational institutions, the common belief is that the Holy Empire was founded by a Pope in Rome. But the real history is that there never was a ‘Western’ Holy Roman Empire, and even the idea of it was stolen from the actual Holy Roman Empire in the East, with its headquarters, at first, in Alexandria (remember the Coptic Church?), Egypt, moving on to Constantinople, Byzantine, when a Byzantine (true Roman) ‘Caesar’ met Phara-jones Cleopatra and took her on a Med cruise to better bed her. The transfer of the ancient capital cities from the South to the North Mediterranean began with a dalliance.

While the dalliance between Alexandria and Byzantium makes sense, the Holywood concoction of dalliance between Rome, Italy, and Egypt does not make sense, because according to Fomenko (at least) Western Rome never got going until the 15^th century of the Western Era.

Because Fomenko is no lightweight historian, but a member of the Academy of Sciences in Moscow, I suggest that the Russian government (with international assistance from China, India, Iran, and others with a stake in the truth) support and finance renewed research of the chronology of history. Whether led by Fomenko or another scholar, it is time that the comedy we are presented with does not turn into a greater tragedy than it already has brought. We need to discover either the true chronology of our history or learn to live with history as an uncertainty, in knowledge that our cynicism is not of our making, but a mark of Cain stamped on our foreheads by our governments. The West is in profound need to reexamine its past, its claims of achievement, and presumption to determine our planet’s future.

A reexamination is important because the current version of history is used by the West as a political tool. Its claim insists not only on the right to the territories the West occupies (and expands on yet again at the expense of the East), but also declares the West to possess ‘the right’ kind of character suitable to possess our planet. On the basis of these claims, the West has not shirked to employ ‘terrorists’ to capitalist ends. Having despoiled its own spiritual heritage, the West today has turned to despoiling Islam by taking advantage of the jealousies of Muslims, who are unable to deal the West a deserved comeuppance.

The corner the East is backed in today is a consequence of the False Flag history presented by the ruthlessness of the liberal West, even as it imitated the ruthlessness of one Emperor Alexis I, who destroyed Eastern Christianity with one push that cost its spiritual leader his life. That push is a story all by itself, now well camouflaged behind the Aztec story of Nanauatzin’s http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanahuatzin (image: http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8214/8343920314_90031212ec_z.jpg ) heroic leap into a fiery pit at the sacred city of Tenochtitlan in Mexico. This story cannot be found in historical accounts in the East or West, but Book 7 of the Florentine Codex http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florentine_Codex  recorded by Bernardino de Sahagun a Franciscan monk http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernardino_de_Sahag%C3%BAn . Sensational, as such a replacement of a historical event in EuroAsia of the East may be, it is unlikely that it is mere happenstance that Sahagun was a Franciscan monk and the place to tell the truth happens is transferred to a newly discovered continent. What Sahagun reflects is an event in Constantinople affecting the Bogomils several centuries before the defeat and neo-Christianization of the Mexican people http://www.cathar.info/121212_comnena.htm .

Such juxtapositions of events is an ‘old’ tool employed by schemers sequestered in ‘think tanks’ in the West, and is employed to this day, because Common Man simply cannot imagine such dishonesty as the basis of history.

The reason the East has come to a desperate situation is that up to this time, there always was another step and a space to retreat to. This allowed the West to expand not only as colonizer of Eastern territories, but when colonization as such stopped, was able continue to short circuit economic exploitation by means of technology over Nature, not to mention make the Vatican a dictator over the chronology of history. Strange as it may seem, a major tool in the hands of the West is an ‘Early Christianity’, which  today we know as Islam, and which almost no one believes has its origins in Christianity. Today, the closest we get is as at the following link, re: encounter of eastern Christianity with early islam:  http://www.brill.com/encounter-eastern-christianity-early-islam .

For the cultures of the East (that of Russia, China, Iran, India) to regain their ground vis a vis the West and to neuter the ‘terrorists’, these have to respond to Western cynicism less with arms than with reeducation undermining of its intellectual presumptions.

Eso’s Chronicles 194/ 4
Scholarship as Political Prejudice (4)
© Eso A.B.

Anyone who for whatever reasons of his-her own has read my blogs for over a period of time will have noticed I do not pretend to scholarship as such, but my perspective is that of a layman looking at the stories pursued by scholars with regard to history and religion especially.

