SJW Classic

 

A link to a SJW classic from 2016, apparently seriously intended. Here is a sample:

>>>After we published the review, we heard from Latinx readers who believe the portrayal of Salma Hayek’s taco was racist and that it reinforced harmful stereotypes. We heard from readers who were upset that we labeled the taco a lesbian when it seems more likely that she was bisexual. We heard from readers who questioned the consent of the sexual encounter between the taco and the hot dog bun. We heard from readers who found the taco to be a damaging portrayal of a predatory queer woman.>>> 

>>>I want to personally apologize to every reader who was hurt by the Sausage Party review. I failed you as a senior editor of this website and I failed you as an ally. I am wholly sorry for the pain and anger I caused you. I offer you no justification. I was blinded by my own whiteness existing inside a system of white supremacy. I must do better. I will do better.>>>

Almost 100 years after the New Deal, this is the new base of the Democratic Party. It is also the new face of the left. Yes, you did *indeed* mess up, that´s true!

"We messed up"

The myth of the noble moa

 

"Environmental Histories of New Zealand" is a collection of articles published in 2002, edited by Eric Pawson and Tom Brooking. I read two of them, "A Fragile Plenty: Pre-European Maori and the New Zealand Environment" by Atholl Anderson and "Contesting Resources: Maori, Pakeha, and a Tenurial Revolution" by Evelyn Stokes. Both contain a welter of evidence against the myth of the noble savage, the idea that Natives look like the aliens in "Avatar", live in fundamental harmony with Nature, are "natural conservationists", etc. 

Anderson´s article carefully argues that the Maori settled New Zealand between 600 and 800 years ago. No other humans had settled on the islands before that time. The theory that the species extinctions in New Zealand were caused by rats introduced by earlier temporary visitors is discarded. Maori and rats arrived together (so did dogs). Nor is climate change the cause. Many archeological sites confirm that the Maori heavily hunted the local animals for food. They also show that the initial Maori settlers were drawn to the "leeward province" (southern North Island plus eastern South Island), where large game was most abundant, including 12 species of flightless moa birds, large flightless geese and an abundance of seals and sea lions. In just a couple of centuries, many of these unique species had gone extinct - extirpated by the noble savages. 40 species of birds, a bat, three to five species of frogs, and an unknown amount of lizard taxa had been exterminated. Apart from hunting or egg-collecting, burning of forests and the introduction of rats were factors in the extinctions. The giant Haast´s eagle, which preyed on moas, went extinct when the Maori had killed its prey. Other animals were decimated, but not driven to exinction. This includes the New Zealand fur seal, the sea lion and the peculiar reptile known as tuatara. The animals had conservative life histories, moas only laying one or two eggs at the time, seals bearing a single pup. Flightlessness, ground nesting and diurnal habits made the moas tempting targets for hunting expeditions. 

The Maori also burned forests to clear the ground for settlement, horticulture and perhaps easier travel. Most NZ trees and shrubs are not evolutionary adapted to widespread fires, and therefore die outright if their habitat is torched. In place of forests, fernland and grassland grows instead. Forests were almost eliminated in the eastern part of South Island in a relatively brief period from 1300 to 1450. That the forests were largely devoid of food resources for humans is one reason why the Maori weren´t particularly interested in "conserving" it. 

Only after the leeward province had been stripped of its large game, did the Maori develop something akin to conservation - after first moving into the windward province (which comprises the western part of South Island and most of the North Island). The author says relatively little about this, but it seems the system was based on increasing territoriality and the building of forts, with exploitation of local plant resources being regulated by the territorial chiefs. In other words, a purely pragmatic strategy, not an example of "deep green spirituality". (Even later, population growth and constant wars propelled a return migration of some groups into the leeward province.)

Evelyn Stokes tries to sound more politically correct in her article, but she can´t hide the fact that the Maori voluntarily and swiftly integrated themselves into the new trading networks established by the White colonialists in the Pacific region. Pigs, potatoes and sweet potatoes were introduced late in the 18th century or early in the 19th ditto, even before Whites actually settled on the islands. The Maori soon traded with pigs, potatoes, fish, flax, kauri spars and timber. The Europeans were often dependent on Maori aid and labor to extract the resources sought after. Whaling was another important activity. Indeed, the crews of British whaling ships in the region were often Maori. Nor were the Maori particularly insular. Maori who worked onboard ships found their way to Sydney or even London, learned English and returned home with new experiences. Maori chiefs, who at this point still controlled New Zealand, allowed Whites to settle and marry Native women as a way to build alliances. And yes, the Maori bought firearms for the gold coins used as payment for their exports... 

The story ends with New Zealand becoming a British colony and the Maori being swindled out of their land. So I suppose the rest of the book deals with "Pakeha" (White European) environmental destruction...

None of the above means that the Polynesians were particularly "immoral". Rather, they were like everyone else. Humans hunt for food, expand their populations, wage wars and (gasp) trade in potatoes. That´s simply how our species evolved. But sure, I suppose some stray moa in the New Zealand highlands might have a different perspective on *that*...  

Veckans Strasser

Det populäraste inslaget på bloggen är tillbaka, här med ett meta-politiskt intressant försök att analysera "gentrifiering". Jag tror att skribenten missar en viktig aspekt: den privilegierade vita medelklassen bryr sig inte om invandrarna alls, så "anti-rasismen" är hyckleri. De vill däremot väldigt gärna ha gratis arbetskraft, så länge den är bosatt i segregerade områden... 

 Motsättningar i regnbågsalliansen: gentrifiering

Planet Venus strikes again

Somebody asked about the William Gill UFO case at Quora and got some interesting responses. The best are the ones at the top of the thread, from Kaiser Tarafdar and Donald Soryu. 

The Gill & Co "close encounter" with a UFO took place at New Guinea in 1959 and is still considered one of the classical UFO observations. It´s also one of my favorites. 

It *is* hard to explain away, although the skeptics sure tried! Myopia, the planet Venus and a fisherboat are some of the proposals. Or was it Jupiter, Saturn *and* Venus that had been mistaken for a *flying saucer shaped craft with four humanoids on board, waving in response to the observers below*. 

I´m pretty near-sighted myself, but I *think* I could tell the difference...   

The William Gill UFO case

The Space Brothers never left

 

The clip above is from Aaron Abke´s channel (pun unintended) about the Law of One, which I have commented upon before. It was posted the other day.

My take on the so-called Ra Material is that we´re dealing with a form of Theosophy (minus the Aryan root-race) combined with flim flam popular among New Age believers (think ACIM, 2012 or indigo children) *and* a kind of George Adamski retro. 

I admit a certain fascination with the last aspect of the material. I assumed that the contactee phenomenon was more dead than an intergalactic dodo, and yet here we go! The Law of One was originally channeled during the 1980´s, but it seems more popular than ever, despite the "old fashioned" UFO contact angle. 

Like in other Theosophy-derived material, the distinction between spiritual angelic beings and material UFO occupants is hazy, the two somehow being the same. Both "positive" and "negative" aliens are said to exist, with the former predominating (about 90%). The explanation for why they don´t just land on the White House lawn is surprisingly sophisticated and metaphysical. It turns out that both sets of aliens need our free will to further their own evolution ("polarize"). This also explains why so many of them come to Earth, making our little planet look like a cosmic autostrada. Presumably, free will planets are relatively rare in the universe. 

In this scenario, the solution to Fermi´s paradox is therefore that the aliens are already here, but generally chose not to show themselves. 

Otherwise, I must say that Abke is extremely well spoken and looks like a generally nice guy, which I suppose makes him something of an "alien presence" in this particular milieu.

Personally, I admit that I don´t believe in aliens, but the idea of benign Space Brothers overseeing the evolution of our higher selves is one of the more sympathetic notions coming out of the somewhat unruly UFO-logical subculture. Almost makes me nostalgic... 

Who´s next, I wonder?

 

They changed something in the Matrix...

The moment Donald Trump left office (or rather when impeachment number two failed), it suddenly became OK to attack all the heroes of the resistance. 

So far, Andrew Cuomo, John Weaver and Hunter Biden have been exposed. Of course, if you pay attention to alt-media, you knew everything already *before* the elections... 

How ironic. I wonder who´s next? 

