Monday, March 4, 2013

Eso’s Chronicles 144
The Earthquake of San Francisco and
Force Majeure in Latvia as A Screwy Political Act (3)
© Eso A.B.

Autumn foliage
Before the reader goes to read the rest of this blog, I suggest he-she reads the following on the “Force majeure programme in Riga 2014” The header and lead state:




“Rīga 2014 programme Force Majeure / Author: RĪGA 2014 04.08.2011.”
 
That said, the text tells us that:
“In its programme [2014], Riga focuses on culture as the spiritual and intellectual dimension of mankind, manifesting itself through any form of human activity, and expanding the understanding of culture through liaisons with other spheres of life. It is a liaison between generations, traditions and the digital world, it means overcoming historically established barriers.
 
In short, the note of bombast is due to the fact that in 2014 Riga plays the role of the European capital of culture (ECOC). How can we possibly do without references to “the spiritual and intellectual dimension of humankind”?

Some time ago, I started a series of blogs which I hoped to use to argue that Riga, Latvia, develop a program through which it promotes itself as a replacement of Brussels, the current Capital City of the European Union. Vulgar as it may sound, I was motivated by the perception that Mr. von Rompuy, President of the European Council, had turned Brussels into a cork up the EU’s arse. I ended the series, when it became obvious that the average citizen of Latvia (let alone Europe), no matter how much horse meat they had consumed would not be able to muster a fart big enough to expell a cork blessed bt NATO.
 
One reason my arguments lacked volume was that there are actually two governments of Riga: a) the municipal government and b) the national government, the latter having established Riga as the capital city of Latvia as far back as 1918.
 
Another reason to let go was that the state government of Latvia and the municipal government of Riga are presently engaged in a civil war over who is to have control over Riga. To the extent the battle is a battle between two ethnic groups, the Latvians and the Russians, the former of who are 40% (= 263,200) of Riga’s 658,000 population, while the Russians are 46% (= 302,680), other ethic minorities making up the remaining 14% (= 92,120) inhabitants; this according to the 2011 census.
 
While the “Author” (of the programme) does not immediately reveal who it represents (the state or municipal government), a search discovers that: “The Rīga 2014 foundation was established by the city of Rīga to provide for the development and running of the culture events of Rīga as the European Capital of Culture
 
To clarify what the organizers of the Riga Capital of Culture Committee mean by the term force majeure:
 
“For the title of its 2014 programme, Riga has chosen a term commonly used in law – force majeure – which signifies an mighty force, both unexpected and foreseeable (my bolded italics) …
 
If we open the link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Force_majeure we learn that force majeure “...is a common clause in contracts that essentially frees both parties from liability or obligation when an extraordinary event or circumstance beyond the control of the parties….” occurs.
 
Riga Capital of Culture Foundation elaborates that force majeure is a  “mighty force”: “… accumulated through global and individual obstructions and problems.” (My bolded italics.)
 
Having discovered the legal meaning and use of force majeure, we now have to discover what is ‘unexpected’ and ‘foreseeable’ about it? Since catastrophic hazards of nature are rare in Riga, the only “unexpected” event is likely to be a ‘political’ one. While political upsets are frequent in an inherently unstable ‘democratic’ order, Latvia has participated in only one event that may be considered to have the significance of a force majeure. This ‘one event’ consists however of a number of interrelated events. Re:
 
1917, March. Beginning of the Russian Revolution. The force majeure goal of the Revolution is to establish International Socialism as opposition to Global Liberal Capitalism. The ultimate goal of Global Liberal Capitalism and International Socialism is to defeat one another and the victor becoming thereafter the sole governmening system on the planet. A month after the outbreak of the Revolution, Tsar Nicholas abdicates. By November 1917, the Bolsheviks unseat the Provisional Government of Russia, and the Soviet government becomes the only government in Russia and its former territories.
 
1917, July, Riga, Latvia. The Latvian Social Democrats in Riga, controlled by the Bolsheviks, establish Iskolat http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iskolat . Iskolat is the acronym for “the Executive Committee of the Soviet Workers, Soldiers, and the Landless in Latvia”. German forces, ensconced on the left or west bank of the River Daugava, soon thereafter attack Riga, and  Iskolat is forced to retreat east, ultimately escaping into Russia proper, where in March 1918 it disbands. On December 16, 1917, Russia and Germany agree to an armistice http://www.firstworldwar.com/source/armistice_russogerman.htm . The armistice is signed
 
1918, 3 March at Brest-Litovsk  http://www.firstworldwar.com/source/brestlitovsk.htm . As a result of the Brest-Litovsk Treaty, Russia is to cede many of the lands on her Western borders, including the territory of Latvia. The treaty in and of itself, continues as part of the series of events begun with the force majeure that begun with the Revolution, and ought not to be viewed as a separate event. The Treaty was dictated for the most part by the German Kaiser, and was backed by the Central Powers, who, in spite of viewing the Treaty as detrimental to their short term interests in the war,  saw the Treaty as furthering the long term the interests of Western liberalism. The Treaty ultimately cost Russia most of her Western territories http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Brest-Litovsk .
 
18 November, 1918, the Latvian Peoples Council proclaims Latvia’s independence http://latvianhistory.wordpress.com/2010/11/17/18-november-the-latvian-independence-day/ . The proclamation does not result in immediate independence, but is followed by a period of instability and continued armed conflict. The Latvian Social Democrats are reluctant to join, because their sympathies are with the Bolsheviks and in the establishment of International Socialism as permanent opposition to Liberal Capitalism. Nevertheless, the Latvian Social democrats agree to the November 18 declaration, but with the qualification that as far as they were concerned, independent Latvia is for the party an instrument, but not an exclusive goal.
 
1918, 17 December, Latvian Socialists proclaim with the political, economic, and military backing of Lenin and his Bolshevik government the Latvian Socialist Soviet Republic. This act is meant to counter the November 18 proclamation of the Latvian Peoples Council.
 
1919 an attack of combined German and Latvian forces drives the Latvian Socialist Soviet government to Latvia’s easternmost regions. In 1920—with the help of Polish forces—rightist forces of Latvia drive the Soviets from Latvia. As a consequence, the Latvian government has no Socialist representation to this day.
 