Since the perspective of religion so obviously effects the ways society arranges the rituals of its daily behavior, which behavior has led to the destructive behavior of most of today’s governments, independent scholarship would seem essential. However, scholarly independence is obviously suspect, because the daily behavior of society at large is not dictated by religion, but by governments that have taken on the role of religion. Furthermore, the government’s role as a religion is furthered by a complaisant and pliable privately owned public media.

I have perceived my role and my story-telling of history and religion as a goad to help the reader break out of the shell of government dictates that end up constituting the materialist presumptions and ritual over our daily lives. If the reader has minimal respect for me, which he-she would show by returning to read another blog after reading one, and disagrees with my material, he-she is invited to look into the matter further by going to the library or searching the internet. On the other hand, if the reader shares my prejudice that much of what passes today as ‘information’ is information poisoned by the politics of a questionable majority loyal to a tiny violent minority, then over a period of time, we would be pushing scholarship away from government influence toward greater objectivity.

An interesting clash between a private media platform (the Fox News) and an individual scholar shows up at this interesting confrontation between one of the ‘talking heads’ at Fox News, Lauren Green and Professor Reza Aslan, a muslim and a scholar of religions: http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/fox-hosts-bigotry-exposed-reza-aslan?akid=10742.171186.EECk_R&rd=1&src=newsletter875520&t=3

As the clip shows, the Professor is first attacked for being a Muslim and therefore questioned about his legitimacy to write about Christianity, while Lauren Green presents herself as a Christian bigot and as representing (beyond question) the view of the religion of the American nation.

My view regarding Christianity does not in any way parallel those of Reza Aslan. The first difference, I would argue, is that the events concerning Jesus very likely did not occur in Palestine, but in Constantinople (I take the view of the Russian scholar Anatoly Fomenko on the matter), nor that Jesus was crucified, but that another holy man was pushed into a pit where a fiercely burning fire consumed him. The latter is not Fomenko’s view, but stems from my own conclusion that Jesus Christ is a creation of fiction to replace the now forgotten victim of a nascent capitalist government, and that one of the early sources of capitalism is to be sought in the late Byzantine Empire. Anyone interested in the source for my opinion can check out at my blog site JesustheBogomil.blogspot.com   My other disagreement with Professor Asan is that the Roman Empire that he is talking about never existed in the geographical location of present Rome, but was simply was another name for the Byzantine, aka Israel, Empire.

As I discuss in the three previous blogs, the present Rome and the fiction that it ever was the capital of an Empire, is a government supported fiction project, which began with the establishment of the Papal residence in Rome by Pope Gregory XI, who abandoned Avignon and arrived in Rome, Italy on January 17, 1377, thus officially ending the Avignon, France Papacy. As we ought to know, the Vatican itself was officially established only in 1929, when it became a ‘country’.

What the skeptical reader will have to acknowledge (perhaps unwillingly) is that from 1377 to 2013 (the hear this is being written) are 636 years, of which the early years are total fiction (probably due to the change from oral and flexible to written and rigid-legalistic communication). As I contend, the fiction begins with the creation of the capitalist system, where money and tax collecting dominates (represses) the common man in favor of the princes. The unpopularity of this system is obvious, not only because of the violence it created in social affairs (re: cataclysmic violence in Languedoc, Aragon, and the so-called Shepherds Crusade and Lepers Plot in France, but as history of long duree led to the holocaust against the Jews by the Nazi regime in Germany in the recent past.

The unpopularity of the Capitalist religion (behind the False Flag of Christian goodness) continues today in the capitalist attacks on the Muslim countries in the Middle East: Palestine, Tunisia, Libya, Egypt, Syria, Iran, and Afghanistan. Nary is a word said that this is a religious war led by Capitalism with its God Money against Egalitarianism with its God come with the Gift of life.

Tibet socialist villages http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-23100427   

Copyright E. A. Benjamins aka Jaņdžs
NOT-VIOLENT TERROR
27 The Children of Johns

The sentiment against Johann, Hans, Wohn and like cognates of Jānis (John) is so grafted to the consciousness of the descendants of Europe’s Johns [once Europe’s wandering priests and teachers (think of the Wandering Jew)], that the event of the graft-birth—birth by sword or cauterization by fire—has been forgotten. The trauma to the psyche has been so great that it is as if the trauma never was and Johns never lived.

