It takes one to know one

"You need to attribute the author", sez Wiki. OK, he´s name is Alex Tora.

Titta vem som klagar på en nazi-demo i Kiev (alltså Kyiv). The irony... 

"Lugnt nazifirande i centrala Kiev"

Cornering the camel

"A Perfect Planet: Weather" is the third installment in the recent BBC Earth saga. As usual, we get to see the wild, the weird and the wonderful from our (far from perfect) planet. 10 million flying foxes gathering in one small forest in Zambia, fire ants floating on the Amazon river, turtles laying eggs in Amazon sand banks which are washed away after only three months of existence, bee-eaters chased by eagles and crocodiles in Africa, red crabs afraid of sea water on Christmas Island (50 million of them), and the constant threat of climate change looming in the background. 

The high point of the production is the film crew´s search for the last remaining wild Bactrian camels in the Gobi desert (Mongolia). Imagine a desert that´s as cold as the Arctic, and where the camels can survive only by eating snow. If they can find it, that is... Finding the camels wasn´t easy either, the team apparently looking for them for two weeks! 

Despite protestations to the contrary, there is no particular "message" or educational value in this series, although it might of course give you a better appreciation of Nature. Or, more likely, scare the hell out of you (or make you admire new camera technology). Stay tuned for more extraordinary footage next week... 

Jag är pluralist

 

Jag är både monoteist, polyteist och panteist. Samtidigt.

Vilken religion är den "sanna" religionen? Enda sättet att "bevisa" en religion är genom den religiösa erfarenheten. Detta inkluderar rimligtvis visioner, uppenbarelser och mystika upplevelser. Problemet är att man kan bevisa i stort sett *alla* religioner på detta sätt. Kan de verkligen vara sanna allihop? 

Här kommer ett radikalt förslag: Ja, alla religioner är faktiskt *på något sätt* sanna. There, I said it. 

Ta nära döden-upplevelser (NDUs). Kristna ser Kristus, hinduer ser Krishna, buddhister ser Buddha. En traditionell kristen måste i princip hävda att mötet med Kristus var sant, medan de två andra var falska. Men det verkar vara exakt samma typ av upplevelser i samtliga fall. En annan kristen strategi är att förneka *alla* NDUs. Skriften är enda rättesnöret! Det fungerar inte heller. En lutheran kan anse sig ha en upplevelse av att Helig Ande via Ordets predikan har öppnat hans hjärta för Skriftens sanningar. Men på vilket sätt skiljer sig detta från t.ex. en mormons upplevelse av att Mormons Bok måste vara sann? Och varför ska vi tro på just den bibliska uppenbarelsen? Hur vet vi ens att det är en verklig uppenbarelse? Har någon träffat Mose eller Paulus nyligen och fått en intervju? Och även om vi antar att det rör sig om uppenbarelser, på vilket sätt skiljer de sig från Muhammeds, Joseph Smiths eller George Adamskis, för att bara ta tre exempel? 

För en ateist är detta inget problem. I hans universum finns det ju inga gudar alls, och är han dessutom materialist (vilket är det vanliga) finns det inga andra övernaturliga fenomen heller. Ironiskt nog är det inget problem för en polyteist heller. En polyteist kan ju hävda att alla religioner är "sanna" åtminstone i den meningen, att alla är baserade på kommunikationer från gudarna - olika gudar! (Pluralis av "Jesus" lär förresten vara "Jesii".) En panteist kan på samma sätt hävda att alltings urgrund tar sig olika former för olika människor. Det är bara monoteisten som är svarslös, och bestämt måste hävda att alla som ser "fel" saker är förledda av demoner eller faktiskt inte ser något alls. Vilket är omöjligt att bevisa. (Eller rättare sagt den strikta, exklusivistiska monoteisten. En inklusivistisk monoteist kan hävda att den ende guden visar sig för olika sätt för olika människor - Kristus visar sig såldedes som Krishna för en hindu, etc.) 