Note also that France and Germany are essentially giving Biden the middle finger, and nobody (with the possible exception of BoJo, the Little England PM) is particularly scared of him. Something tells me they will be even less impressed by Kamala Harris!

Note finally that Donald Trump, even after the 6 January LARP coup, still has the support of a substantial number of Republican voters.

This is not what was supposed to happen. And yet, here we are. The "normalization" might turn out to be very, very interesting indeed. 

Swedish imperial over-reach?

"Stormakten växer fram" (The Great Power Arises) is a short book by Swedish history professor and popularizer-in-chief Dick Harrison, published in 2020. The contents overlap with two other Harrison specials, "Drottning Kristina" and "Ett stort lidande har kommit över oss". The book deals with Sweden´s remarkable rise from peripheral kingdom in the far north of Europe to a regional great power with interests in both northern and central Europe. This period (circa 1600 to 1718) is known as the "Great Power Period" in Swedish history writing, and is mostly associated with two warrior-kings, Gustavus Adophus (Gustav II Adolf) who intervened in the Thirty Year War, and Charles XII (Karl XII) who fought in the Great Northern War. Harrison´s book deals mostly with the former, since it concentrates on the rise and zenith of Swedish power during the 17th century. There are also chapters on Charles IX (Karl IX) and Charles X Gustav (Karl X Gustav). Unsurprisingly, a large portion of "Stormakten växer fram" deals with the Swedish intervention in Germany, Bohemia and Moravia during the Thirty Year War. 

Harrison begins the story with a thorough character assasination of Charles IX (who ruled Sweden from 1599 to 1611), clearly not one of the author´s favorites! Duke Charles became regent and later king by overthrowing his nephew, Sigismund (Zygmunt Waza) who was king of both Sweden and Poland. Since Sigismund was a Catholic (Sweden was Lutheran) and associated with the high nobility, Charles could appeal to the clergy, burghers and peasants to overthrow him. This was simply a clever manouevre. Harrison regards Charles IX as a brutal dictator, perhaps even a paranoiac and sociopath, before whom nobody was safe. His foreign policy was scarcely any better. When the king died, he had "succeeded" in making enemies of essentially all Sweden´s neighbors: Poland, Russia and Denmark-Norway. The defeats against the Polish and the Danes were particularly humiliating. The Swedish army was no match for the Polish Hussars, and after the defeat against Denmark, Sweden was forced to pay a huge ransom to get back certain occupied territories. Ironically, however, it was precisely these defeats that made Sweden - or rather the new Swedish rulers - motivated to reform the political, military and fiscal system from top to bottom. Under the new king, the legendary Gustavus Adolphus, Sweden became the most militarized state in Europe. "Sweden wasn´t a nation with an army, but an army with a nation". Essentially everything was subordinated to the demands of war. The swift mercantilist economic development of Sweden during this period (made possible by skilled immigrants from Wallonia and the Netherlands) was really a way to collect new revenues for the military. A highly centralized state apparatus collected exorbitant taxes, drafted soldiers and carried out intrusive censuses of the population. The Church of Sweden, which had priests in every village, functioned as a de facto part of the state machinery. Meanwhile, the Swedish army was modernized and adopted battle tactics that were relatively new in Europe at the time. The Sweden of the Great Power Period became a kind of early modern state par excellence. 

Harrison marvels over the fact that no peasant rebellions took place in Sweden during the period in question. In the rest of Europe, civil wars and popular rebellions were common during the 17th century. They had been common in Sweden, too, during the 16th century. Despite the severe hardships imposed on the peasantry, Sweden became a nation of obedient soldiers and tax-payers. Why? While I don´t think there is any simple explanation, Harrison does point to a few factors. One was that the Swedish peasantry had their own representatives in the Diet or Parliament. They also had an amount of local self-government through the "socknar" (a kind of parish councils doubling as secular local councils). While the peasantry didn´t have any *real* influence over the course of national politics, the system thus had "safety valves" which permitted the peasants to at least voice their grievances. In most European polities, peasants had exactly zero possibility to do this. Another factor is that Gustavus Adolphus (perhaps reluctantly) agreed to share power with the nobility. This created political stability. It was also a welcome contrast to the arbitrary rule of Charles IX. Finally, there were personality issues which made the Swedish administration run smoothly. The king´s chief minister Axel Oxenstierna was extremely competent at everything from grand strategic designs to micro-management, and although he and Gustavus were polar opposites on a purely personal level, they nevertheless agreed to work together as a team. Oxenstierna was considered one of the greatest European statesmen by his contemporaries. 

This unprecedented mobilization of resources turned Sweden - one of the smallest kingdoms in Europe in terms of population - into a feared military adversary in just a few decades. Another factor should also be mentioned. During the Thirty Year War, Catholic France paid enormous subsidies to Lutheran Sweden to keep the Swedish military operations going. The reasons were pure Realpolitik: France was encircled by the equally Catholic Habsburgs, who ruled both Germany, Italy, Spain and the area today known as Belgium. An anti-Habsburg alliance with the "heretical" Swedes was pure common sense for the likes of Cardinal Richelieu. Of course, Sweden wouldn´t be of interest to one of Europe´s true great powers without the previously mentioned mobilizations.

While all this is impressive, in a sense, the end results are not. Sweden lost one third of its male population to war during the period 1618-1718. The Thirty Year War, in which Sweden played such a crucial role, devastated Germany as foreign and domestic armies systematically plundered and killed the civilian population en masse. Poland didn´t fear any better when Karl X Gustav decided to devastate that nation. Of course, Sweden´s enemies were just as bad - these were bad times. One thing that struck me when reading Harrison´s account of the Thirty Year War in particular was the opportunism of many of the involved parties. Whatever the Thirty Year War may have been, it certainly wasn´t a "war of religion"! Many Protestant princes didn´t want Swedish "aid", both Protestant and Catholic polities switched sides on a semi-regular basis depending on who had the upper hand in the war (but somehow forgot to switch their religion in the process) and Gustavus Adolphus (hailed as "the Lion of the North" by some German Protestants) had to allow Catholics freedom of worship in order to get those French subsidies... 

The last chapter of "Stormakten växer fram" deals with Sweden´s colonial adventures in North America and West Africa. Sweden is sometimes portrayed as a downright incompetent colonial nation (or even as somehow benign), but judging by Harrison´s description, the problem was rather that Sweden´s attempts at colonial expansion were nipped in the bud by stronger competitors.  There was nothing inherently bad with the Swedish plans, per se. In West Africa, the Swedes built a trading fortress called Carolusburg at the Gold Coast and found a suitable market for slave export at Sao Tomé. It was even possible to export slaves to the Carribean, but before the expansion could begin in earnest, the Swedish Africa Company was betrayed by its former superintendent, Heinrich Carlof, who entered Danish service and started attacking the outposts of his former employers. I´m not sure if the fate of New Sweden in North America illustrates the author´s thesis, though. He admits that Sweden seldom sent ships with food, guns and reinforcements to its North American colony, and I assume the low population of Sweden made it difficult to find prospective settlers for an overseas venture. I suppose you *could* call this incompetence, or at least an original form of imperial over-reach!

And speaking of imperial over-reach, Sweden eventually lost its great power status, but that´s another book (also by Dick Harrison). 

Confessions

 

[The following is a translation of something I posted in Swedish last year. It´s essentially an expanded version of "Infinite possibilities", hence the rather obvious similarities and repetitions.] 

I considered myself a materialist until about the mid-00´s. However, I realized later that my "materialism" was really a form of teleological crypto-pantheism, so cryptic that I hardly understood it myself. If one believes that the entire universe has some kind of meaning or goal that´s hidden as a potential already in the primordial state and then unfolds itself in history, one isn´t really a materialist. 

During a short period (about a year maybe) I actually tried to be a consistent materialist. It didn´t really work. I mostly made me feel depressed. Eventually, I left materialism behind. There were several reasons for this. I suppose one was psychological. Materialism makes existence meaningless. Another reason could be termed philosophical. I believed very strongly in an objective morality, but how can you justify it without reference to some form of transcendental principle? I also realized that in principle it doesn´t seem possible to reduce consciousness to matter. Two books that influenced me were "The Mysterious Flame" by Colin McGinn and "The Mystery of Consciousness" by John Searle. Ironically enough, both authors are materialists!