This is why Hitler, a descendant of a people who took the graft of neo-Christianity, had no inkling that such a graft had been performed on his forebears. This is why he, an heir to “Operation Spiritual ‘Final Solution’”, was readily recruited to the cause of another “final solution”. Alas, the consequences of a spiritual graft commit the grafted to a mindset from which it is almost impossible to break away. The results of meditative thought—think what you may—it always leads you to think in a self-referential (within neo-Christian parameters) way. For example, beginning with the concept of “blood libel” directed at arch-Christians (their self-sacrificial ways are interpreted as the sacrifice of babies), the neo-Christians—their God removed to the never land of Heaven—were readily able to perceive their opponents as vermin and suicide terrorists. [“Our, Fedre, hu he eart in Heofnum…”, You stay where You are, and we will do whatever we do here on Earth in your name!] “Blood libel” is the victor’s curse on the defeated enemy in order to silence also the loser’s descendants. Hope that they will never remember!

While the curse of blood libel is no longer issued except for the neo-Jews and neo-muslims, probably to provide no excuse whatsoever to recall their past, neo-Christian princes and lords manage to instill in the populace a prejudice against the “pagans” nevertheless. The prejudice maintains its effect by shifting the defeated enemy’s sense of guilt (as enemies of Christ) unto a caste among the losers who survived the defeat of their faction intact. Incidentally, the reason the caste survived is that its members were the collectors of gifts [the Latvian word for gift is called “dahvana” [dahv or diev (a God) + y(j?)ana—a gift to the Gods] for the temple and the sacred king.

The victors exploited the said caste’s experience as collectors of gifts by turning them into tax collectors. To the West, thus, this arch-Christian caste of tax collectors is known as Jews, Juden, now comes softened as Hebrew. This is very good, except that by getting away from Jew and Juden one is liable to lose all connection with history.

What the meaning of the name and its origin is is difficult now to tell, but the word “yule”, the sacred log of the winter solstice—a log once burned in honor of the Sun—may provide a link. In a number of traditions, the yule log—the rump of an oak—was covered with a blanket before it was brought into the house or to the pit for burning. Since trees were once believed to house Gods, the log may have been thought of as a gift of warmth. Another possible source for the name may be the Baltic word “juhgs”, a yoke, a word that means a burden; and taxes surely are a burden. There is also a relationship between Hannukah—a Jewish holy day celebrated about the time of winter solstice—and that same word, but beginning with the letter J(Y), re: Yannukah, an event of J(Y)ohns, perhaps the lost name of the arch-Christian winter solstice festival. In Latvia the Children of Johns would have known their winter solstice festival as Yahndahlins (Jandahlins), a name now signifying the noise that describes the energy found on a dance floor.

Once the Jews switched from gift collecting to tax collecting, they could be manipulated by blackmail. Blackmail occurred whenever the Lord of the manor felt that the Jews had become too independent of the views of the Lord’s court. On the occasions when blackmail was exercised, the Jews were reminded of their origins among the “pagans” or of becoming “pagans” as a result of their betrayal of Jesus Christ.

The blackmail was made credible through the exercise of a “pogrom”, an onomatopoetic word (po+grom) for the strike of lightning and sound of thunder. The anger of the defeated arch-Christians (lingering and real, but without memory of its defeat), given a provocation and alcohol, enabled them to enter the quarters of the Jews—the one’s who the neo-Christian priests had called “killers of Christ”—and do their will until the lord’s bodyguards arrived to put a stop to the violence. Such blackmail against the Jews (and the arch-Christians) has never been confessed (except by Hitler), nor has anyone ever truly withdrawn it. No longer known as “blood libel”, the libel against the Children of Johns took the form of anti-semitism now in the process of forgetting itself and mutating into a mindset that dismisses the self-conscious mindset of Central Europe East as entirely of inconsequence.

Interestingly, a fragment of this arch-Christianity has survived among the Latvians, who remember their arch-Christian priests as Johns and the followers of these priests as the Children of Johns. The Johns Eve and Johns Day Festival take place at summer solstice, which—like it or not—recalls a time when the Johns were under the umbrage of Saule, the Sun as either God or Goddess. If today the words of a folk song, edited by neo-Christians, speak of “Ai, Jānīti, Dieva dēls” (Oh Johnny, Son of God), the more ancient version of it sang “Oh Johnny, Son of the Sun”.