These events, except for the event of 1989 (collapse of the Soviet Union), end the force majeure effort by Lenin. Unfortunately for the Soviets, the West survives the struggle between itself and the reestablished East, whereas the East again loses its footing. In Latvia the fall of the Soviet Union is celebrated by adopting and projecting a kind of mindless hubris over the ability of the West to celebrate centuries of murder and suffering of humankind by finding the heights of expression in Pop Art. Its media celebrate a conceit that history serves best when forgotten or purposely misrepresented . There is nary a thought here that denial of economic equality might serve as heat serves a cobra in producing deadly poison.
 
Given that in the text quoted above, the organizers of the Riga 2014 Cultural event have put ‘unexpected’ next to ‘foreseeable’, one is tempted to imagine the two words are related to each other as closely as  ‘unknown’ is to ‘known’. It is like a dream before awakening from it all wet. Fortunately for the dreamer, the mystery is solved by the explanation that such wetness is “…accumulated through global and individual obstructions and problems”. It is like discovering that all one needs to solve the problem of absence of imagination is a suppository.
 
A citizen of the world, who has bought into the “globalization” ideology of the liberal capitalist world order, might see the word ‘individual’ in personal terms. He-she might wonder whether “individual obstruction” is sourced in them? Even so, it is unlikely that anyone reading this, and thinking of coming to Riga in 2014 will ‘unexpectedly’ and spontaneously admit themselves obstructionists. As to ‘individual problems’, who can say that he-she is free of them?
 
This leaves us seeking ‘unexpected and foreseeable’ situations significant enough to call for force majeure action—from a global perspective. If we discover such, we will not escape thinking of force majeure as involving political risks of global proportions. Moreover, since the “Riga 2014 Cultural Capital of Europe” has a legal standing, it is the party which writes the contract or, to put it another way, defines the function of the Cultural event.
 
This is how the Foundation sees its function:
 
A significant role in Riga 2014 programme will be played by the Mobile Centres in Riga’s suburbs and Latvian towns. It means that in 2014, Riga plans to decentralise its programme by carrying out various cultural events outside its cultural centre, reaching Sigulda, its official partner town, Cēsis, Liepāja or any other city or town open for cultural cooperation. The European Capital of Culture status for Riga must be beneficial to the entire nation, and Riga sees itself as sort of a gate to Latvia – many professionals of culture have already been involved in preparing applications for the ECOC status of Riga, Cēsis and Liepāja, thus demonstrating the mobility of Latvian artists.
 
The implicit/ explicit definition of the function of Riga as a Capital of Culture may not be all that significant to a visitor to Riga, but to a Latvian citizen it is a rather amazing document.
 
  • The second sentence, re: “It means that IN 2014, Riga plans to decentralize its programme…” should read: “It means that BY 2014.…” In other words, Riga has usurped the benefits meant to be “beneficial to the entire nation” for itself for over twenty years (since renewed independence).
  • “…Riga sees itself as sort of a gate to Latvia… ” should read: “Riga, which  has placed itself as a city outside of Latvia, is considering reintegrating itself as part of the country to receive cudos from the EU….”
  • “… The European Capital of Culture [ECOC] status for Riga must be beneficial to the entire nation…” is an assertion post factum, because by its own admission, Riga has here to now had a centralized programme….”
  • When we come to the following fragment in the last sentence: “…many professionals of culture have already been involved in preparing applications for the ECOC status of Riga, Cēsis and Liepāja, thus demonstrating the mobility of Latvian artists,” we are at first mesmerized, then shocked by its audacity to describe artists as “professionals of culture”. If one googles for the meaning of the term http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100210203325AAIXuaX , one finds no understanding of it on the web. True, it may be a term understood by the Riga bureaucrats, but it is unlikely to be understood by artists in the rest of Latvia, whether professionals or amateurs, since by definition, they have not been part of Riga by Riga’s own admission.
Such audacious presumption forces us to question the municipal government and its Council Of Culture. However, wait!  Who are the members of this Foundation?
Interestingly, all of the names of the Supervision Council of the Foundation are Latvian names, that is, the Council consists solely of the 40% of the inhabitants of Riga who are of Latvian ‘ethnicity’. The only name of Russian descent (of the 46% of Riga population) is that of the mayor of Riga, Nils Ušakovs, who leads the list of thirteen other names.
 
The exclusionism is apparently an unwitting continuation of the exclusion that began with the exclusion of socialists ninety-five years ago. It encapsules the continued unwitting identification of the Latvian cause with then emergent proto-Nazism, even though the hay-days of German Nazism are sixty-five years behind us. I write this, fully aware that the fascist and liberal capitalist nature of the Latvian government today is a term that does not apply to all Latvians, but only to those living in Riga, who define contemporary humankind as being of an “urban” nature.
 
Under the subhead “Road Map”, at the link to Riga 2014 ECOC, we read:
 
“The greater part of mankind lives in cities….  A city is not only made up of buildings and carriageways…. Cities are like living organisms that can grow dynamically and aggressively…. They can be led by the dynamics of the explosive development of generic cities … grounded in the pragmatism of capitalism. Or, it might be the global city … in which the local is found in constant interaction with the global. It may be assumed that a city grows by itself.”
 

In other words, cities, too (inclusive of Riga), may be like Nazi armies on a warpath for ‘Lebensraum’.  Interestingly, Latvians of countryside origin tend to bypass Riga by going direct to its airport, then flying to lands far abroad, while Riga attracts (in a move of expansionary inversion) an increasing number of rich Russians and Chinese.

If Riga ever becomes Europe’s Capital of Culture and Politics (ECOC&P), it will be,  because its Russian and Chinese http://www.kasjauns.lv/lv/zinas/66822/riga-nodibinata-pirma-latvijas-kiniesu-asociacija speaking immigrants will have learned to outwit the Latvian government and appear with Latvian names. In the future Mrs. Nadja Simjanova and Mr. Chan Chunyin will execute an Eastern style personal force majeure by applying for their Latvian passports as Nadīne Simsone and Kārlis Kārkliņš—no matter how many backward summersaults the Latvian Parliament in Riga flips in protest.