Man kan förstås fortfarande driva linjen att en eller flera religioner är "sannare", "bättre" eller "högre" än de andra. Jag har själv vissa sympatier för den ståndpunkten. Under en period betraktade jag faktiskt kristendomen som den högsta religionen. I efterhand har jag insett att det nog bara var min subjektiva tolkning av den som jag satte "högst". Och så är det ju faktiskt för alla andra också. Hur många subjektiva tolkningar av NT är vi uppe i nu, 2000 år efter Kristus (sic)? Sjuttiosju? Sexhundra sextiosex, eller vad? Och varför skulle en religion som hävdar att en personlig gud älskar människan och vill förlossa henne nödvändigtvis vara "högst"? Handlar universum bara om oss? Handlar det bara om just mig och min privata tolkning av en viss religion? Kanske är kristendomen bara högst för oss människor, och inte för någon annan. Kanske är din kristendomen bara högst för dig? 

Tänk om människan faktiskt kan välja sin väg genom evigheten. Anta att jag inte vill uppstå med en oförgänglig fysisk kropp och leva i 1,000 år i ett märkligt paradis på Jorden där lejonet vänslas med lammet? Anta att *lejonet* inte vill göra det heller. Eller ens lammet. Anta att jag föredrar att förenas med det kosmiska supermedvetandet, som droppen förenar sig med havet? Eller förvandlas till en bodhisattvisk ljusvarelse? Eller återfödas som ett lejon? Vem ska stoppa mig? Luther? Även om vi antar att det faktiskt finns ett slutmål någonstans, så innebär detta ändå inte att Gud visar det för oss. Kanske kan vi inte ens förstå slutmålet. Gud visar oss det lilla vi förstår av det. Jag tror att Mahayana kallar detta "upaya" (på engelska "skilfull means"). Gud är faktiskt allt för alla människor...

Denna tanke verkar betydligt mer rimlig än att ett synnerligen eklektiskt urval av skrifter med uppenbart motsägelsefullt innehåll, dåligt översatta, och dessutom tillkomna under en period då mänskligheten i största allmänhet visste betydligt mindre än vi gör idag, skulle utgöra ofelbara meddelanden från universums skapare. Ja, jag menar Bibeln. Fast samma kritik kan nog appliceras på i stort sett alla s.k. heliga skrifter. 

Jag är både monoteist, polyteist och panteist. Samtidigt. 

Faustian Man as Explorer: Some random reflections

Some random reflections about nothing in particular...

I recently linked to an essay on Wikipedia (sic) about Plato´s unwritten doctrines. I think it´s pretty obvious what´s going on with the denial of Plato´s esotericism (whatever you take the esotericism to be). The attitude that since esoteric doctrines aren´t *supposed* to exist, they ipso facto *don´t* exist, obviously comes from the Protestant reformation. 

I happen to have a strong sympathy for the "populist" attitude that things indeed shouldn´t be "hidden away", but that´s a very different proposition from claiming that actually there are no such things. Or, to be more precise, there were no such things in the primordial, pure and pristine past the Reformation (any reformation) is supposed to be a "return" to. The reformers claimed that the message of the primitive Church was purely exoteric, and that the Catholic Church had muddled everything at a later point. In the same way, Plato had a pure and pristine exoteric message, later muddled by Plotinus and the Neo-Platonists. 

Of course, this is the usual way in which humans seem to operate: everything radically new, is depicted not as it is, but as a "return" to something old. So here´s a radically new idea I just cracked: what if humans actually do, ahem, new things from time to time? Our modern Western civilization is certainly new in this way (for good or for worse). Indeed, we are presumably unique. Uniquely wrong, perhaps, but still unique. You don´t have to believe in "Whiggish history" or "the myth of Progress" to realize that our civilization really is a new, unique and crazy adventure in time and space. Not a revolution (pun intended) back to some Golden Age, the (Neandertal) inhabitants of which would be horrified by our antics... 

The Indefinite Dyad

 

Was Plato a Neo-Platonist? I actually found this interesting essay on...Wikipedia!