The curse against the Children of Johns (John and all being one Children of the Sun), decimated their numbers by murder (martyrdom) in significant numbers starting as early as the 9th-11th centuries, but gaining significant ground with the 16th and the European Religious Wars. This is the time of the greatest numbers of cross-overs. This is when many of the Children of John(s) crossed over to a fellow caste known as Jews. Under the king’s and princes’ protection, but with no apparent binding agreement or oath that would disallow the Jews to open their ranks to their endangered brethren. This democratic kink, such apparent link to their connection to the Children of John, caused the ranks of the Jews to swell many times their original numbers.

The consequences of the neo-Christian attacks on arch-Christians and victory over the latter to the extent that the former have no recognition of themselves and are allowed no suggestion of any such recognition of themselves—have been many; which is not to get into the problems between neo-Christians and the Muslims.

For one, even as neo-Christian violence caused the Children of Johns to become demoralized and forget their origins, their loss of collective memory (such a memory in modern society enduring for about two generations) caused them to accept a neo-Christian interpretation of history and become haters of Jews, i.e., anti-Semitic and deniers that they might be their own.

Because of the murder and mayhem against the Children of Johns, Johns Eve today has lost almost all of its links to a once very sacred ritual. With ever more renaming of the festival (re: summer solstice, picnic, day off, long-weekend, etc.), ever greater distancing occurs and removes the Johns Eve festival of its charisma and decreases its function as a community-binding celebration.

P.S. I highly recommend “Pan Tadeusz” by Adam Mickiewicz (b. 1798), translated by Kenneth R. Mackenzie, Hippocrene Books. There may be other editions. This is an epic poem that tells of Polish life in the 18th century. It is a long read, but worth it, because it gives evidence of the times of transition from the arch-Christian Children of Johns to Hebrews so zionized that they have become settlers of Z(Y)ion almost beyond recognition.

If you copy this blog or otherwise mention the content of it, please credit the author and http://esoschronicles.blogspot.com/

NOT-VIOLENT TERROR
20 Prisoners of the Law

It is not difficult to get a perspective of what smoke and nicotine does to one’s body and to begin doing right by it. This is why telling a smoker to “break the habit” often works. However, sometimes a habit is difficult to get a perspective on. Two habits difficult to deal with are neo-Christianity and death. Both for their own reasons so saturate our consciousness that try as we may, some of us cannot look at them with a fresh eye.

Following of the imposition of Christianity and peace through violence and terror (“just war”?), the populace found it expedient to submit to Truth as it was told it from Above. The “Truth” of course is nothing more than the Word (edict, law, order) under the control of a bureaucracy that interprets the Word according to the wishes of the powerful princes and their courts. After being taught for several hundred years running that Christianity is love and to associate this love with Jesus Christ in Heaven, the populace is now unbelieving if told that Jesus in Heaven cancels out love. Likewise, after being told for centuries that death is for God and the secular authorities alone to decide upon, people are shocked if told that life as well as death is their own, and that a voluntary and a self-willed death is the goal of consciousness.

However, as my Blog 18 explains, before incest was tabooed and the taboo became engraved in stone as “law”, the laws of the mind prevailed. In the dream, the counter of the bar is made do as the altar, and the barmaid becomes “mother” with male genitals. The dream denies the values of our society, which are not only neo-Christian, but essentially fascistic, that is, they are superficial, positivist, and directed from Above at the public as advertisements (propaganda in an earlier day).

What hides behind the conflict between “natural” law and man-created law? The Greek playwright Sophocles in his play “Oedipus the King” explains this. http://tinyurl.com/c2lr8d The story tells of how a prince marries his mother (as if he did not know who the Queen of Thebes was), how the citizens of Thebes discover the lie, and why as a result Thebes faces social collapse. Unless the king resigns or is cast out, Thebans believe that their city will suffer a fatal demise.

Nevertheless, there is another possible interpretation of the story. It appears in my rewrite of the Oedipus story. See “Tiresias’ Revenge”. [February, 2009 http://esoschronicles.blogspot.com/ ]

My interpretation argues that in order for Oedipus to earn the right to become King of Thebes, he has to suffer the risk of exposure on a mountaintop. If he (as an infant) survives one night on the mountain, it will mean that the Gods look at him with favor. However, Oedipus’ mother does not want her son exposed to such a risk. The queen offers to sleep with the goatherd who is standing watch if he will let her steal away her son. Another baby, quite dead, is to be put in Oedipus’ place.