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 http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-moral-decoding-of-9-11-beyond-the-u-s-criminal-state-the-grand-plan-for-a-new-world-order/5323300#_edn14 .
                                                                                                               
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 http://jesusthebogomil.blogspot.com ), 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 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L'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 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gasometer_Oberhausen ), thus giving Vice President Cheney the opportunity to put the finishing touches on 9/11 by ordering war games in the sky http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/september2004/080904wargamescover.htm  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 http://www.infowars.com/infowars-exclusive-david-icke-on-how-bilderberg-elites-control-society/ 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  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John,_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 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/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 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magna_Carta . 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 http://digital.csic.es/bitstream/10261/32188/3/FSI%20main%20text.doc 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.


 

Wednesday, February 27, 2013

Eso’s Chronicles 142
The Earthquake of San Francisco as A Political Act (1)
© Eso A.B
Shades in the mirror of a liberal political universe
There will be those who insist that what I call the ‘slide of San Francisco into the Pacific’ falls under the category of ‘an Act of God’ and will NOT BE a political act.

Though the event (whenever it happens) will be dramatic enough to be called an ‘Act of God’, I insist that it will be a uniquely American “political act” that—now that it has begun with a vaguely intuited ‘happening’ somewhere ‘out there’—it will reverberate to the farthest reaches of our planet and maybe even kill us.

Like all expectations which anticipate the End of the World, the slide of San Francisco into the ocean http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/map/ has taken a long time to develop and has a long history.

The earliest recorded event of ‘the End’ is that of “the worship of the golden calf” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_calf  and, the best I know where to place it,  is in the ancient Jewish empire of Khazaria http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Chasaren.jpg, aka the Khazarian Khaganate, an empire that stretched from the east coast of the Black Sea to the West coast of the Aral Sea, and about equal distance from Kiev in the north to the borders of Armenia.
 


Because the modern state of Israel has political reasons to identify with a fictitious land, the so-called ‘Ancient Israel’ located north of Ancient Egypt, and similar political reasons for identifying with the area apply to the nations of the West, this ancient empire (of a Turkic people) is today casually passed over, if not outright ignored.

However, being ignored does not mean eliminated. Rather, being ignored causes the object to become an “unknown known”, as Donald Rumsfeld, the former American Secretary of Defense, tried to explain the attack on WTC towers, when explaining to news media why President Bush declared a ‘Crusade’ against terrorism.

Because ‘unknown’ Khazaria continues to remind itself to us through the ‘holy writ’ known as the Bible and the mysterious writers who presumed themselves to be wise, and whose presumption inspired the emergence the Commandment “Thou shalt not kill” (Exodus 20:13), it ought not be surprising that the Khazars also brought into being a  nonviolent civilization. The full meaning of “Thou shalt not kill”, however, emerges only in Matthew 5:21: “Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, ‘Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment’.” Today this is interpreted as a blanket condemnation of taking human life.

A more critical reflection on “Thou shalt not kill”, however, reveals it to be a Commandment that applies only to those who have no authority to kill, but does not apply to those who have the authority and who have the courage to stand judgment. These latter were once upon a time known as the holy kings, those who paid for their authority with self-sacrificial death (but failing it were garroted http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garrote ).
 




The holy kings accepted their role as transgressors of the Commandment and did not fear death for themselves, because they were convinced that the death they realized on themselves and meted out to others  was justified by the fact that it created and maintained a community. The basis for their conviction was the perception that a community was an exceptional institution and would not exist without such a sacrifice.

It was the universalization of the Commandment through the written law (entertained by Western boyars and princes), that destroyed the tradition of Eastern Christianity and instituted what we know as Western neo-liberalism, i.e.: a force majeure that is as ‘natural’ as an Act of God, but invariably favors the ruling party or the party that unseats it from power by means of a civil war. Universalization of force majeure as a ‘natural’ Act is the essence of neo-Christianity, also known as Catholicism, because it can be instituted (over a holy king) only by a pretense to religion. This necessarily makes neo-Christianity a False Flag event.

The universalizers carry forth their pretense under a umbra of absolute nonviolence and by insisting ‘blood guilt’ to be unredeemable under any circumstances. It is, thus, that modern government has made itself the killer of ALL life, human and animal, excluding the wealthy and the ruling elite who remain the universalizers and False Flag carriers.

Yet Numbers 35:33 explains: “So ye shall not pollute the land wherein ye are: for blood it defileth the land: and the land cannot be cleansed of the blood that is shed therein, but by the blood of him that shed it.

If we take and put the writings mentioned above end to end, we arrive at the conclusion that it is wrong to kill, and why those who kill must be killed in return, and why those who follow in yet another turn of killing must also be killed. In other words, the killing can stop only if one takes it upon himself to kill himself. Because taking one’s life is such an awesome act, it used to be called a ‘sacrificial’ act.

In order to deny a sacrificial act its effectiveness, the governments of today call it ‘a suicide’, and elevate “human rights” above all other rights, and make murder, too, a human right—especially when it concerns those sitting in government.

Such simplistic or closed circuit reasoning constitutes the rule of law in our day, and is the reason why communities are collapsing the world over. It exempts murderous statesmen from the death penalty—unless even more violent statesmen can gather political points with an desensitized public by killing murderous statesmen in a phony self-righteous act, because the latter have less military power than they do. The most recent examples of such murders of murderers are the attacks and murders executed by U.S. Presidents and leaders of NATO nations on Iraq and Libya, and celebrating their military victories by murdering the captured leaders guilty of unredeemed murders of their own.

By these lights, the leaders of the West and the leaders under their sway, have discarded and trampled into the mud the Commandment “Thou shalt not kill”. Now, go blow your whistles, boys, all you want; we will simply shut down the speakers and whisper “terrorists” in mikes of our own!

One ‘boy’ piped: “Unfortunately, all our efforts to explain to the Americans that European missile shield in its current form is aimed against Russia, its nuclear capabilities and undermines world’s nuclear balance have been in vain. Our arguments have been heard neither in America nor in NATO,” Medvedev said. http://rt.com/politics/medvedev-us-defense-cuba-333/

Go, whistle some more, Medved!