Plato´s unwritten doctrines

Trustafarians

 

Watching this as we speak. The first ten minutes are *extremely* funny. Then, it becomes much less humorous. A critique of the current ayahuasca craze, from a guy who took the drug himself and saw some serious shit... 

UPDATE: He becomes more serious later in the presentation. Quite good, actually!

Inför kriget

Kan någon förklara det här nyhetstelegrammet? Jag trodde Tjeckien, Slovakien och Ungern var pro-ryska. Särskilt Ungern. Fast här verkar det som att just dessa länder lackat ur på Ryssland. Eller agerar de under hårda påtryckningar från EU och USA? Rumäniens utrikespolitik kan jag ingenting om, men jag antar att konflikten i Moldavien (Moldova) tenderar att göra dem anti-ryska. 

Rumänien utvisar rysk diplomat i solidaritet 

Hot om militärkupp i Frankrike?

Den här typen av nyheter brukar uppmärksammas av den extrema vänstergruppen SEP eller WSWS, som givetvis tolkar dem som bevis på att allt är en konspiration. Fast just här undrar man ju faktiskt... 

Från "Fria Tider", som politiskt står på rakt motsatt sida. Jag antar att FT stödjer utspelet, medan WSWS (som ännu ej hunnit kommentera) givetvis inte gör det.

Franska generaler varnar för "raskrig", hotar med statskupp

En helt vanlig dag i världsrymden

Det här är strängt taget "gårdagens nyheter", men nu har Harvard-astronomen Avi Loeb tydligen gett ut en bok om sin teori, att det mystiska objektet Oumuamua faktiskt var en uomjordisk rymdfarkost av något slag. Min vilda gissning är att det var ett exotiskt naturligt objekt (det måste finnas hur många som helst), men tanken på att det skulle kunna vara ett UFO är faktiskt fascinerande... 

Utomjordingar passerade genom vårt solsystem

Åh nej, Hans Helighet är "woke" igen

Hmmm...

Jag ser att gamle dalai vill ha vänsterlibbarnas solidaritet nu igen.  

Dalai Lama träffar Greta Thunberg

Wikipedia of the Week

Maybe Wiki isn´t *that* bad, after all? Perhaps I should have a "Wiki of the Week" on my blog? For instance, did you know that the Maldives used to be Mahayana-Vajrayana once? Of course you didn´t. Now, you do. 

And then there´s this: "In February 2012, a group of Islamic extremists forced their way into the National Museum in Malé and attacked the museum's collection of pre-Islamic sculptures, destroying or severely damaging nearly the entire collection about thirty Buddhist sculptures dating from the 6th to 12th centuries. Museum staff indicated that as the sculptures were made from very brittle coral or limestone it would be impossible to repair most of them, and only two or three pieces were in a repairable condition."

Buddhism in the Maldives

This week´s safe space

 

The crisis of American Buddhism

"After Buddhist Ethics" is a work by David Chapman, available at one of his websites. Chapman is a strongly heterodox Buddhist, and belongs to a supposedly Vajrayana-inspired group called Aro gTér, of which I know next to nothing. I previously reviewed Chapman´s "half-book" titled "Consensus Buddhism", available at the same site. "After Buddhist Ethics" covers much the same ground, but with a more specific emphasis on ethics (and Buddhism´s lack of it). I found the work interesting, since it describes the American (or is it Californian) Buddhist milieu based on personal experience. It was just as bad as I expected! 

The "Buddhist ethics" promoted by American Buddhists (who are all White, Boomers and privileged) turn out to be indistinguishable from left-liberal American middle class values. Or rather these values pre-SJW/pre-BLM (the younger generations are more savage and fanatical). Everyone is supposed to be "nice", politically correct, non-judgmental and "compassionate". Racism, sexism, homophobia, conservative values and environmental destruction are all seen as not very nice. Presumably you´re supposed to vote Barack Obama. The milieu is effiminate, and often female-dominated (cis-womyn). Even worse, it´s frequently disorganized, meetings always start late, everyone acts like an immature teenager with no sense of responsibility, structure or proportions. 