The problem this “saving” of Oedipus from the risk of death creates is that by gaining a life not risked, he loses a kingdom. He loses the kingship in two ways: a) the other infant’s corpse (drama demands that this baby is murdered) tells everyone that the Gods did not favor him; and 2) Oedipus did not face the test demanded by the society of Thebes through its sacred by-laws.

The mother of Oedipus, Iocaste, however has a solution. When her son becomes old enough to become king, she will have her husband and Oedipus’ father, the king, killed. Following Laius’ murder, she will marry Oedipus, who through her will become king.

The story told by Sophocles follows this latter line, which shifts the guilt of what plagues Thebes onto the incest taboo. The taboo serves the as a sacred by-law as much as the test of the King’s son over his suitability to become king.

If the drama escapes the notice of modern critics and lends itself to the Freudian interpretation, i.e., son desires to sleep with his mother, it is because we desire to escape the kind of maturity that asks us to accept death and go into that good night with understanding. This neo-Christian doctrine, introduced by priests serving secular princes on the make, had its critics, but—as the erasure by Oedipus’ mother of the need for sacrifice and the violent way that neo-Christianity came to power shows—the critics were killed and the incest taboo was accepted as the very truth of God and Nature.

The denial of the need for self-sacrifice and its substitution with state murder (only the state has the right to kill) is the dogma of our day. The dogma that tells us that the individual has no right to take charge of his-her own life-death, penetrates even the circle of so-called revolutionaries. While not averse to war, they have a nihilistic concept regarding self-sacrifice, i.e., one kills one’s self (a better word is one “explodes” as a “suicide terrorist”) to kill as many bystanders as possible. In effect, the resistance of intelligence to neo-Christian dogma and its violence wrought modern state has been cleansed of the arch-Christian concept of death as a responsibility of a mature mind.

The absence of death from the lives of modern individuals has resulted in unsustainable numbers of people populating our planet. Because of habits long preached and enforced by the modern state in alliance (a charade) with state-created neo-Christian religion, one unexpected result is a exponential increase of human births.

The 6.8 billion people on Earth today are far beyond the 2 billion that our planet can support and sustain indefinitely. The established mindset believes that war and pestilence will eventually take care of the surplus billions. At the same time, death of 4.8 or more billion people begs the mind to perform murder on such a scale, that it cannot face it. Nor can it think of a solution. After all, it has condemned the acts of Hitler and Stalin as atrocities. What is to be done?

At the present (see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZlgtbEdqVsk ), we imagine the problem as an invasion of aliens. Since we cannot think of killing them as Hitler would have, we imagine death as a kind of perpetual concentration camp. Still, as the film illustrates, our mindset is not free of fascist solutions.

P.S. A philosopher from the left, Slavoj Žižek, opposes self-sacrifice and taking charge of one’s own death. Žižek, a Slovenian Marxist philosopher, who is now international director of the Birbeck Institute for the Humanities at London University (Financial Times, 3/6/2009) is against individual sacrifice. While in one sense Žižek fresh air in a rancid political environment, the air is so much under the control of inertia that it keeps even Žizak from breaking away from the neo-Christian shadow.

In his book called “Interrogating the real” (2005), Žižek discusses a film called “The Life of David Gale” (2003). According to Žižek, the film supports “[sacrifice] right up to suicidal sacrifice, as the only proper ethical virtue.” Writes Žižek “…the film fails: it endorses an ethics of radical self-sacrifice for the good of others; it is for this reason that the hero sends the full version of the tape [the evidence]… because he ultimately needs the symbolic recognition of his act. No matter how radical the hero’s self-sacrifice, the big Other is still there.”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pzp_b8qvTRo&NR=1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I4cb1MS9q7Q For Žižek the big Other continues to be big enough to check the will to self-sacrifice.

On the other hand, what if the big Other auto-projects through an act of mimesis? The question that arises is what are we to do with it then, when it is, thus, real?