Once exceptionalism is exercised only in matters relevant to government and its small circle of oligarch supporters, but not to society as a whole, irresponsibility become a matter of course in a long string of cases. Without a doubt, community will break down. This is where the Civil War stage begins. As noted in my blogs 20 and 21 (“The Despair of Stalin”) at http://jesusthebogomil.blogspot.com , the Civil War did once already begin under the guise of the Russian Revolution (1917), but miscarried, because Lenin and Stalin for all their unhappiness failed to destroy the force majeure instituted by the neo-Christian False Flag Act of 1118, but remained under it. Indeed, the bureaucracy organized by the Bolsheviks was essentially imitative of that of the West.

As far as the humankind of billions is concerned, it is powerless to effectively change governments and their preoccupations, because it does not have enough power in its hands to kill the universalizing governors. Even if every inhabitant of the planet were armed, the absence of a sense of community (due to the removal of bonding charisma by governments many centuries ago) prevents humankind from organizing into disciplined unit or a solidarity such as government has organized its bureaucracy into.

This is where the earthquake of San Francisco enters into the picture. 

Given that the public is unable to introduce major changes in ‘modern democratic’ government, which has declared itself and its oligarch controlled financial institutions as “too big to fail” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Too_big_to_fail , an outside event must insert itself and is eagerly and with endless patience awaited to do so.

In cultural terms the waiting is nothing new, and was expressed long ago by Samuel Beckett’s play “Waiting for Godot” (1948), described by some as the 20th century’s best known play. While Vladimir or Estragon, the play’s main protagonists, wait and while their time by looking into an empty shoe and a hat, the play ‘plays’. At last, they are visited by Pozzo, an oligarch, who drives a slave named Lucky, but neither turns out to be Godot or God (with or as) a dot—as this member of the audience once believed.

No doubt, Beckett’s play and the failure of the “too important to fail” is tedium arriving with the regularity of unrequested ‘spam’ from the internet. The correctness of this analysis was recently ‘proven’ by the welcome the Russian people extended to exploding meteriorite http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBvotWfR3j4 , and with what patience the inhabitants of Tokyo sit on top of a volcano, and the San Franciscans twiddle their thumbs sitting over the San Andreas fault in California.

 

Saturday, February 23, 2013

Eso's Chronicles resumes

Eso’s Chronicles 141
Latvian as ‘rough speak’ and ‘tough love’
The natural environment of Democracy is the wood,
all other democracies are mke-believe
One of the most pleasant word in Latvian today is “čaviņa” (chavinya), an endearment derived from the Italian word “ciao”. Many of young Latvians use the word when chatting on the internet or mobile telephone.

The attached link, in which economics Professor Keith Chen from Yale University points out the subtle differences between the English language that has no future tense and languages that do have it, and which differences may or may not make you wealthier than your neighbor, is well worth for a Latvian to read and reflect on.


Here is why. Prof Chen divides the world's languages into two groups, depending on how they treat the concept of time. Chen argues that if one’s language separates the future and the present in its grammar and leads the user to slightly disassociate the future from the present, the “…speakers of languages which only use the present tense when dealing with the future are likely to save more money than those who speak languages which require the use a future tense, he argues….”

Of course, the Professor has many critics, and some of this is reflected in the BBC article. I will leave it to some Latvian grammarian to explain the nuances of the Latvian language with regard to future and present tenses. What concerns me, is a theme that I have often referred to: the NEAR TOTAL LOSS of the endearing word in Latvian, and the ‘stiffening’, nay even tendency to brutalize the Latvian psyche as a consequence.

I am referring to the facility of the Latvian language of another day to ubiquitously use terms of endearment for even the most roughest and sometimes most unpleasant of words, such as ‘akmentinjsh’ (akmentiņš--stone), ‘suhdinjsh’ (sūdiņš—excrement), etc. Indeed, the Latvian language can endear every word. The use of the endearment in places that culturally may be deemed inappropriate places is therefore interpreted as potentially of a sarcastic or ironic inflection.

The endearing word was a feature of Latvian as an oral language, and went pretty much out of use with the arrival of the written word, especially with news reporting, where ‘realism’ is deemed paramount and subjective thought almost indecent.

One may further argue, that, well, that is ‘too bad’, but that is how things are and one must accept this. Maybe so. Nevertheless, it may also be argued that ‘realism’ that excludes endearing sentiments is a cancerous growth. We can observe this ‘cancer’ in the politician activated disputes over the use of Latvian at the exclusion of other languages as somehow a matter of a ‘superior patriotism’, when in fact it exhibits woeful knowledge about the nature of the culture among the forebears of the Latvian people as recently as a hundred years and less ago. In other words, culturally speaking, the Latvian politicians betray their culture and forebears.

At the very least, the same politicians could allocate greater funds to the study of the Latvian language at the appropriate institutions. Else, as we see, a Professor of Chinese descent at Yale University in America indirectly knows more about the Latvian language than a self-enclosed group of Latvian ‘realists’, known as the ‘Saeima’, arguably a fascist collective of politicians, do. Do these politicians really believe that their ‘realism’ will really make Latvians materially better off and more survival prone?

Sunday, September 16, 2012

ORIGINS OF THE POLICE STATE
Copyright Eso A.B.

Coming to the launch of the underwater sculpture, My Crocodile, July 26, 2012
 THE GREAT MIGRATION WEST ENDS
From this writer’s perspective—influenced by Anatoly Fomenko's application of topological mathematics to history—our planet HAS NO RECORDED HISTORY worth paying attention to until the advent in the 10th century of the so-called Cluniac eclisiasts originating in the Benedictine Monastery in Cluny The monastery is located in what is now the approximate centre of France, about 50 km north of Lyon and 20 km west of Macon.

It was out of Bene-dictine Cluny that there arose the idea of “Order and Exclusion” or, if you will, the idea that government should be a closed system. The development of this system—presented most succinctly in a famous book by French author Dominique Iogna-Prat—is what created our world today.