The author believes that Buddhism in the United States is often used as a status marker. By claiming to be a Buddhist, you signal belonging to a high-status in-group of educated, well-travelled and sophisticated people, who are simultaneously both brave and compassionate. And presumably rich, too! At one point, Chapman exclaims that Episcopalianism and Buddhism are both "middle-class sects" in the US - a covert sarcasm against Allan Watts? One of the reasons why Consensus Buddhism (the author´s term for left-liberal US Buddhism) is in crisis today is that it no longer works as a status-marker. The 2010´s are not the early 1960´s. Today, left-liberal values are mainstream and even somewhat bland or boring. Consensus Buddhism has nothing to offer over and above this, except the previously mentioned structurlessness and meetings that always start late. (Early US Buddhism seems to have been more structured and in general required more effort.) Even mindfulness meditation has been secularized, so the Consensus Buddhists aren´t unique on that score either. 

Chapman points out that there really aren´t any Buddhist ethics to begin with. The original Buddhist scriptures did contain rules of various kinds, some of them related to morality, but didn´t offer a coherent philosophy or system of ethics. Indeed, what looks like ethical rules are really a kind of ascetic practices. Only a monk can consistently suppress his sexual passions, refrain from killing, watch his tongue, and so on. Traditional Buddhism was patriarchal, accepted the caste system and the feudal order, and accepted slavery. There are stories of the Buddha accepting "slaves and other livestock" (!) as gifts. In historical fact, even Buddhist temples owned slaves. Indeed, sometimes *the monks* were a kind of slaves! And although the author follows a "Tibetan" path, he acknowledges that the Tibetan peasants were serfs before the Chinese invasion (which he nevertheless opposes). There is also an entire history of Buddhism supporting the wars of Buddhist and even non-Buddhist rulers. 

During the 19th century, Asian Buddhism was modernized by reformers such as Siam´s king Mongkut (who had been a Buddhist monk before becoming king) or the Sinhalese activist Anagarika Dharmapala. This is sometimes known as "Protestant Buddhism". However, these reformers *imported Western ideas* and incorporated them with Buddhism, including British Victorian values and an attitude strikingly similar to that of Western Buddhological scholars or Christian missionaries. This Westernized Buddhism was then exported back to the Western world, where it changed even more, gradually becoming decidedly less Victorian and more explicitly leftish. (Unless you believe that there might be a connection between Victorian puritanism and puritanical political correctness, something this author sometimes does believe.) Thus, the only "Buddhist ethics" that seem to exist are those which really come from outside the Buddhist fold altogether! Unless, of course, you want to claim that feudalism, slavery and patriarchy are ethical...

The author´s alternative is based on the theories of Robert Kegan (whose books I never read). I can´t say I was thrilled. I get the impression that Kegan´s theories of human cognitive development have no universal validity, since his "stage 3" corresponds almost exactly to the histrionic immaturity of late 20th century and early 21st century American teenagers and college students (especially female ones). "Stage 5" corresponds to an idealized version of postmodernism and multi-culturalism, presumably reflecting Kegan´s own political affinities. Funny how that works, aint it? Chapman has considerable problems making Kegan´s ideas stick universally. Thus, he claims that pre-modern cultures are "stage 3", including traditional Buddhism (!) and medieval villages of subsistence farmers (!!). The idea that pre-modern cultures looked anything like American teenagers is funny, to be sure. Chapman´s own ideal explicitly rejects middle class values, in favor of both upper class and working class values, or something the author *thinks* are such values. In reality, it seems to be the "values" of the declassé and decadent upper-class hedonist, which may indeed be similar in some superficial ways to the hedonistic acting out of the lumpenized underclass (*not* the organized working class). I´m not surprised that a Tantrist would embrace such values, and indeed Chapman exemplifies it with a huge orgie! Indeed, I get the impression that the author is really an atheist-materialist or agnostic, and that he embraces Tantrism mostly because he gets his kicks that way... 