NOT-VIOLENT TERROR
17 Beyond Orgasm

Claiming to be in possession of one of the “great religions”, i.e., Christianity, the politicians of our civilization opened the gates to impermissible freedom (the state of nature) in sexual matters. Not surprisingly, drugs enhanced the sexual “drive”, raised the blood pressure, and sensitized the erectile tissue of sexual organs above normal. Christianity which ought to have checked the drugs and the behavior that resulted from their use, failed to do this, because the servants of the elites, the politicians, had made sure that the inspirational leaders of Christianity, the Johns, were renamed as one name, Jesus, long before all the consequences were obvious. Once the colleges of Johns were sufficiently repressed with burnings and drownings, Jesus was dismissed to Heaven, a non-existent space, whence he could not affect social behavior on Earth.

One of the catastrophes to result from the dismissal of arch-Christianity under John was an increased number of babies, most of who came into the world of our civilization unplanned and unwanted. Neo-Christianity claimed that these births were the result of “an act of God”, and therefore objected to the mother’s (and perhaps the father’s) crude effort to reverse the effects of hyper-sexualization through abortion. The neo-Christian efforts to stop abortion did not (and could not) work, because Jesus, neutralized as a force on Earth by his removal to heaven, could not intervene in the direct ways that the Johns would have.

How would the Johns have intervened? While this is a hypothetical question and, therefore, does not have a sure answer, the search for ways of preventing conception suggest contraceptives, alternate ways of sexual discharge such as hand stroking, and castration and penis removal in extreme cases.

The people endured the catastrophe brought about by hyper-sexualization, because hyper-sexualization (once the sport of princes and princeses) served as a reward for enduring social hypertension. The impermissible freedom, originally secured by the elites for themselves, allowed the elites to act without a conscience when their presumptions to such freedoms was threatened by social upheavals. While reserving for themselves a statistical niche of 5% of the population, they let the rest of the 95% of hyper-energized people to exploit (rape) the Earth without any sense of guilt. This is how in less than a millennium (according to the historian Anatoly Fomenko, the arch-Christian John was burnt and the neo-Christian Jesus sent to heaven in 1184) our planet was turned into a refuse pile and a desert. In other words, the elites—the oligarchs—satisfied their servants less with money, more with hyper-sexualizing their sexual life. Sex as a spiritual experience became something like a sweet potato http://tinyurl.com/clvsna . Paying off the middle and working classes with a payment “hidden” within sex (as permissiveness and by overlooking the damage caused by conception), has resulted in the collapse of our civilization. What was supposed to become a field of wheat, a cornucopia of the good life achieved through intelligence, has turned into a field of tares.

One of the first victims of the catastrophe of our civilization are the small nations, the reservoirs of cultural variety, the seed banks for when hybrid plants fail to adapt to disease that they are not programmed to resist. One such victim is the small nation is Latvia.

Latvia, one of the three Baltic nations, escaped some of the brutal consequences of the rule of elitist theology because of being held in a state of “backwardness” by fifty years of Soviet occupation. However, this backwardness was not the result of self-conscious holding back, but because the Soviet Union—whose aim was to emulate the “developed West”—had to struggle against the West to reach equivalence. The West understood all too well that the planet could not two hyper-populated civilizations and fought the Soviets with a “cold war”. When the Soviet Union failed to reach its economic goals and imploded, the people of “backward” Latvia were on their own.

Predictably, the newly liberated Latvia began to copy the ways of the West. Its political parties became fronts for business groups (led by oligarchs or alliances of oligarchs), and the Latvian people, a people who through their forebears were heirs to an ancient culture, were deprived by their political parties (led by their elites of course) of education, specifically knowledge of their history. Instead of renewing and adapting relevant religious elements from their forebears, the Latvian government subsidized—sometimes directly, sometimes indirectly—neo-Christianity and its theology of Jesus, at the same time as it dispossessed John, the native Latvian “god” and/or symbol of unity, and tried to forget him.

The direct support of neo-Christianity may be seen in the act of the president of Latvia attending neo-Christian prayer meetings and state support for annual catholic pilgrimages to Aglona, a site claimed to be especially blessed for catholics. No such favors or visits are ever made to native Latvian religious groups or Johns Eve celebrations. The indirect methods of facilitating the forgetting of arch-Christianity include the dropping the name of John from the festival altogether. Thus, increasingly the festival is being called by the public media a “summer festival”, a “solstice festival”, “ligo festival” (“ligo” is an ancient refrain to Johns Eve songs, similar to neo-Christian “halleluyah”), “fernleaf blossom festival” (once a reference to the revelation of a spiritual mystery, now become a sexual orgasm), and other.