Gatis and the Crocodile communicate
 St. Benedict of Nursia had little to do directly with the system that came to call it self "Catholic". Among religious 'historians' Benedict is a much disputed figure. Nevertheless, for a number of reasons, he is believed to be one of the founders of the West European culture. The following link identifies the name “Nursia” (Nur) with purity, the origin of which name is to be sought in the Far East and the Pashtun tribe of Afghanistan and Pakistan. While the link of the West with the Far East may seem far fetched to some, it makes good sense to those who remember that Ancient Christians and Moslems are closely related, and the so-called 'schism' is a consequence of the divisionism introduced by the violent creation of one-dimensional order by the Bene-dictine and Dominican orders of Cluny.

St. Benedict of Nursia was a monk who--it is possible--came to West from the Far East, and brought with him the example of the way of a disciplined life. Since the saint himself has little to do with the order that used his name, it is unlikely he is to be blamed for the Discipline with a large D that was turned into one of the foundation stones of the oppressive Western system of government of today. After all, discipline ought not to mean going to Prison. That kind of a conclusion may be imposed only  by a fundamentalist contrived observation of the ‘letter of the law’. Discipline at its best is to help create a community by living as an example.

Stefany and Biruta look My Crocodile over and learn
that he is 110 years old, and a 7 meter long oak trunk
Another reason for the arrival of a new system (whatever the old may have been) was that by the time of St. Benedict, the migrations of people from the East to the West were over, and Western Europe was being settled by people, who little by little  became sedentary, and no longer expended their energies in travel.

The leaders of the newly formed sendentarist society no longer needed to expend their energies in holding themselves together as a community; it was no longer of paramount necessity to keep the people from dispersing. The princes and boyars were settling down, too. However, because the latter inherited  their posts as a tradition going back to a time when the tribe was in motion over a woodland environment, the former nepotism (based on heroic acts) was becoming outmoded and needed to be transformed. The big question was: Would the path of least resistance lead nepotism to extinction or to survival as a corrupt institution?


NEPOTISM’S GREAT TRANSFORMATION

The cynics seized the day. Nepotism as practiced during the Great Wanderings transformed itself into a new system, one we know as feudalism. One of the symbols of sedentary feudal power is the medieval “donjon" , which stands for the central tower of a castle.


Volodya, Gatis, and author moving My Crocodile into the Bottomless Johns Pond
 With heroism and its  authority no longer a social necessity, those who held power were left with unspent and excess energies. This happened, because leadership was no longer expended at the pace it was during the time of the migration. The kings and their courts of past ages, once populated by court poets and with ‘heroes’, no longer needed them, if only because heroes no longer died at the once accustomed pace. With the community no longer in continuous motion, dangerous and unpredictable situations decreased. Moreover, the question of ‘What to do with my brothers?’ became a question of great and acute concern to the leader.

The top leader, generally a position inherited by the king’s eldest son, was more than happy if his sibling brothers turned to spiritual matters. This spiritual (or imaginary)  matter, because it was overlapping a tradition of martial authority, is whence came vertical social leadership.

An important initiator of vertical spiritual leadership was the Abbey at Cluny. There are a number of reasons for this. The foremost is that the Cluny Abbey monks, many of them being heirs to authority, wished to repress the earlier wandering Johns, shamans, and other self-confessed men of God or Gods, and then replace them with themselves, that is, the Bene-dictine (dictrine=auto-didactic) order. A sentimental or idealistic excuse or apologia may have been a vision of what ‘order’, subject to absolute or military type of obeisance, could accomplish over the long run. Hence the expansive idea that someday the Bible ought reach every corner of the world.


FROM JONASTERIES TO MONASTERIES

My Crocodile goes belly up and Gatis goes to the rescue
One phenomenon of the early Middle Ages was the spread of names and words originating in the word John. The mystery is resolved if we realize that "John" is indeed a unique name, and that its original meaning is to be looked for in the word “gens”. Gens, at its root, means a human being, as well as seed, but the name found its most common use in being applied to shepherds, goatherds, and swineherds. In the Latvian language, which has roots in the oldest strata of the Indoeuropean languages, a shepherd to this day is known as “gans”. Until recently (but no longer), the most popular Latvian name for male children was “Jans” (Jahnis). In short, the sound of G in “gens”, transformed itself into the sound of  I and Y. The name of gans-yon-yons-ivan-shepherd echoes also in the names of gendarme or jandarme, a herder and guardian of people, a policeman, even a gent-le-man.

The letter G, or J, or Y, curiously enough, also echoes to the letter D and M. We can hear the letter D in the name of the European river Donau, or Donava, re Yonava (yon=young), meaning a young maiden or virgin; the D in the Russian river Don, also echoes to the same meaning. We may find the letters G, H, I, J, Y, Z also in M—as in Mohammed = Johanned. While some argue that this writer uses the phenomenon of ‘paraidolia’ too liberally, he responds that ‘paraidolia’ has not been used liberally enough. While the phenomenon discocvers its widest application in music , it is used to no lesser extend in the shaping of the sometimes many vernaculars or dialects of one and the same language.

One informative anecdote happened when this writer tried to argue that “”donjons” (better known as “keeps” in England), the central towers of Middle Age castles, which may be seen in the castles and forts from France to Japan, actually use the name of John in one word twice, i.e., John of Johns. When I advanced the notion that “don”=John; and “jon”, too,=John, I was met with considerable scepticism. When I suggested that a donjon was likely to be found also in the Kremlin in (Moscow), a Russian reader gleefully denied it. Not knowing Russian, I  had to accept the argument—until I discovered the name in the Bell Tower of Ivan the Great, the main church on Kremlin grounds.



THE FLAT OR CLOSED CIRCLE
My Crocodile gets his bearings

In any event, this is how began a long journey through many labyrinths, which led to the modern police state. No less disconcerning is the news that NATO may as soon as 2016 be flying drones over my country home in Latvia.

Among the first acts of the monks of Cluny was to attempt to convert all manifestations of early and itinerant Christianity to the Cluniac way of thinking and being. The closest group of Old or Archaic Christians to the Abbey of Cluny were the Cathar Christians (close cousins of the Bogomils). The word ‘Cathar’ is—as we may guess—related to ‘Catholic’, the word ‘cath’ stemming fron Greek “katharoi”, pure.

As the act of staying and keeping one's self pure suggests (intense self-discipline being a given), that the conflict that arose as a result of the attempt to imposed discipline on the people of the wood was a bloody one. The Cluniac Bene-dictines were the leaders in dictating and subsequent violence. The secular king in northern France was their chief military ally. The Cathars were among the first Christian religious groups to be declared heretical and excommunicated, i.e., thrust from ‘civilization’ to return to the wood.