That being said, I nevertheless found "After Buddhist Ethics" interesting, and might continue exploring some of the topics covered. Link below! 

After Buddhist Ethics

Ägd på älvdalska

Riksdagsmannen Peter Helander ÄGER talmannen i det här roliga klippet, tyvärr utlagt av knäppgökarna "Fria Tider". Språket i artikeln är förresten svenska. Jag har ju kommenterat älvdalsmålet tidigare, so here we go again!

Talar älvdalska i riksdagen, får tillsägelse

DESTROY THE BUDDHA STATUES!!! The ride never ends...

It seems White Boy Summer never ends. Look what Wiki is saying: "The Greco-Buddhist art of Gandhara is characterized by Buddhist subject matter, sometimes adapting Greco-Roman elements, rendered in a style and forms that are heavily influenced by Greco-Roman art. It has the strong idealistic realism and sensuous description of Hellenistic art, and it is believed to have produced the first representations of Gautama Buddha in human form, ending the early period of aniconism in Buddhism." 

Translation: the Buddha statues originally came from White people. THEREFORE THEY MUST BE SMASHED BY ANTIFA AND BLM!!!!

Wikipedia on Greco-Buddhist art

Wat means?

“An Episcopalian is a Presbyterian with a trust fund. A Presbyterian is a Methodist with a college education. And a Methodist is a Baptist with shoes.”

Can anyone explaineth? 

Stranger King

Hmmm...

Look what I found on Wikipedia!

Stranger King

White Savior

An interesting article on Henry Steel Olcott, the American Theosophist who promoted Buddhism in Ceylon (now Sri Lanka). The article is pretty critical, casting Olcott as a crypto-colonialist pseudo-Protestant liberal counter-missionary missionary, rather than as a "genuine" Buddhist. Note, however, that the Sinhalese didn´t seem to mind! Olcott was more involved in Buddhist revivalism that I had expected. Note also the Mesmerist and Spiritualist connections. There are some other articles on Olcott on this site, as well. You can find them in the navigation bar.

The White Buddhist: Henry Steel Olcott and the Sinhalese Buddhist revival

Claiming knowledge

An extremely interesting piece from "Buddhist" blogger David Chapman about how religious, political and counter-cultural groups try to invest their ideas with authority. An appeal to (usually fake) tradition is the most common strategy, but there is also another way, whereby already failed ideas are dressed up as "the latest exciting innovation". The implications for Buddhism may be interesting... 

Invented traditions and timeworn futures  

A broken consensus

"Consensus Buddhism" is a "half-book" written by David Chapman and published in several installments at his blog Vividness. The work is a somewhat eclectic criticism of something the author dubs Consensus Buddhism, by which he means the liberal-modernist new agey mainstream "Buddhism" popular in the United States and other Western nations. While the author doesn´t sound *that* politically incorrect or even particularly hateful, he does offer a de facto broadside against this kind of Buddhism (or "Buddhism"). Interestingly, he believes that the Consensus lost its hegemony around 2015. 

Consensus Buddhism, Chapman believes, is a somewhat contradictory blend of Theravada, Zen and Vajrayana, but all three have been substantially revised compared with the traditional versions before becoming part of the synthesis. The Theravada component comes from "Protestant Buddhism", a 19th century modernist form of Buddhism that emerged in Southeast Asia and Sri Lanka under the threatening impact of Western colonialism and Christian missionary activity. While the Protestant Buddhists were Asian, they were nevertheless inspired by Western scholars to modernize Theravada in a way resembling liberal Christian Protestantism (but still in a distinctly Buddhist garb). Of course, this new Buddhism was supposedly a return to the pure and pristine ideas of the Buddha, distorted by millenia of superstition, priestcraft and backwardness. Note the similarity between this approach and the Christian Protestant criticism of Catholicism! Modernist Buddhists emphasized meditation and individual enlightenment, claimed to be scientific and rational, and studied the ancient Buddhist scriptures to divine their "true" meaning. During the 19th century, this was *not* the standard approach to Buddhism in Southeast Asia and Lanka. Exported to the West, this form of Buddhism became even more modernized. While Western Buddhists often practice vipassana ("mindfulness" is based on this), this particular meditation technique seems to contradict the general ethos of Consensus Buddhism, which isn´t about asceticism, renunciation or "non-mind". Maybe this is why Westernerns sometimes snap when trying out vipassana?