Another thing that made me think were near-death experiences (NDEs). I think I first heard about them already during the 90´s. I was perplexed. There didn´t seem to be any obvious materialist explanation. But since I considered myself a materialist, I put them aside anyway. Later, NDEs became one of the strongest signs that there really is a spiritual or supernatural sphere of existence.

I didn´t have any clear alternative to materialism, but my thoughts pointed in the direction of dualism, perhaps even deism. During one period, I was sympathic towards, and interested in, Christianity. It has certain beliefs which I considered interesting: a personal god, anthropocentrism, the notion that the world is "fallen" and thus isn´t supposed to look like it does now, the notion that evil is a real power and hence not an illusion or something purely chaotic, and the (so to speak) populist view of salvation. Among other things!

I don´t understand the attraction of pantheism. It seems to be a kind of spiritualized materialism. What´s the *point* with breaking with materialism and atheism, if evil is inevitable anyway, illusory or said to come from God, a god that is suspiciously similar to man´s Freudian subconscious? I will probably never understand this. 

So why didn´t I become a Christian? C S Lewis said, jokingly, that a few years before his conversion he had accepted "all of Christianity except for the Christianity". Something similar can be said about me. The problem is the Bible. It doesn´t seem completely...real. What I have considered to be the main problem has varied over the years. At the moment, I suppose its the apocalyptic. It´s very clear from many NT books that the apostles expected the second coming of Jesus very soon, and Jesus himself is said to have made explicit pronouncements in that direction. 

But he didn´t come back. This is extremely strange, if you take the Bible seriously. Jesus is said to have been the Son of God, he is said to have taught the disciples for 40 days after the resurrection, and Paul had regular supernatural contact with both Christ and the Holy Ghost. John even got a direct revelation about what would soon come to pass. Isn´t it strange that *all* these people so *completely* misunderstood Jesus? No, I don´t think so. 

Primitive Christianity is, as far as we can tell, a failed apocalyptic sect... 

I know of course that there are alternative interpretations, but I don´t see any of them as particularly convincing. Some try to allegorize the second coming of Christ ("apocalypse of the heart"), but that´s scarcely possible. Surely it´s supposed to be interpreted literally. And that makes the Platonizing and Gnostic versions of Christianity problematic, as well. 

If Christianity isn´t true on a very central point, what then is the alternative?

I have no "alternative" to materialism or Christianity, but I have began to suspect that such may be very far away from our standard worldviews. Is it really so certain that there is only *one* true religion, or that "all religions are true since they all lead to the same goal"? Here is a radical thought: all religions are true although they lead to different goals! The only way to make the existence of the supernatural plausible isn through supernatural experiences, but these seem to confirm all religions and religious notions: animism, pantheism, polytheism, monotheism. Both personal transcendent creator-gods, impersonal world-souls and personal but limited spirit-beings show up before our eyes. What if they are all true? Or what if they are all...false? Astral mirages... 

It just struck me that people see demons, too!

Could one claim in some way that some of these religions are, despite everything, "higher" and hence more true than the others? To Christians, it´s self-evident that Christianity is highest. After all, it promises individual immortality (including the resurrection of the body), and talks about a personal god which even loves the sinners. Evil is completely destroyed and the world made new. But what is there *really* to say that this is the highest possible religion? Why isn´t it higher to merge with Brahman and become one with the cosmic consciousness? Why must my personality absolutely be preserved? Why must I have a body? Doesn´t this imply limitation? 

Anthropocentrism, too, can be questioned. Why should man play a central role in an infinitely spiritual and material cosmos? If there is a drama of salvation pertaining to us, it *only* pertains to us. Not to the Martians, Neandertals or Gaia as a whole. Sometimes I wonder if we are so far down the great chain of being that we simply cannot understand the divine. That would explain a thing or two!

Infinite possibilities (again)

[This was originally posted on Oct 27, 2019, but I feel like reposting it here. Take it for what it´s worth]

Some stray thoughts about religion and similar topics…

I used to be a materialist for decades, but realized around 2005 that metaphysical materialism, especially in a reductionist form, simply doesn´t make any sense. I think I “broke” with materialism (as in “rage quit” – just kidding!) for three reasons.

First, I came to the conclusion that I never *really* been a materialist in the first place, my purported materialism really being a species of evolutionary and teleological pantheism. I was never a Hegelian (I mean, who is?) but Hegel is actually the best comparison I can come up with. I tried for a brief period to be a real hardened materialism, but it mostly made me feel depressed!

Second, I realized that science haven´t solved the mind-body problem, indeed it seems impossible to solve even in principle if materialism is assumed. The books that influenced me most were “The Mysterious Flame” by Colin McGinn and “The Mystery of Consciousness” by John Searle. Ironically, both authors are materialists. I also studied Alfred North Whitehead´s philosophy through the prism of David Ray Griffin. Postulating dualism, panpsychism or a combination of both seems to have more explanatory power than trying to reduce everything to brute matter.

Third, I believed very strongly at the time in an objective morality. The only way to explain and justify such moral principles seemed to be to assume that they were eternal. But how can a non-material “thing” be eternal? The only explanation is that it´s really a Platonic form. Perhaps a Platonic form in the mind of God…? I think I may have been subconsciously influenced by C S Lewis here. This led me to a kind of Deism or perhaps Theism-in-General, although I can´t say I was particularly “religious”. In fact, I wasn´t religious at all (still am not), rather, my Deism-Theism was a kind of philosophical position.

During a period, I was relatively sympathetic to Christianity. It must have shown, since I was sometimes mistaken for a Christian on Amazon! The reasons for my pro-Christian sympathies were complex, and only a few will be mentioned here. First, I had developed a strong aversion to pantheism and the idea of an impersonal god. I think the reason is that pantheism (and panpsychism) strikes me as too close to materialism, the “faith” I had abandoned. Christianity, by contrast, has a personal god. Indeed, he is so personal that he has incarnated as a human! Second, I had also developed an aversion to the idea that evil is either an illusion or in some sense “good”. Interestingly, pantheists often make either or both of these claims. Christianity isn´t entirely consistent in its view of evil, but at least it doesn´t deny its existence. Third, I reacted against the claim that the physical world is necessarily imperfect. This sounds absurd – surely a perfect god should be able to create a perfect world? If he can´t, he´s not perfect, and if he doesn´t although he can, *he* is the creator of evil. Why worship such a god? In Christianity, the world and/or humanity and/or human souls are seen as fallen from a previously perfect state. Pantheists simply worship the fallen world…

However, there are also problems with Christianity. I´m almost tempted to say that the biggest problem with it is the Bible! And I don´t mean Cain´s wife - the good book actually *does* explain where she came from. (Yes, really.) What I perceived as the biggest “Bible difficulty” has varied over the years, but currently, it´s the cock sure predictions that Jesus would return during the lifetime of the apostles. Which he obviously didn´t. Paul believed this, the authors of Mark and Matthew believed it, too. The author of Luke and Acts didn´t, rewriting the Olivet Discourse in the process. If we accept the usual date of Revelation, another bout of imminent apocalypticism shook the Church under the reign of Emperor Domitian. 

None of this makes sense if you tentatively accept the Christian position on things. Jesus supposedly remained on Earth for 40 days after his resurrection, teaching the apostles. Why did they misunderstand his teaching about the Second Coming? Then, he sent the Holy Ghost to lead the apostles. Once again, why didn´t the Spirit tell them that “one thousand years is like one day to the Lord” until generations later? Was Christianity a failed apocalyptic sect? Or did the disciples completely misunderstand the message of the Christ? Perhaps they did, but if so, the veracity of the New Testament can be questioned, these scriptures simply being the work of humans, although perhaps highly spiritual ones.

At the moment, I´m not sure where I stand on these issues. Except that I´m not a materialist, and probably not a pantheist sensu stricto. But then, in a way this opens up infinite possibilities…

Och Jesus kommer alltså inte tillbaka

 

Fler dåliga nyheter...

Golfströmmen kan stanna helt

When privatization aint fun no more

This wasn´t what the neo-liberal privatization craze á la Maggie Thatcher was supposed to lead to, well, you live and you learn.

Here´s an idea. Let´s make a deal with "Red" China. One: Bring the jobs back. Two: Let the ChiComs take our schools. They should definitely try this approach in the United States...

Also, note the connection with the COVID pandemic! Why isn´t the UK government paying the schools instead?  