The Albigensian Crusade (1209-1255) also marks the start of major deforestation campaigns. This was because wood was necessary not only to build forts and castles, and villages and emerging towns about them, but was also required to bake an ever increasing quantity of fired or ceramic bricks.

It is noteworthy that the Albigensian Crusade resulted in renaming of the Bene-dictine order and  its reinstitutionalization as the Dominican (dictatorial) order. As the name suggests, ‘domini’ means to dominate over, and its purpose was to bear down and instill on the population the Bene-dictine doctrine--obviously no longer bene to the people, when bene becomes an imposition and an order. Though the Bene-dictines remains to this day, the Dominicans grew out of its foot as the sixth toe. It initiated the Inquisition, which dominated over older and archaic Christian orders through terror and anihilation.

As the Benedictine-Dominican Order imposed its ideas of a closed government system on the West, and these became the norm among the secular elite, it moved its tentacles East aiming to seize the city of Byzantium, later Constantinople (Istanbul today), which in those times was perceived as the Jerusalem (city of the lamb) of an unstructured and wood dominated space on our planet.

The first aggressive acts of the Western neo-Christian order was to persuade the Emperors of the East of the advantages of a closed system. This was done through a number of small but violent wars against Rome in the East, which was then located in what is Istanbul today. The French king, at that time was not limited to the territory that is now France, but had a number of kingdoms, some of them extending into the Middle East. Today our schoolbooks associate these Frankish kingdoms with the Carolingians and French knights. 

The link in the above paragraph provides a map of the times of early Middle Ages. What the story gets wrong, however, is that “Rome” was not yet relocated in the West, but remains in the East. If we read history with the idea that in the early Middle Ages Rome is not yet in the West, but is gradually--by hook and crook--transferred there from the East  through the Cluniac doctrine of imposing its order on all and sundry, we are close to what was actually going on at the time.

One event of major importance in consolidating the notions of Reality by the West was accomplished through the agency of the Byzantine Emperor Alexius I. Egged on by the Cluniac monks and Francs, Alexius arrested and then killed the most charismatic religious leader of the East, one John or Ivan Basil (King) of the Bogomil (God lover) religious community. One may say that with the death of Basil [his first name is this writer’s paraidolic guess], the West killed the Sacrificial Pope-King of the East; and therewith began the transference of Rome-East to Rome-West. The latter was (according to A. Fomenko) but a small town on the west coast of Italy, hence so little remains today of its allegedly glorious past.

The murder of Ivan Basil echoed like a scream throughout the yet unconquered East and as yet wooded Europe. It echoed in the West, in that the neo-Christian order of the West countered the outrage and protests among the populace by creating an ever more convincing story of how Jesus—universally perceived as the founder of Christianity (though he was by no means the only Sacrificial Spiritual King, but only the last one of them)—was killed by crucifixion, i.e. by being hung on a cross suspended from nails driven through his palms and feet.

While it is a physical impossibility for a man to hang on a cross from nails, without body tissue tearing through the metallic supports, it does make for a gruesome and dramatic story with which to impress the impressionable. By being able to divert the peoples' attention from Basil's death in a fire pit and put the blame on Alexius I, the Western princes were able to persuade and recruit a huge crowd of Western peasant volunteers to go on a Crusade against the East. We know this Crusade as the 4th Crusade, though some historians (Fomenko) say that it actually was the First. It is recorded in our history books as the Crusade that went to free Jerusalem of Saracens. Actually the military parade stopped at, then sacked and plundered Constantinople (~1204). Not surprisingly, the of the crusade consolidated the power neo-Christians.

Next, the Dominicans had major success in imposing their ideas of order on Poland (and hence on Lithuania) . By 1201, the Order reached Riga and had ideas of establishing a Jerusalem of the East there. To do this, Bishop Albert, the neo-Christian bishop of Riga, had to destroy Jersika, the capital of the proto-lett people located inland on the shore of the river Daugava (Yaunava=Virgin). "J/Gersika" was the indigenous peoples' way of pronouncing Jerusalem. Albertsdestroyed both the city and the king of the proto-letts.

The sacking of Constantinople caused what 'historians' today known as the “Great Schism”, between the East and the West. Ultimately, the East succumbed to the superior violence of the West (achieved through the West’s greater discipline). Nevertheless, the East never surrendered completely, but continued to resist the West, and this resistance (often no longer conscious of its origins) continues up to our time. In those far away days, the dissenting Eastern Christians moved their headquarters from Constantinople (Istanbul) to Kiev, later to Moscow, then to St. Petersburg, then back to Moscow again.

While this writer's primarily concern is to establish different major outlines of how the modern police state was begun, we cannot overlook the nature and importance of the order of the 'closed' or 'flat'  circle created by the Cluniac monks. The di-dact of the words, “flat circle”, originates in the visual image of a circle that turns in on itself and cannot be escaped from as is possible when moving along the surface of a topological circle. One of the consequences of being mentally stuck on a flat circle is a growing consciousness of “ownership”, which is a consequence of the limited space afforded by all things closed-in on themselves.

Thus, the idea of “ownership” is most clearly established in the West, where the expression “private ownership” is ubiquitous and has become a synonym for having a roof over one’s head. Of course, if space were infinite, then private ownership would ideally be enjoyed by everyone. Unfortunately, space is finite; and in our day this has created another Great Chasm —that between the wealthy (originally landowners of great tracts of land) and the poor (those who possess no or very little of property) who sleep in doorways.


DESTROYING THE WOOD AND EARTH
Witnesses to the launch of My Crocodile
By the time the Great Migration reached the West coast of Europe, agriculture was well on its way in the East. Feforestation, which created ever more arable land for sedentary landlords, began there.

While agriculture is said to have begun as long ago as 10,000 years, its began to greatly accelerate only with the end of the Great Migration in Europe. The end of this migration apparently coincided with the beginnings of the second millenium of our era.

As woods were cut down to build houses for an increasing population, which was fed by the growing grain supply from a princely landowning class, small villages turned into towns, and some towns turned into cities. Many villages turned into towns by virtue of trade from which there emerged a merchant class and wealth that was independent from princes.