The second component is a modernized form of Zen, including the version associated with Japanese teacher D T Suzuki. Chapman doesn´t mention that Suzuki was affiliated with the Theosophical Society, which is surely significant. Suzuki apparently had a "perennialist" view of Zen, seeing it as the spiritual core of all religions. Also, his view of enlightenment had more in common with something Chapman calls "Romantic Idealism" and "Western monism", rather than with traditional Zen notions. In the United States, Suzuki´s approach could easily influence the new agey alt-spirituality scene. The third component was the Dalai Lama´s modernized and de-Tantricized form of Vajrayana. These three "export" versions of Asian Buddhism have been combined with psychoanalysis, New Age approaches, and a general "niceness" or liberal political correctness similar to liberal forms of Protestant Christianity. The end result: Consensus Buddhism. (Funny detail: at one point, Chapman uses Ken Wilber´s expression "the green meme" to describe political correctness.) 

The reason why Consensus Buddhism became hegemonic in the broader United States Buddhist milieu isn´t entirely clear, but some things do stand out. First, it appeals primarily to "Boomers" who are White and relatively privileged. According to the author, it has almost zero appeal to any other demographic. The Consensus Buddhists control (or used to control) the most important American Buddhist magazines and ditto publishing houses. There was a considerable overlap with the New Age milieu. The scandals surrounding Tantric teachers during the 1980´s made it possible for Consensus Buddhism to push out the Tantrikas from the milieu (I assume the Tantric groups recruited from the same White affluent middle-class Boomer demographic). Tibetan Buddhism or Vajrayana is good for exotic window-dressing, but the wilder strands of the tradition must be actively suppressed, since they aren´t "nice". This is ironic, given the fact that Western Buddhists aren´t interested in anti-sexual asceticism, for instance, so you would think they would embrace Tantric orgies with a gusto! The author also points out that some Buddhist traditions are simply ignored by the Consensus, rather than explicitly attacked. This is the case with Sokka Gakkai, a movement Chapman believes recruits mostly from working-class, immigrant and non-White sectors of the US population. They therefore never appear on the Consensus radar screen.

Chapman´s own alternative isn´t really worked out in the "half-book", but he is a supporter of the Nyingma tradition within Vajrayana, and links to a website about Aro gTér, the specific lineage he belongs to. Very often, he comes across as a near-skeptic. Thus, Chapman questions the claim that mystical experiences are self-validating and that they can somehow "prove" a certain religious tradition. Nor is perennialism correct. The idea that your True Self is also the World-Soul and therefore God (Atman is Brahman) only exist in certain Hindu traditions, and therefore cannot be the inner core of all religions. Chapman even claims that we can´t even know what the Buddha really taught, so why even bother with him when seeking enlightenment! (Perhaps this is a "guru trick" from his part. Compare the Tantric saying "If you see the Buddha on the road, kill him".) I get the impression that the author´s position might be a radical form of pluralism which claims that all religions are true, despite their fundamental differences, since reality is fundamentally "empty" and therefore ever-changing and creative. Which just happens to be the Vajrayana position... 

Who knows, maybe even Consensus Buddhism could become part of Emptiness? 

I will continue my explorations of this author´s content in the near future. 

This would explain a thing or two, actually...

 

Why the West is the best

Reading this as we speak. It´s a "half-book" about modern liberal Buddhism, written from a Vajrayana (?) perspective. Will probably review this in the near future. Stay tuned! The link goes to the introduction. You can easily find the rest of the half-book on the site.  