China is buying British schools

I just felt like posting this today

 

The Masters of the Universe

Look who´s trying to lecture us on "disinformation"...

Facebook bans criticism of the COVID vaccines, but in private, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg is worried about the effects of DNA or RNA vaccines.

This hypocrisy is so expected that I hardly even give a damn. But sure, I suppose it *could* be good to know. Facebook and the other tech giants are going down anyway, although it remains to be seen if the new nation-state regulated versions of the web are really any better...

As for the COVID vaccines, I don´t have any well informed opinion either way, but I somehow don´t think a Big Tech CEO or a Big Pharma boy are beyond criticism on such topics, especially since the vaccines in question has been developed faster than usual, and one of them is of an entirely new type. It´s exactly in situations like this that we *do* need free speech! Can I at least criticize the Russian COVID vaccine on FB...?

Zucc is worried about COVID vaccines

Official optimism

 

"Aniara" is a Swedish film first released in 2019. A version with English titles does exist. The film is freely based on Harry Martinsson´s epic poem "Aniara" from 1956, which I have reviewed previously. Martinsson´s pessimistic story about a rescue mission forever lost in space actually rendered the author a Nobel literature prize. Adapting a modern epic poem for the blue screen is presumably a hard bargain, and the 2019 film will probably be neither better nor worse than any other attempt. A working knowledge of the book *might* be a good idea to really understand the plot (the little there is of such).

"Aniara" is more about moods and atmosphere than actual plot or character development. In the film, the space ship Aniara looks like a leisure cruise, and most of the passangers are pretty well off, making the disaster that forces it off course more potent than in Martinsson´s poem, where we learn relatively early that literally everything is in apocalyptic decline, not just Earth but also the Mars colony which is Aniara´s intended destination. (The film reveals in only one line that the good life on Mars is just a lie.) 

The rest of the film is spent watching the crew and passangers slowly descend into madness. It´s difficult to make the "story" go on and on for over one hour and a half, and I was frankly bored after a while. The coping mechanisms of the people onboard Aniara turns out to be everything from religion and disco dancing to bizarre sexual orgies. (In the film, but not in the original, two of the lead characters have a lesbian relationship.) The ship´s captain, a virtual paragon of official crank optimism, does his best to keep everyone´s spirit up, while secretly cutting himself. I couldn´t help thinking of some "our" politicians and their press conferences during the recent COVID pandemic... 

Martinsson´s original story was a criticism of the human condition from a kind of pessimistic-existentialist-Buddhist perspective. The space ship Aniara is really a metaphor for humanity, a humanity "off course" towards a certain death in the cosmic night. To Martinsson, nuclear war, overpopulation and totalitarianism were the main dangers. A central part of the story is "Miman", an intelligent computer. In the original epic, Miman has the ability to communicate literally all knowledge in the universe and is worshipped as a god, yet this doesn´t help anyone on the lost ship - presumably a criticism of our science, philosophy and religion. In the film, Miman is more of a pure brainwashing device. In both versions, the sentient machine eventually realizes that humanity is irreparably depraved, and self-destructs! In general, the existential speculations of Martinsson have been played down in the film, and the author´s weird Neo-Swedish or Newspeak is also kept down to a minimum. 

"Aniara" (the movie) ends with the ship finally reaching a habitable Earth-like planet in the constellation of Lyra, but after 4 million years, everyone onboard is long dead. 

There the story ends, and we are left stranded (still on Earth) to mull over the implications... 

Damnatio memoriae

How is this different from a "damnatio memoriae"? Batshit crazy, I say! 

Democrats propose to damn Trump´s memory

ANTI-biologisk krigföring?

Lägg märke till erkännandet i sista stycket: det ryska vaccinet...fungerar faktiskt?! 

Putin och Xi har fått ett nytt vapen

Leon Trotsky y Wall Street

"Irreversible Damage: Teenage Girls and the Transgender Craze" is a book by Abigail Shrier, a writer for the Wall Street Journal. The book speaks for itself and although I didn´t like its style (too much teenage angst - from a grown up woman - and too many Jewish cultural references), I nevertheless recommend everyone to read it. I knew some kind of weird transgender craze was going on, but clearly I didn´t know half of it! 

Until about ten years ago, the number of people with gender dysphoria (then usually referred to as transsexuals) was about 0.01% of the population. Most were male, and most had been gender dysphoric since childhood. Today, by contrast, transgendered people are literally everywhere, most of them are girls (a unique situation historically) and the gender dysphoria usually starts suddenly, with no prior history, in adolescence. In just a few years, the number of teenage girls with supposed gender dysphoria has risen by astronomical numbers. This in itself is highly anomalous - unless we assume (as the author does assume) that we´re dealing with a "social contagion". Or, to use stronger language not found in this book, a mass hysteria. 

Other factors compound our skepticism. Very often, girls "come out" as the opposite gender in clusters. Peers come out together. Virtually always, the "rapid onset gender dysphoria" (ROGD) is the result of contact with trans-activists on the web. Most girls claiming to be transgendered seem to share a similar profile: White, upper middle class parents, academically gifted, socially awkward or depressed, both the adolescent and the parents have "progressive" political views. Transgenderism seems to be a woke virus. If the phenomenon is really real, it should be distributed more evenly in the population (like homosexuality or bisexuality). Instead, it clusters in precisely the places were political sympathy for the ROGD phenomenon is strongest. Note also the curious fact that the phenomenon seems to have originated on the American West Coast, and then spread gradually to the rest of the United States, Canada and Western Europe. It seems to be largely unknown in, say, Hungary or Baluchistan. 

And speaking of that political sympathy...

California has enacted laws threatening health workers with jail time if they don´t use the "preferred pronouns" of their patients. New York State has gone even further, extending a similar law to cover landlords and employers. Over a dozen US state has prohibited "conversion therapy for transgendered individuals", making it effectively illegal for therapists to question the "gender identity" of their patients. But then, most therapists don´t even try. They are really activists, aiding and abetting the "transitioning" of teenagers. The same is true of doctors and surgeons dealing with gender dysphoria issues. In California, 13-year olds have the "right" to transition through hormonal and surgical interventions. In many states, college students can get testosterone without a prescription. The colleges and universities themselves simply sell them! "Obamacare" (the Affordable Care Act) makes it possible to obtain testosterone cheaply. The teachers are in on it, too. Many schools in the US have compulsory "sex and gender identity education" that are really trans-propaganda. This is true of both public and private schools. Many schools refer to the students by their "preferred pronouns" without even informing the parents. And yes, women´s sports are under attack, since mediocre male-to-female trans-persons can compete as women and win medals, destroying the careers of female athletes in the process. Clearly, it's not just the bathrooms! 

This is the most disturbing aspect of the phenomenon: the anti-feminist angle, dressed in "progressive" garb. It´s no longer OK to be a girl. You get higher status if you transition to a boy. If you do "typically boyish things", you *must be* a boy, rather than a girl excelling at previously all-male territory. Conversely, boys who transition to girls can now invade female spaces (such as women´s sports). In some schools, nobody identifies as a lesbian anymore, while every other girl claims to be a boy! The whole thing reminds me of how leftists genuflect before Islam and Islamism, two other patriarchal worldviews. It seems feminism is always the loser in the rainbow alliance. (It´s almost as if the feminists are right: yes, there really is a patriarchy!)

Critics are of course silenced. Therapists who question the transgender craze are fired from their jobs, teens who de-transitioned are cancelled from social forums for "hate speech", celebs might lose their sponsors, etc. I wouldn´t be surprised if Abigail Shrier´s book will be cancelled further down the line. The transgender milieu itself seems to be a fanaticized social cult. Yet, the hard facts speak against the transgender ideology. There is no evidence that suicide rates go down if teenagers or young adults "transition" through hormones or surgery. If anything, the opposite seems to be the case. Many live to regret their decisions (which may include surgically removing their breasts). 70% of gender dysphoric children outgrow their gender dysphoria if *no* intervention is made, while 100% of those on puberty blockers will start taking cross-sex hormones. (Yes, pre-pubescent girls are allowed to take puberty blockers!) This is once again different from homosexuality, which is usually set in stone, regardless of whether or not there is an attempt to stop it. However, evidence means nothing to the activists, who are rushing headlong into a disaster. 