History books invariably call the passage from wood to agriculture to towns and trading centres “progress”, but fail to mention that concurrently there was a rise in social instability due to a rise of material inequality. The control of the social instability was first left to the control of the organized religious such as the “preaching” order of Dominicans, who while preaching to a captive audience (church attendance was mandatory) were also engaged projecting control through rhetorical and public lies.

The “lie” of the neo-Christian orders consists mostly in discovering new ways of how to rhetorically pacify the have-nots within the new capitalist and closed system (churches as once a week obligatory prisons) society. Thus, while the message of Jesus, which taught meekness at the same time as it advocated opposition to greed by way of self-sacrifice, was presented at the churches  as unquestionable obedience to the orders of superiors.

In the course of time, those who determined the fate of the poor came to be identified with the elite and their effect over the middle class, which on balance weighs in with superior incomes over the common or low wage worker. Because one may argue that social equality between all human beings is a genetic inheritance that manifests as a psychological attitude or expression that begins with life itself, and among humans goes back to their shared time in the wood, social tension is inevitable and bound, on occasions of great inequality, to break out in violence. Though there are some who argue that this problem has been overcome by capitalism with the advent of science and its technologies, which, it is claimed, have a solution for every problem, time has not borne this out to be true.

Following the institutionalized discipline of the Cluniac monks, the retreat of the religious orders into rhetoric (which subplanted religious deeds) created opportunities for political forces with greater spiritual courage. Vetted by numerous rebellions, there arose philosophies and ideologies which opposed those who were the cause of inequality (the neo-Christians including) and unleashed Revolutions with a large and bold R.

The “French Revolution” was one such radical, and violently reassertive event of egality exercised by those who belonged to or sympathized with the economically disadvantaged.

Another Revolution born of inequality was the Russian Revolution led by Lenin and after Lenin’s death seized by Stalin. Though Stalin ruled by violence and terror, he nevertheless imposed radical changes on Russia. Unfortunately, both his and Lenin’s analysis of the causes of economic inequality—dependent on the economic theory of Marx. Marx failed to understand that the root of the cause of inequality is not Capitalism (though it certainly plays a significant part), but the destruction of nature, specifically the wood, and the replacement of the wood with agriculture, and, thus, institutionalizing profiteering at the expense of nature. Deforestation, agriculture [become more virtual than real through the genetically modified seeds by Monsanto], and mining are the foremost tools of such profiteering.


VIOLENCE VS NOT-VIOLENT
My Crocodile soaking up water for his undert-the-water lay
If one assumes as a premise the notion that the wood is the source of a democratic order in which repression of social order and imposition of economic inequality is immediately counteracted by a) forceful personal (sometimes violent) resistance; or b) further evolution (apparently as a survival mechanism), then one also begins to see that the democratic order among equals has little to do with democracy as a political system in our desertified "democratic" West.

This is not to deny that democracy is a “sacred value” even in an environment where it obviously is unable to function, but the value of it in our time exists only in the human mind and body as these twins remember the origins of themselves in the genetic constitution of being.

The ideological “sacred value” however does in fact have breaking points. These occur when after a long time of transgression against democracy, the liberal forces of the haves (who have most benefited by the anarchistic elements inherent in the life force) have overstepped the subjective boundaries of aforementioned “life force”, and the public at large collectively hears the sound of a “snap”.

The result is not simply like the removal of a tap to a explosive fuel mix, but is like a match put to the leak of said tap. Transgressed upon democracy then not only flees from its trap by bursting through it, but it has no hesitations in becoming explosive, of using extreme violence and death to achieve a true democratic (re: egalitarian) balance.

Though at the time of a Revolution all the economic and cultural blocks of society participate in the pulling down of the previous 'old' order and all contribute to “chaos” (“the centre cannot hold” as the poet said), a remembrance of order and community enters the fray nevertheless, generally, by selecting an individual to lead the violence, which duration, hence, depends on the chosen individual’s character.

During the French Revolution, the leader of the controlled violence was Maximilien Robespierre. The death machine, the guillotine, did its job quickly and without undue violence (except for extreme subjective fear) on the part of its victims. Eventually, the guillotine took off the head of Robespierre, as well.

In the Russian Revolution, the leader of terror became Joseph Vissarionovich Stalin. More than a hundred years had transpired since the French Revolution without the liberal forces ever taking to heart economic and social equality as being at the heart of every human being. Today there exist very mistaken and spacious observations of these two Revolutions: 1) The French loved their Napoleon; the Russians hate their Stalin. Such are  silly observations for so important events.

Terror took the lives of many millions of people on Soviet territory. This writer, too, lost family members to it. Nevertheless, Stalin’s terror was not senseless or personal power oriented as the liberal propaganda machine of the West now declares. Rather, by Stalin’s time, it had become clear to those oriented by egalitarian genes, that there was some singular cause why the interests of the community could not stand up against economic liberals. Though Stalin was an avid reader of history, there is no record of what he thought of Robespierre’s terror. It is plausible that, he thought it was not extensive enough. Therefore, Stalin’s terror was directed not only against individuals, but at economic classes, especially those most infected by motivations of liberalism.

However, it is unlikely that Stalin's terror was "extensive enough" either. Stalin recognized this himself, when he said at the beginning of his last terror campaign (against inequalitarian zionism embodied by certain Soviet Jews and Christians converted to the dominant neo-Christian order): "What will happen without me is that the country will die because you can't recognize your enemies." ['Stalin'' by Simon S. Montefiore, p. 631]  Stalin is long dead, but inequalitarianism embodied in parliamentary (de jure or de facto) democracy is at this very time marshalling forces for further one-dimensional crusades.

Here we may return to the human being as a creature of the wood, where a subsistence economy prevailed. In the wood the human being is not yet become a farmer. He is not yet exploited by the princes and boyars.

Today this creature of the wood has no forest to return to. Today the situation is much like the famous painting by Munch, called “The Scream" : an obviously terrified person, possibly a bald headed woman, turns back from wherever it is she was crossing a bridge to, and looking back is confronted not by a wood she can run into and hide, but by a painter, who is no less terrified by the imposingly empty solitude before him and behind her.