Consensus Buddhism

The retroactive purge of Richard Dawkins

"Wow, I really love the American Humanist Association.
Is it one of our front groups?"

The American Humanist Association is so woke that it has decided to strip Richard Dawkins of an award he got 25 years ago. LOL! Clown world strikes again. Of course, nobody has ever heard of the AHA, while everyone knows about Dawkins, so somehow, I think he´ll manage... 

American Humanist Association purges Richard Dawkins

And Arctic night came to be

"A Perfect Planet" is a BBC One series, narrated in the original by David Attenborough. Here in Sweden, our very own Henrik Ekman is the mysterious voice in the background. I recently watched the second episode, titled "The Sun". Ostensibly about the impact of sunlight on Earth´s wildlife, it´s really a nature photographer´s extravaganza, showing spectacular images from all over the world. This time, the production team takes us to Southeast Asia, Ellesmere Island during the Arctic night, mainland Canada, the Sahara desert, New Zealand, Alaska, and a few other places besides. We get to see the bizarre life cycle of the fig wasp (which has co-evolved perfectly with the fig trees), the weird mating rituals of the garter snake, hibernating frogs, snow geese fighting it out with Arctic foxes, silver ants in the Sahara, gibbons, and the sooty sharewater (a bird that migrates between New Zealand and Alaska, thereby experiencing "an eternal summer"). 

But the most astounding and frankly scary footage comes from Ellesmere Island north of Greenland. You would think an island in the middle of the Arctic Ocean would be devoid of "higher" wildlife. You would be wrong. Even during the coldest and darkest time of the year (the Arctic night lasts four months here), the island is the scene of an eternal struggle between hords of muskoxen and packs of Arctic wolves. It frankly looks like another planet. In the documentary, the wolves actually fail to kill a muskox, and are forced to chase enormous swarm-like flock of Arctic hares instead! It looks almost comic. Last time I watched a documentary about Ellesmere Island, I waxed philosophical. Somehow, the fate of the animals at this God-forsaken place, being forced to act out their pre-programmed behavioral patterns over and over, made me more appreciative of being born a human...

Finally, two complaints. At least in the Swedish version, the narrator quotes the Bible but garbles its meaning. No, citizen, the Bible doesn´t simply say "And light came to be". It says very explicitly that *God* created the light. But nice try, atheista. Also, the observation that one hour of sunlight contains all the energy humanity needs is irrelevant, since there is no way to harness that large amount of solar power. Funny how the little sound bites tells us more about the Zeitgeist than the big picture...

If Our Lord also created Ellesmere Island after hounding the wolves out of Eden is, alas, less clear!

Still, recommended. Especially in conjunction with the first episode, reviewed by me elsewhere on this blog. 

Mindfulness and kundalini

On the dangers of mindfulness meditation and kundalini yoga, written by John Michael Greer (an occultist working in the Druid Revival and Golden Dawn traditions). Let´s be careful out there! 

The Flight from Thinking

"Sveket från Daniel Suhonen" eller Leninistisk uppfostringsanstalt inställd?

Att Åsa Linderborg vill ha yttrandefrihet för våldtäktsmän (och kanske vissa andra friheter också) visste vi redan. 

Men efter *den här* krönikan borde nog tanten tala ur skägget ordentligt. Hon anser alltså att det inte bör vara straffbart att förneka Förintelsen. Okej. Betyder det att Linderborg vill upphäva lagen som förbjuder hets mot folkgrupp? I så fall borde hon säga det uttryckligen.

Hon skriver också, uppenbarligen helt utan ironi, att "statsbärande partier brukar ha selektivt minne". Som kommunistpartierna, då?