Why has transgenderism been so succesful, while other strange subcultures on the web have remained marginalized? Shrier never discusses this problem, but it did struck me when reading her book. Why are Otherkin (adolescents claiming to be animals and hence suffering from "species dysmorphia"), Tulpamancers (ditto claiming that their imaginary friends are real) or Plural Systems (ditto claiming to be more than one person inhabiting the same body) not "affirmed" in the same manner as transgendered individuals? My guess is that the neo-trans-people have succesfully piggybacked on the gay rights movement (the current acronym is LGBTQ, after all). In the process, they have all but obliterated the "L" and will probably turn on the "G" soon enough, too. (Not to mention the original transsexuals.) However, something even more sinister might be going on.

Shrier never discusses the role of Big Pharma in the equation. Indeed, it seems to be a kind of elephant in the room. Of course it is: Shrier is an opinion writer for the Wall Street Journal. Just as Big Pharma was prescribing opiates for any conceivable depression, leading to the opiate crisis, *somebody* must be making big bucks on all the "T" (testosterone), other hormones, surgical interventions, and hours spent in "affirming" therapy. Let me guess. Big Pharma meets Big Shrink? The whole thing is a capitalist venture, to some extent even paid for by the tax-payers, with equally disastrous results as the opiate crisis. The "progressives" have been hoodwinked by Woke Capital. Not the first time! Yet, Shrier is more interested in confiscating kids´ android phones, than with wrestling this elephant... 

There is another thing, too, which struck me as odd about "Irreversible Damage". When all is said and done, I think it´s obvious that the teens with ROGD really are deeply depressed. *That* part of the equation is real. Yet, the words "autism spectrum disorder", "Asperger´s" or "ADHD/ADD" doesn´t seem to be anywhere in the book. But surely *this* is a large portion of the explanation? The profile of the typical ROGD sufferer seems to fit the autism spectrum: a socially awkward "nerd". Transgenderism is the weird coping mechanism of these kids in the hypocritical, popularity-obsessed, perfection-obsessed "liberal" upper middle class American milieu. Presumably, other teens with autism spectrum disorders and similar conditions cope in other ways, perhaps by becoming Alt Right trolls, turning autism into another "identity" or, ahem, by actually doing something real about their situation. 

It will be, shall we say, interesting to see how this will end. For end it will. Will the transgender craze be stopped cold by the American people, perhaps after trying to destroy women´s sports? Will people who were brainwashed into "transitioning" by the cult sue their therapists ten years from now? Or is the craze too deeply ingrained in the collective psyche, making the only "solution" a terrible backlash in 25 years or so? A backlash that will affect victim and perpetrator equally, and also spread to gays, lesbians and transsexuals, who have little or nothing in common with the ROGD teens?

One thing is certain. This moment in time will be remembered as another example of "extraordinary popular delusions and the madness of crowds".  

Dåliga nyheter

Kampen mot klimatförändringarna går visst inte så bra... 

Global uppvärmning skapar jättehål i Sibirien

Kina byggde ett nytt kolkraftverk i veckan 2020

Farfarout

Solsystemets mest avlägsna objekt

Solsystemets mest avlägsna objekt har lokaliserats, och fått det provisoriska namnet Farfarout. Det objekt man tidigare trodde var mest avlägset heter förstås Farout.

Omloppstid runt solen? Runt 1000 år! Kan bli svårt att använda i födelsehoroskop, med andra ord... 

:-D

 

Medan världen brinner

 

"Rasismdebatten" på Konstfack

Det verkar som att den där amerikanska sekten har kommit till Sverige... 

Tyvärr har Aftonbladet låst sin artikel om den bisarra "debatten" på Konstfack om mötessalen Vita Havet. Den var faktiskt mer kritisk än den här "objektiva" svadan. 

Det senaste är att den "rasistiska" professorn anmält uppropet mot henne (som skrivits under av 44 sektmedlemmar) till facket som arbetsmiljöärende.

Vita Havet-dumheterna debatteras just nu på alla kultursidor. Fast vi vet ju redan hur det här kommer att sluta, eller hur?

Professorn kommer förstås att få sparken. Och sedan kommer de privilegierade kidsen (som tydligen inte har något annat att göra) att gå vidare med kulturrevolutionen... 

Vi får se när sekten lyckas infiltrera DN och anklagar Wolodarski för att vara vit, man och jude. Då kan det bli riktigt intressant!

Eller?

PS. Enligt AB finns det två mötessalar på Konstfack som kallas "hav". De heter Vita Havet och...Svarta Havet. Två helt normala geografiska namn. But whatever. 

The Law of Ra

The Law of One seems to be a popular topic for discussion right now at the more alternative end of the New Age spectrum. Ostensibly a channeled communication from a "social memory complex" known simply as "Ra", the Law of One is really a form of Theosophy, although I´m unsure about the exact lineage. Alice Bailey? Dion Fortune? 

While the Aryans have been quietly dispensed with, much else in the "Ra material" is still recognizably Theosophical. The "octaves" and "densities" are the globes, rounds and root-races (but without the Aryan aspect), the "wanderers" are the Ascended Masters, entire planets are said to slowly evolve into higher dimensions, and Ra himself (or themselves) is an alien from Venus. Chakras and rays in all the colors of the rainbow are part of the teachings, as are references to the kundalini. Even the "negative densitites" could be Theosophical. Presumably, these are the Black Lodges or dugpas! 

To the Theosophical core have been added other elements, perhaps taken from A Course In Miracles (ACIM). There is also a strong interest in "Alternative Egypt", Ra of course being the name of the ancient Egyptian sun-god. Finally, there is a connection to the UFO and contactee sub-culture. Since Ra is both a channeled entity and the collective planetary consciousness of a higher-density version of Venus, channeler and contactee merges into one. It´s interesting to note that the three original messengers of the Ra material were interested in the spiritual dimensions of the UFO phenomenon. 

While there is an official website of the Law of One, the promotion of the material seems to be pretty decentralized. The clips above feature an extremely well-spoken young man who is also into ACIM and some kind of liberal Christianity. Other promoters include David Wilcock, who strikes me as more "right wing", also expressing his belief in various conspiracy theories. (I previously linked to his production "The Cosmic Secret".) I´m frankly a bit surprised by the current popularity of the Law of One, since the entire thing feels heavily anachronistic. I assumed nobody in 2021 would want to listen to a blend of New Age-coated Theosophy, channeling, and belief in benign space brothers. The whole thing feels so 1970-ish. But OK, perhaps I´m more, ahem, negatively polarized than these particular people...

Let´s just say that I don´t think the Age of Aquarius will be very "Aquarian". That seems absurd even from an astrological viewpoint. Aquarius, after all, is ruled by Saturn and Uranus. The planet of negative limits meets the all-father of crazy. Sounds like a deadly combination!

The clips above are, first, a general introduction to the Law of One, next, a clip on demons, and finally a clip on Ra and "Alternative Egypt".  

Legend

"Myten om Jesus" (The myth of Jesus) is a classical book by late Swedish professor Alvar Ellegård, published in 1992. Long out of print, it was recently resurrected as an e-book available from Adlibris (the Swedish vendor). Ellegård subsequently (1999) wrote an English book on the same theme, "Jesus 100 Years Before Christ: A Study in Creative Mythology". Ellegård´s semi-mythicist work on Jesus created quite a stir when it was published, often being seen as downright extremist. I´m old enough to remember a well-attended Ellegård lecture organized by the Swedish Humanist Association (then called Human-etiska förbundet). The audience was so packed that I could hardly breathe! Today, another generation of Bible criticism later, "Myten om Jesus" sounds almost moderate. But sure, maybe not in Poland or Bible Belt America...

Ellegård does believe that Jesus was a real historical person, but places him in the second century BC rather than the first century AD. Curiously, he seems oblivious to Talmudic references which could be interpreted in the same way, nor does he know of the Jewish-Christian sect in Persia which had exactly this view of when Jesus lived. Instead, his case revolves entirely around the Dead Sea Scrolls. To Ellegård, Jesus is identical to the Teacher of Righteousness, the leader of the Essene community at Qumran. Over a century after his betrayal and violent death at the hands of the usurping Hasmoneans, this Jesus appearead in supernatural visions to Paul, Peter, James and the other "apostles", revealing that he was the long-awaited Jewish Messiah that would soon return and usher in the Millennium. Or so they claimed. In this scenario, the apostles were really Essenes, "Jesus" being their long-established cultic figure about whom little real historical information existed.