The Latvian president’s attendance of neo-Christian prayer meetings has now reached the stage of permitting neo-Christians to burn the books of Latvian authors. One neo-Christian priest encouraged his congregation to burn Latvian books in a Johns Eve bonfire and called John and religious folk traditions of Latvians as “an ideology that does it [the congregation?] physical and spiritual evil” (my translation of a citation in Diena, 4.8.09).

Be that as it may, the remnant of John or Johns—once an arch-Christian symbol of communal bonds throughout Europe and beyond—is a phenomenon worthy of the attention of spiritual communities throughout the world. John identifies Christianity (what I call arch-Christianity) not with worship of the supernatural, but as a theology inherent in human nature before it is turned into a theology that serves the oligarchs.

Nearly twenty years after Latvia has regained its independence, the oligarchs and their supporters have turned Latvia into a failed state—both, in terms of confusing Latvians as to their past cultural and spiritual legacy and in terms of bankrupting and pauperizing their country. The de facto bankruptcy of Latvia (it is kept from de jure bankruptcy by accepting a spirit-bankrupting loan from the IMF) is not a result of careful and thrifty planning of how to renew Latvia and its traditions. It is the result of overspending, creating irresponsible debt,and in the words coined by one of Latvia’s oligarchs—“flooring the gas pedal”, no doubt, to drive the nation into a tree or a ditch.

Today the Latvian population (1.4 million), its numbers long held in check through various repressions (war dead, suicides, prostitution, deportations, emigration for political as well as economic reasons), finds itself in a death-spiral. The situation report on Latvia is, as some forebear of the Latvian people might have said it, “Oh John!”

If you copy this or otherwise mention the content of this blog, please credit http://esoschronicles.blogspot.com/

© Eso Anton Benjamins


NOT-VIOLENT TERROR
1 What is terrorism?

The term “terrorism” originated with the Jacobins  during the “Reign of Terror” of the French Revolution. “Terror is nothing other than justice, prompt, severe, inflexible,” said Robespierre, Jacobin leader.


The word “terror” comes from (see Wikipedia) Proto-Indo-European tre-, meaning to shake, tremble, which reached Latin as terrorem (fright, fear).


However, fear and trembling are not synonyms for terror in all languages. In Finnish and Chinese, it is kauhu and kongbu respectively, which is closer to the English word combat. Since one often fights for one’s rights—rights that one believes to be one’s just claim—Robespierre’s definition is closer to the original meaning of the word than Latin. Of course, this is not to deny that the death sentences ordered by the Revolutionary Tribunal under Robespierre’s direction not only made thousands tremble, but the phrase “reign of terror” did indeed come to signify fright, fear, and a settling of accounts with but cursory procedures and verbally vague charges. To repeat Robespierre: “…promt, severe, inflexible”, a decision by man not inspired by presumed laws of God, but by man in full bloom of subjectivity polished by rhetoric.


Today, however, the word “terror”—familiar to society as a result of frequent wars, literary references, and more recently through the phrase “war on terror”—reflects back on many “legitimate” governments as being institutions in the “business” of sowing paranoiac fear among the public to increase their power beyond the limits of any Constitution. President Bush’s statement that the Geneva Convention did not protect “enemy combatants” at the Guantanamo Base detention camp, made it apparent that the United States wished to legitimize terror as a tool of government. http://tinyurl.com/ddacl4 In this sense, the Bush administration was a Jacobin as they come.


The threat of terror has served as a scare tactic for a long time. The Catholic Inquisition (beginning about 1184) used terror to persuade so-called “pagans” to convert to the Catholic version of Christianity, what this writer calls neo-Christianity. If one assumes (the whyfores anon) that “pagans” had a religion of greater virtue than the kind brought to them by the Inquisitors, then it makes good sense that only tactics of fear and persistent intimidation may break the hold (for dear life!) arch-Christians had on their virtues. Which raises the question, why—inspite centuries of reassurances to the contrary—would the Catholic Inquisition represent neo-Christianity and not its predecessors, the more virtuous arch-Christians?