This causes us to ask: What kind of government did human beings have before deforestation defined the space we live in?


GOVERNMENT IN THE WOOD
Stefany standing in the Gates of Crocodile Alley

 The idea of a government in the wood is nicely presented in the Bavarian fairytale called “KingGoldenlocks" .
The link to the fairytale (a must read) presents us with interesting information.

First, the king’s castle and kingdom are located in a wood;
Second, the wood about the castle is ruled by a giant, a King of the Wood;
Third, the king regards the giant as a creature he has to capture;
Fourth, not everyone regards the wood as his-her enemy, the king’s son among them, perhaps because he senses that the wood is his original home;
Fifth, the son is to be killed (excluded from society through sacrifice) in the wood for releasing the giant or king of the wood from captivity;
Sixth, the son of the King of the Wood is a swineherd of wild pigs;
Seventh, the giant and his son, the swineherd, save the unfortunate prince who appears to love the wood for its own sake;
Eighth, the king of the wood is not averse to removing the usurping king Goldenlocks from the throne;
Ninth, the swineherd is a good actor/mimic and blends with and replaces the son of king Goldenlocks so perfectly that he eventually becomes the new king;
Tenth, the switch between prince and the swineherd is done through the sacrifice of the tenth finger, likely the pinky of the left hand, which is—one may presume—how ultimately the wood is saved from the axe.

If we take a closer look at item Five [the son is to be sacrificed in the wood, presumably to the (barbarian) King of the Wood], we note that the giant in the wood or King of the Wood does not accept a human sacrifice, but is willing to accept in its place one’s pinky, the little finger.

We may interpret the substitution of one’s pinky as a compromise, nevertheless, close enough to the sacrifice the whole body, because it is a sufficiently real touch of Reality. At the same time, the biting off of the little finger symbolizes the fact that before the son of King Goldenlocks is King Goldenlocks son, he is the grandson and heir of the giant King of the Wood, the Primordial Father/ Mother figure. The substitution of the pinky for the whole body is similar to King Solomon’s solution in case of the child, who is claimed to be their son by two women. The real mother is unwilling to see her child torn in half, but rather surrenders it to the woman who is staking a false claim.

We may deduce from the fairytale, that in due course the real and future government of humankind will make its home in a forest, not the city. This government in the wood will show its earnestness not through rhetoric, but some act, which for the given society is an individual sacrificing his-her little finger or its equivalent.


NOT-VIOLENT TERROR

Little Dans Anton was also a witness to My Crocodile launch.

At about the time of the rise of the Benedictine Order (and Exclusion) at Cluny circa the 10th century, the last sacrificial king—of many thousand year lineage—died.

The ancient tradition and charisma of order had been entrusted to the charisma of sacrifice. This trust died by neglect of the tradition and ultimately the murder of the Sacred King in a Revolution. The death and undermining of the tradition of self-sacrifice had been progressing as a cancer within society for many centuries (perhaps even for a millenium) before the final collapse overtook it.

Where the King died is not clear, but symbolically he may be represented by Basil, John or Ivan Basil, of the Bogomil religious community. Basil means King. Basil surely believed that God would return His love for Him by protecting him, Basil, from fire and other harm. He also believed that when faced by death, he had to be able to face it bravely and die if it came to that. Even if he did not believe in God, he knew that in order to hold a human community together, someone had to act as if he did believe in God. Hence the famous Bogomil cry, no doubt quoting Basil facing the pit of fire: "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me!?"

In short, Basil was one of the last Sacred Kings who was a leader of a community held together by the charisma of a self-sacrificial leader, a king still worthy of his office.

Bogomils are said to have originated in Bulgaria. The link informs that Bogomil origin is to be looked for in the reaction of the ‘ancient’ Christians (of the 10th century society) to the aggressive advances of Cluny Abbey militants. The latter desired to replace the “good news” of the sacred community with the “new news” introduced by neo-Christianity desiring to institute a secular order on behalf of the ruling princes. The death of Basil (by burning) in a pit of fire at the Hippodrome of what is now Istanbul can be seen as a Western inspired  change of order using the disciplinary device of expulsion, death, which excludes by causing a loss of memory.

Basil, like Quadafi of Libia, stood in the way of the ambitions of the West. He was put to death by fire, which turns the human body into ashes, which are then scattered over the landscape to be forgotten for lack of a place to build a memorial. This exemplifies the methods used to introduce what this writer calls 'The Order of the Closed Circle', the rule of the letter of the Law over the spirit of justice.

The “letter of the Law”, incidentally, lends itself readily to institutionalized and bureaucratic paraidolia, generally exercised by a “Supreme Court”, which has a self-instigated and self-applied legal right to reinterpret that famous phrase of the Nazis: “Arbeit Macht Frei” (Work Makes Free) into “Disciplin Macht Frei”, not to forget that “Zuchthaus (prison) Macht Frei”, which brings us to the notion that “Arbeit, Disciplin, and Zucthaus macht Frei” all who want a job, but cannot it, because prison labor 'jobs' are free, prisoners need not be paid, and hence you freer than ever.

Today there is no wood to escape to. While King Goldenlocks may still be alive (because his son is alive) their father and grandfather, the Kings of the Wood are dead and forgotten.


THE END OF TIMES BEGET NEW TIMES

Strange as it may seem, though the King of the Wood and his son the pig herd are dead, the wild hogs of the wood are not gone yet. On a small piece of land that I own in the Latvian countryside, there is a small damp depression in the midst of lumps of grass, where I see the wild pigs come and dig themselves a ditch and then come and wallow in the mud.

These are the reserve forces that someday I/we will unleash against the mind and body control police, and force the maxi-farmers to surrender their fields of agriculture, which they not to share, but make profit from. No hunting (policing) of wild pigs and hogs will be permitted on whatever a ‘new’ law defines to be a maxi-farm.

Remember the saying of the so-called "Peaceniks", who used the slogan: "Make Love, not War" when confronting the militarists? We may rewrite the saying and make it read:

Hunters! Do not pull the trigger on wild hogs. It is more fun to let the love of your life zip open your pocket and stroke the trigger that makes you come alive.”