This explains why the earliest Christian sources (Paul, some of the Catholic letters, Didache, Barnabas, etc) contain relatively little information on the earthly ministry of Jesus, nor did the congregations Paul was corresponding with ask for any. (These congregations would have been less strict Essene groups living outside Palestine. Only the Qumran community had a monastic character.)  Paul´s knowledge of Jesus comes almost exclusively from visions. Apart from these, Paul is simply quoting various passages from the Old Testament, exegeting them as applying to the heavenly Messiah he claims contact with. Once again, explicable on the hypothesis that Jesus wasn´t a person who had lived and died recently. The difference between Paul and the other apostles was that the former wanted to de-Judaize the Essene movement he had joined, inviting God-fearers and other Gentiles to join. To this end, Paul took up influences from the mystery religions (with their dying and resurrecting god of salvation) and Gnosticism (with its dualism between Darkness and Light). Paul in effect became the real founder of Christianity: a syncretist religion blending Judaism and its Essene branch with Hellenism. Other leaders of the "Christian" movement, such as Cephas or James, didn´t want to go quite that far, keeping the Jewish character of the message more intact. Ellegård speculates that the defeat of the Jewish revolt against Rome in 70 AD, including the destruction of Qumran, must have created confusion and consternation among the Essenes in the diaspora, perhaps making it easier for de-Judaizing and Gentile-friendly influences to make themselves heard. 

The Gospels, usually dated 70 - 100 AD, where written later according to Ellegård, perhaps 100 - 130 AD. They are creative mythology, freely based on Messianic prophecies and other passages in the Old Testament, pagan legends about holy men and heroes, and statements made by Paul (which were originally visions). The first person to place Jesus firmly in the first century AD, together with Mary and Pontius Pilate, was Ignatius, but he couldn´t cite any sources, suggesting that the Gospels didn´t yet exist during his lifetime. Taking a cue from Ignatius, a respected Church leader, the Gospel writers expanded on his concept of a first-century Jesus who had suffered, died and been resurrected under Pilate circa 30 AD. Another reason why the Gospels were written down was to stake out territory against the Gnostics. The Gospel of John in particular is an anti-Gnostic polemic. Ellegård spends considerable time detailing all the contradictions between the Gospels, differences between various preserved manuscripts, and so on. His conclusion: we are dealing with an evolving tradition, not historical fact. He also points out that Christianity evidently *didn´t* evolve in Palestine (despite the Jerusalem church having a special status of honor), since all preserved Christian writings are in Greek, often address themselves to churches in Asia Minor, quote the Greek Septuagint translation of the "Old Testament", and so on. On the other hand, the theological milieu is nevertheless Jewish in the sense that it presupposes a grounding in Jewish scriptures not to be expected from mere Gentiles. That is, Christianity emerged in the Jewish diaspora, among Hellenized Jews (or in this scenario, Hellenized Essene Jews). Asia Minor, Alexandria or even Rome is the backdrop to early Christian evolution. Ellegård points to parallels between Philo and the Gospel of John in this regard.

Since Ellegård isn´t a full mythicist, he dates scriptures with a low Christology earlier than those where Jesus has ascended to divine status. Thus, Ellegård believes that the Didache might be the oldest preserved Christian scripture, since Jesus is there depicted as a teacher and prophet, and much of the teachings revolve around a piece of Jewish wisdom literature. The epistle of James might be a Jewish text simply rewritten and reused by Christians. Paul´s ideas about Jesus being a divine or semi-divine figure temporarily incarnating on Earth as a sacrifice for sin represents a later stage of development. Christian Gnosticism is even later. It´s not clear how the author classifies the apocryphal Gospel of Thomas, but he seems to place it early, perhaps also as a general wisdom text re-attributed to Jesus. 

The last chapter of "Myten om Jesus" is the most surprising one, given the gung-ho reputation of this little book. Ellegård suddenly strikes an irenic pose, arguing that faith should become more like science, which he sees as skeptical - really skeptical. Science is based on the idea that we will never know the full truth, and faith (as a kind of parallel track to knowledge) should emulate this humble methodological skepticism. Ellegård even says that Paul was undoubtedly one of the greatest visionaries who ever lived?! I have no idea if this was Ellegård´s attempted concession to his Christian readers, or whether he actually was an honest agnostic. Probably the latter, since Sweden is so secularized that atheist professors hardly need to dissimulate. 

Somehow, I share Alvar Ellegård´s assesment. Jesus may be a myth, but it really is the greatest story ever told. And whoever told it, may even have been on to something... 

The Biggest Secret

 

"The Cosmic Secret" is a two-hour presentation (or "film") made by David Wilcock and Corey Good, who both belong to the channeling-New Age-UFO milieu. Unless I´m mistaken, Good is the channel, while Wilcock is the theoretician, although he also claims to have met extraterrestrial intelligences. The borderline between contactee and abductee isn´t entirely clear in this case. Both men are inspired by the Law of One, a neo-Theosophical channeled message hailing from a Venusian named Ra. Good claims that the Ra collective visited him in the form of the so-called Blue Avians, bird-humanoid aliens with blue feather covering. Wilcock in particular is controversial, due to his conspiracy theories and pro-Trumpista orientation. 

The material in "The Cosmic Secret" is highly eclectic and frankly a bit confusing. It´s a kind of stream-of-consciousness smorgasbord of alternative ideas mined from a wide variety of sources: Zitchin, Hancock, Cremo and something akin to Velikovsky. We´re talking really hard catastrophism, complete with UFOs and alien civilizations landing on Earth, living inside the Moon, etc. Instead of Nibiru, we get two primordial planets, Maldek and Tiamat, which both exploded in an ancient cosmic cataclysm. Conspiracy theories featured include the Mandela effect, the secret space program, and alien abductions. One of the interviewees say that the "Chabad" (i.e. Hassidic Jews) are part of the Illuminati conspiracy, being "a Khazar cult". Ooops. 

There is also a somewhat unexpected Christian aspect to this material, although a "heretical" one. Wilcock is clearly fascinated by the apocalyptic aspect of Christianity. I suppose there is a similarity of sorts between the Rapture and the Ascension (the new agey concept of that name), but in Wilcock´s case, it goes beyond this to the apocalypse as such. Interestingly, Wilcock identifies the apocalypse with a major solar flash or solar flare, destroying most life on Earth, and claims that this pivotal cosmic event is predicted by many different religious traditions. 

The last ten minutes or so of "The Cosmic Secret" are the most surprising, since all the interviewees suddenly start talking about love, forgiveness, the unity of the human race, and similar New Age concepts. The contrast to the more "hard" conspiracist-alien abduction ideas is glaring (I wonder what Trump or QAnon would think of this!). 

I can´t say I particularly *liked* this production, but it shows that - surprisingly enough, at least to yours truly - the contactee and "shift of consciousness" milieux are still going strong, eight years after the 2012 fiasco. I´m not sure what to think of that, really, but there you go... 

Galaxy Brain

"I Want to Believe: Posadism, UFOs and Apocalypse Communism" is a intriguing book by New York-based writer A. M. Gittlitz, published last year. It tells the story of the Argentinian Trotskyist revolutionary Homero Cristalli (1912-1981), better known under his mysterious pen name J Posadas (sometimes interpreted as Juan Posadas, sometimes as José Posadas). The movement around Posadas was notorious on the far left for decades, first because of its bizarre theory that a nuclear war would trigger a future socialist reconstruction of society, and later because of Posadas´ belief in UFOs, space aliens and the possibility of human-dolphin communication. I first heard of the Posadists in the 1980´s as "the Trots who believe that socialism will come from the Moon". Later, I wrote to the British "Revolutionary Workers Party" asking for Posadas´ notorious UFO article, but instead, I was sent a pamphlet about Charlie Chaplin (thank you). I also corresponded with ultra-Posadist Paul Schulz and tried to read his German-language material. Yes, it did mention Star Trek ("Raumschiff Enterprise" in German), Erich von Däniken and the lost continent of Mu... I have previously reviewed some of Posadas´ own works on this blog (click on the label "Posadism" below this post to access it). After reading "I Want to Believe", I can only say that I didn´t know half of it! 