The answer may beg belief for some, but is rather plain. “Pagan” religion never was just about fertility gods, thunder gods, dragons, the goddess of fate, and their like. That is a fiction created by the neo-Christian Church.


From the beginning, societies that were larger than life—that is, groups of people larger than a family of a mother and her children and perhaps a father or two—were obliged for their cohesion to self-sacrifice. While self-sacrifice may be said to be an every day experience (often imbedded in some tradition, as when, for example, the Chinese give the best morsel in their soup to their guest), the ultimate sacrifice was always necessary. It seared self-sacrifice as a value and virtue into the society’s mind. It was obvious to arch-Christians that their leaders must lead by example, and the example of ultimate self-sacrifice leaves no doubt that the sacrifice (necessarily by a leader of the community) puts the community’s interests above his own.


While neo-Christianity has its explanation of how Christendom or Christian society came into being, we should note that it has never been at peace with itself. It is of course wrong to argue that aboriginal societies practicing self-sacrifice are without problems, nevertheless, the “Christian sphere” has consistently found it necessary to resort to physical coercion and violence to assure hegemony.


This is why it is necessary to look behind the neo-Christian façade maintained with the support of violence, and pose the question whether neo-Christianity was preceded by what we may call arch-Christianity. Arguably, arch-Christianity would have shared its creation myth with—and, thus, been linked with—its aboriginal past.


What is arch-Christianity, the thing hid in the cellars of neo-Christianity?


Arch-Christianity would not have found it possible to imagine that it could send its founder to an imaginary Heaven to lose himself, and that the “people” could do without being a frequent witness to self-sacrifice or live within the psychic consequences of it. Arch-Christian leadership in and of itself could not have imagined that it could exist as a body outside the body of the people. The leadership of an arch-Christendom would necessarily have led a largely non-violent society by having it and themselves join frequent witness to self-sacrificial acts.


It has not been easy however to look behind the façade of “modern” (and post-modern) times, because, for one thing, it looks upon ultimate self-sacrifice—other than an exception in which case it is “good”—as sacrilege. Why is this? The answer is clear. The charisma that emanates from self-sacrifice comes with a command: Thou shalt love Thy community with thy life. Indeed, the charisma that attaches itself to the sacrifice both before and after death, threatens any power that rules by means that, as one American president had it, “speak softly but carry a big stick behind your back”. It is in this sense that we may begin to see the advantages of a society that does not carry either a stick or a gun, but governs through the not-violent terror of self-sacrifice.


Of course, today human sacrifice (by one’s self or others) has become a topic almost exclusively associated with “primitive” tribes. Ultimate self-sacrifice is not discussed unless it has some connection with the ultimate sacrifice made by a soldier in the nation’s military. For the neo-Christian man or woman, the topic appears only in the context of ancient or medieval times, and then only as a revolt against the king’s once sacred authority. [A sideline: No doubt the Catholic clergy wept when the French Revolution took not only the head of the last sacred king (presumed), but confiscated most of its real estate holdings. Well it might weep, because its long service to secular governments ended with the implicit replacement of neo-Christian disbelief with belief in what we today know as neo-liberalist economic solution.] It is not surprising that large segments of society in our day feel that the king was more often than not a traitor.



Asterisk & Notes of Interest:


1. This writer agrees, more or less, with the new chronology of history as proposed by Anatoly Fomenko.


2. A once common way of self-sacrifice. Look for the word “endura ”.


3. There are other ways to explain “Christianity” than the explanations given by orthodox authorities. For the latter explanation, see Acts 11-26, where we find the supposed first mention of “Christians”. However, the word has no certain chronology and words such as “very old” and “ancient” are appropriate. The word “Christianity” may be read as consisting of two parts: cross + yan; perhaps “cross” standing for here, this place, this individual; and J(Y)an standing as a name of an individual or the name of a place. Thus, the name Krishyan—still common in central Europe—used to stand for the name of a priest, i.e., Krish (likely a variation on the word “cross”, but Yan (likely derived from “gans”, herder, perhaps of geese) the Priest.


The second part of Krish-yan was deliberately obscured by neo-Christians (of the English-speaking variety in the English variant of the word) by replacing “Yan”with “ian” in order to cause the public to forget “Yan”. The name was likely associated with self-sacrifice. Similarly constructed words: Rama-yana; Mande-yana; Krish-yana.