What makes the Posadist current so fascinating is that it started out as a "real" Trotskyist tendency, and even had a modicum of support in the unions and the working class. Posadas (or Homero Cristalli, to use his given name) was an Italian-Argentine left-wing radical of a working class background. He only attented school for two years, and tried his luck at a wide variety of odd jobs, including minstrel singer and soccer player. Eventually, he became a union organizer and joined the Trotskyist movement. To make a long story much shorter, Posadas eventually split with the "official" Fourth International, creating his own "Fourth International (Posadist)" in the 1960´s. At the time, the Posadists had a real presence in several Latin American nations: Argentina, Uruguay, Brazil, Mexico, Guatemala and Cuba. They attempted to organize workers and landless peasants. In Cuba and Guatemala, they tried to influence left-leaning guerilla movements with varying degrees of success. Eventually, both Castro and Guatemalan guerilla leader Yon Sosa disavowed the Posadistas. In Cuba, the Posadists were rounded up and imprisoned after Castro had allied himself with the "Stalinist" Communist Party. Che Guevara negotiated a deal which permitted the Posadistas to leave prison and return to civilian life, on condition that they would dissolve their party and never again partake in political activity. In many other Latin American nations, the followers of Posadas were murdered outright by pro-American military or right-wing death squads. More succesful, perhaps, was a clandestine arms factory in Morocco, smuggling weapons to the FLN in Algeria. The factory had been set up by Fourth International leader Michel Pablo, and several Posadist militants worked there. 

Or so the story goes. Gittlitz admits that it´s difficult to know what *really* happened in many cases, so his story of the Posadist international should perhaps be taken as a first approximation of the truth, rather than as a story about "what actually happened". But yes, I´ve heard the Guatemalan part of the story from a reputable source (who believed that the Posadists really did embezzle MR-13 funds. Curiously, my source referred to the man as "Posades"). Other claims sound more fantastic. Did the Posadist International really have sections in far-away places such as South Yemen, Somalia and Madagascar? I doubt it. I heard too many examples of small left-wing tendencies claiming "sections" that on closer inspection turn out to be fictitious (or consist of one guy in a Paris student café). 

An interesting fact is that the crazy perspective of hoping for a nuclear war wasn´t entirely Posadas´ own invention. It actually comes from Michel Pablo, the leader of the Fourth International in the immidiate post-World War II period. Pablo´s belief in War-Revolution - that a Third World War is imminent and will trigger a world socialist revolution - is only one step removed from Posadas´ more dramatic demand for the Soviet Union or China to actually launch such a war by a preemptive nuclear strike on the United States. And yet, Pablo is seldom painted as barking mad. Perhaps he was a more erudite theoretician than the autodidactic Posadas? Gittlitz also notes the shift in Posadist politics circa 1968 (which seems to have co-incided with a similar shift in Castro´s policy, something not noticed by the author) from ultra-leftish guerillism towards a more pro-Soviet "popular frontism". Posadas even supported the Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia! When Posadas was forced to leave Latin America, he went to Italy where his group entered the Communist Party and even sent a representative to Moscow for talks. The Soviet host wasn´t impressed and would later publish a polemic against the Posadists. 

Had this been all, Posadism would simply be regarded as a kind of ultra-Pabloism, and nobody would give a damn. What made the tendency memorable (and meme-able) is that somewhere along the line, J Posadas *did* go barking mad...

Juan Posadas did have authoritarian, puritanical and slightly megalomaniacal tendencies already from the beginning of his Trotskyist career. It´s interesting to note that he originally slavishly followed the decrees of the Fourth International leadership, Pablo in particular. I suspect this dogmatism was Posadas´ way of compensating for his lack of education. At some point, the Argentine autodidact decided to replace his guru Pablo with...himself. It was pretty much downhill from there. During the 1970´s, if not earlier, the Posadist international became a kind of "Jehovah´s Witnesses of the left", or a cult by any other name. The internal life of the organization strikingly resembled other cults, both political and religious: all power was in the hands of Posadas and his immidiate family, morality was puritanical, members were not permitted to have children, critics of the leadership were invariably denounced as "police agents" and expelled, all meetings were closed with shouts of "Viva Posadas", and the party magazines were filled with the rambling, incoherent and incomprehensible speeches of the great leader, presented as infallible wisdom. The political line also resembled the message of apocalyptic cults. After an event known as "the repression" (compare the Great Tribulation of Christian fundamentalism) during which many militants would be rounded up and killed, a nuclear war would follow (compare Armaggedon) and after the war, almost miraculously, the survivors would establish socialism on a world scale (compare the Millennium). 

In one of these speeches, Posadas mentions UFOs, claims that they are extraterrestrial craft, and that the aliens must be socialist. Perhaps they can even help humanity to fight for socialism? The speech was dutifully printed in the magazines of the Posadist "sections" and quickly made them the laughing stock of the entire left. Ironically, Gittlitz believes that Posadas himself wasn´t *that* obsessed with UFOs. It was simply one of many topics on which he had all-knowing opinions, but it´s hardly surprising that Posadas´ opponents jumped to the occasion. 

During the 1970´s, Posadas purged most of his old guard, was involved in several sex scandals (again like any cultish guru) and seems to have gone completely and utterly mad. For instance, he treated the birth of his daughter Homerita as an event of world-historic significance, and wanted to raise her to become the first enlightened socialist human (or something to that effect). Party members in Italy were instructed to visit the maternity ward where Homerita was born, stand around the bed of the mother and the infant, sing revolutionary songs, etc. The staff of the ward eventually had to silence them! Posadas´ message became more and more New Age-like. He believed that humans could and should communicate with dolphins. Indeed, all animals and plants would become tame and live in peace with humans under socialism, and some animals (if I understand his ramblings correctly) would even become as intelligent as humans (including the almost iconic dolphins). At this point, the Posadistas had no working class base left, the experienced militants were all gone, and most of the "sections" consisted of confused young people of the kind that might just as well join a religious cult. 

After the death of Posadas, two ex-Posadistas developed the UFO strain of his thought even further. One of them was Dante Minazzoli, who had been expelled by Posadas for whatever reason, but still continued to believe in the alien-socialism interface. He spent years as a kind of one-man entryist in ufological circles, trying to gently win them over to a revolutionary socialist perspective. The other was Paul Schulz, who told me that he had been expelled after the death of Posadas by the new leadership of the International. Judging by "I Want to Believe", Schulz was far crazier than I had previously thought. Apparently, Schulz became a trance medium, believed that he was in direct communication with aliens, and tried to win Swiss contactee Billy Meier for a socialist perspective. Meier never responded to Schulz´ letters... 

When J Posadas died, many assumed that his movement would die with him. However, it seems that the Posadist Fourth International still exists, led by Posadas´ son Léon Cristalli. Or perhaps there are now two Posadist internationals, the "European bureau" having split from the "Latin American bureau". Léon Cristalli´s wing of the movement (the Latin American one) supports Vladimir Putin, Donald Trump and the populist spring in general. They believe that Russia is a "workers´ state". However, the most well-known revival of Posadism is in the form of jocular and ironic Internet memes. This "Neo-Posadism" rose to prominence circa 2016-17, at about the same time that Trump-supporting trolls filled Twitter and other social media forums with curious memes featuring Pepe, Kek, Harambe, Trump as the restorer of German Idealism, and what not. There is a fake Posadist group known as "the Intergalactic Workers League" and an equally fake "DSA Posadist Caucus". In this era of postmodern irony, J Posadas have been turned into a LARP...

While I consider "I Want to Believe" an interesting and indispensable read for those of us who give a damn about the 57 varieties of Trotskyism, I must say that the author comes across as something of a quasi-intellectual. I only skimmed the last chapter, where he discusses "the function of the joke and irony in history" (sounds like something Posadas himself could have written). Gittlitz is also somewhat sloppy, as when he refers to the Russian capital in 1917 as "Saint Petersburg" (it´s Petrograd), or claims that the Popular Front government in Spain had a conflict with Franco in 1935 (it wasn´t elected until 1936), or uses English words in weird ways ("principal" instead of "principle", etc). The author accepts a kind of mythologized Trotskyist history, in which Lenin wanted to see Trotsky as his successor, hundreds of thousand Trotskyists were sent to the Gulags, and Hitler feared a world revolution led by Trotsky. Nah, none of that happened, except in the fevered imagination of...well...Posadas, perhaps? It´s almost as if the author has gone native!

That being said, "I Want to Believe" is nevertheless recommended. Four stars out of five. 

Bohemian Rhapsody

For quite some time, the Czechs liked to portray themselves as more enlightened, democratic, Protestant, and Western-oriented than the Slovaks, who were accused of being generally backward and Catholic. After the fall of Communism in 1989, Slovaks were also painted as dangerous "populists" and probably Russophiles. 

I used to believe something like this myself. Then, I started digging into Czech history...

It *is* true that Slovakia was something of a backwater for about 1000 years. It´s also true that Bohemia was a culturally advanced region, Prague in particular, during the a portion of the Middle Ages and the Early Modern Period. Emperor Rudolf II´s court is famous in this regard. But note that this wasn´t an exclusively Czech thing. It was equally German (or Austrian). Bohemia was a kingdom within the "Holy Roman Empire".

Czech nationalism during the 19th century was to a large extent pan-Slavist and pro-Russian. During World War I, the Czechs got the best of all possible worlds. They were oriented towards both France, the United States and...Czarist Russia. The Czechoslovak Legions played a prominent role in the Russian Civil War. For this reason, the relations between the Soviet Communist regime and Czechoslovakia were originally quite non-existent.

During the 1930´s, Czechoslovakia changed its foreign policy and entered an alliance with Stalin´s Soviet Union. Note that Czechoslovakia was at this point still a capitalist democracy. There was also an alliance with France. 

During World War II and the period 1945-48, Czechoslovak president Eduard Benes (a moderate Czech Social Democrat) headed a "national front" dominated by the Communist Party. In the elections after the war, the Communist Party became the single largest party in the Czech lands. It did *not* become the largest party in Slovakia... 

The bad experience of Communism (1948-1989) made the Czechs pro-Western, pro-American and anti-Russian. Playwright and pro-Western dissident Vaclav Havel was elected president of post-Communist Czechoslovakia and then transitioned to president of the Czech Republic. However, then something odd happened...

The next president, Vaclav Klaus (who originally claimed to be a Milton Friedman neo-liberal), turned out to be a pro-Russian Euro-skeptic climate change denialist. The third president, Milos Zeman, is apparently a former Communist and also regarded as soft on Putin. And in 2017, the Czech Republic voluntarily elected a "populist" prime minister, one Andrej Babis. What makes this even more piquante is that Babis is ethnically Slovak! So after accusing their Slovak cousins for being "Russophile populists" for 20+ years, the Czechs eventually elected one of these hideous Slovak populists Czech head of government!

Am I the only person who thinks we may have been played by Czech propaganda all this time? 

The secret of salvation

 

"Secrecy´s Power: Covert Shin Buddhists in Japan and Contradictions of Concealment" by Clark Chilson is a very in-house book about a number of secretive religious groups in modern Japan. The groups in question are Shin Buddhists, Shin being a sub-branch of the "Amidist" Pure Land Buddhism tradition. Pure Land Buddhism is an almost "theistic" form of Buddhism, centered on the worship of the cosmic buddha Amida (originally called Amitabha). Devotees of Amida believe that the constant repetition of a mantra known as the nembutsu will make them attain rebirth in a paradise world known as the Pure Land, where further attainment of nirvana or the status of a bodhisattva is said to be extremely easy. To a Westerner used to Christianity, the Pure Land traditions look almost "Protestant", since they emphasize that salvation is easy and granted by the grace of Amida, who comes across as a "personal god". It also seems that the Pure Land is a permanent paradise, not the temporary version of mainline Buddhism. Amidism also seems to have a "populist" streak - hardly surprising for a religion that promises an easy path to liberation - and has historically been associated with the common people (including rebels) rather than with the aristocracy or the temple priesthood. One such populist notion is that there should be no secrets in religion. This marked out Pure Land Buddhism from other traditions, and Japanese society in general, during the medieval period, when most other religious groups concealed part of their teachings and practices (various trade guilds did the same). And yet, there are covert Pure Land Buddhists. Chilson´s book deals with three such groups, all three of which belong to the Shin branch of Pure Land Buddhism. Due to the book´s somewhat exclusive scholarly character, the author never explains the differences between Shin and other forms of Pure Land Buddhism, nor does he explore the history of Pure Land traditions at any great length. It would be interesting to know more about the Amidist "Ikko-Ikki" rebellions during the 14th and 15th centuries, for instance! 

Like other forms of Pure Land Buddhism, Shin is generally also an overt religion which rejects all claims to an esoteric message. However, it seems that the Shin tradition has been plagued by secret breakaway groups almost from the start. The most famous description of such a group, at least in the West, comes from D T Suzuki, the famous writer on Zen, who was actually initiated into a covert Shin fraternity as a boy. Otherwise, covert Shin groups have managed to pass more or less under the radar for most of the 20th century. Their secrets were exposed by infiltrators over a century ago, but many of the groups themselves then disappeared from the public limelight. Chilson describes three groups or traditions known as Urahomon, Gonaiho and Kirishimako. All three have their roots in the Early Modern Period. Urahomon and Gonaiho are heterodox in comparison with overt Shin, while Kirishimako originally had the same theology as mainline Shin and adopted secrecy due to persecution. All covert Shin Buddhists suffered persecution under the Edo Period, but the traditions that would give rise to Urahomon and Gonaiho were secret from the start for theological reasons. 

Kirishimako pretended to be Shintoists, and were so succesful in concealing themselves that even people in the surrounding rural community where most followers lived were largely unaware of their existence. The group wasn´t exposed until the American occupation, when some villagers refused to accept food from American soldiers due to food taboos. Later, a public school discovered that many village children refused to eat chicken, a staple food in modern Japan. The strong Kirishimako taboo against killing and eating chicken had inadvertently revealed the group´s existence when society changed. 

Most of the book deal with Urahomon, a group the author has encountered himself. For frankly unclear reasons, the Urahomon granted Chilson interviews and permission to attend some of their meetings. They even tried to recruit him as a member! Urahomon´s strategy is to "hide in plain sight" or dissimulate. The group is affiliated with Kuyado,  a Tendai temple in Kyoto dedicated to the tenth-century holy man Kuya (who was an Amida devotee). Some of their members even take wows and serve in the temple as a kind of deacons. It´s also interesting to note that Kuyado´s association with Tendai seems to be formal, the temple having a history as an independent entity which bestowed imperial patronage on marginalized groups. As members of a Kuya-Amida temple, Urahomon (or rather one of its many lineages) can meet openly at designated times and places, without anyone suspecting that it´s really an event hosted by a secretive sect believed to be extinct by many outsiders! 

Urahomon´s secret message strikes me as more extreme than that of overt Shin or Pure Land. Those who pass through a special initiation ritual are said to be buddhas and experience the Pure Land paradise already in this life. This is apparently similar to other esoteric strands of Buddhism, but not to mainline Shin. However, the Urahomon initiation is relatively simple, compared to the elaborate rituals, meditations and visualizations it takes to reach enlightenment in the more Tantric traditions. Urahomon has no paid priesthood - even the exoteric deacons at Kuyado work for free - but each affinity group nevertheless has a leader who has undergone an often rigorous training. Since most of Urahomon´s traditions are oral, prospective leaders have to hone their mnemonic skills, which can take years. Sometimes it is succesful: the author attended sermons that went on for several hours, but which seemed to be recited entirely from memory! 

Why are these groups still secret? There is no religious persecution in Japan today. Also, the groups are slowly but steadfastly dying out. The author experienced this in real time: in just ten years, the number of people attending Urahomon meetings dropped by half. Why doesn´t Urahomon go public? It might be their best strategy for survival (compare how the Golden Dawn tradition in Britain survived by leaking its esoteric teachings into the public domain). Chilson believes that secrecy is an integrated part of the group´s ideology, power structure and entire mode of functioning. It cannot easily be dispensed with without changing the very bedrock of the religion. In short, it´s part of the Urahomon identity. 

"Secrecy´s Power" also contain more general scholarly-sociological discussions about the role of secrecy in religious groups, but I admit that I mostly skimmed those sections, not being in a very scholarly mood right now! 

Probably far too narrow for the general reader, but if you are *extremely* interested in Japanese Buddhism, I suppose this could be worth at least a look.