Linderborg har ju tidigare profilerat sig som en närmast bokstavlig kommunist. Är hon det fortfarande? Jag undrade detta redan i mitt allra första inlägg här på bloggen för två år sedan, då Linderborg anklagade #metoo för att vara "en revolution" och skrev något surt om att revolutioner alltid hotar rättssäkerheten. Lite märkligt att en gumma som blivit anklagad för att driva Aftonbladets kulturredaktion som en leninistisk uppfostringsanstalt börjar låta som Edmund Burke när *hennes* kompisar drabbas av den röda terrorn... 

Jag undrar förresten om jag får avslöja namnet på hennes våldtäktanklagade kompis utan att bli anmäld för förtal? Det kanske ska vara verboten fortfarande?

Kanske finns det en förklaring till mysteriet med kamrat (eller är det medborgare) Linderborg. Kanske tillhör hon en kommunistisk fraktion som länge diggat yttrandefrihet. Särskilt för anti-semiter. 

Kanske är Linderborg egentligen anhängare av...FiB/Kulturfront. Någon borde kolla om hon har Mao-märket kvar på skärmmössan!

"Ett paradis för alla slöhögar"

Veckans Strasser

Konservativa "Breitbart News" i USA ger utrymme åt radikalfeministiska och/eller lesbiska kritiker av trans-rörelsen. På engelska. 

French lesbians harassed by transgender activists

"I will not submit"

The first modern state?

I´ve continued my reading of the heavy scholarly tome "Peasants, Lords and State. Comparing Peasant Conditions in Scandinavia and the Eastern Alpine Region, 1000-1750", edited by Tove Iversen, John Ragnar Myking and Stefan Sonderegger. It´s probably still a common idea in some circles that the historical development of Sweden is somehow unique (and uniquely good and benign), for instance due to "peasant self-government" at the local level since time immemorial, and the peasant estate in the Diet since at least the 15th century. In this scenario, Sweden always had a strong and free peasantry, something that eventually led to the creation of our advanced modern democracy. While this view isn´t *entirely* out there, it´s interesting to note that many other European nations or territories have a strikingly similar self-conception: Iceland, Norway, Switzerland, Tyrol, England...and probably others still. So already on this level, there is nothing "unique" about Sweden. It´s of course an interesting question whether or not there is something "pan-Germanic" or "Indo-European" about this instead, at least on the level of ideology.

The tome under review doesn´t discuss this, however. Rather, it tries to take a more realistic and empirical look at the actual conditions on the ground, and these (inevitably) turn out to be a more messy story. One example is Tyrol, a historical region in western Austria and northern Italy. During the Middle Ages and Early Modern Period, Tyrol was one of many self-governing territories within the "Holy Roman Empire of the German nation". During the Carolingian period, free peasants were heavily represented at the assemblies ("things") convened by the local counts. Of course, many peasants during this period were *not* free. The theory that these assemblies had evolved out of the "Markgenossenschaften", old areas managed and ruled communaly by Germanic tribesmen during the Migrations, has apparently been abandoned by modern historians. Be that as it may, whatever influence the free peasants may have had eroded during the eleventh century, when the nobility and the clergy usurped the powers of the "things". '

During the 13th century, the situation changed again. The peasantry was allowed to create local organs of self-government at the initiative of the princely rulers. The process is mostly associated with Meinhard II, who ruled Tyrol from 1258 to 1295. Meinhard´s goal was to create a centralized regime centered on the princely rulers, and one historian has actually dubbed Tyrol "the first modern state". This project led Meinhard into conflict with both the nobility and the clergy, who rather preferred the more erstwhile feudal system. Meinhard nearly extinguished the Tyrolean nobility, either by inheriting or ransoming their noble rights, or by simply driving them away from the territory altogether. He also gained control over the important ecclesiastical territory of Brixen and Trient. The salt and silver mining were both controlled by the prince, generating a substantial revenue. 

Meinhard´s so-called "concentration" (centralization) freed the peasantry from feudal control. In its place came a kind of local self-government at the village level, but also new dependencies on the emerging central power. The local assembly, known as Gemeinde, consisted of all household heads in the village. It´s most important function was to administer the Gemain, the communal land surrounding most villages. They also took decisions concerning field rotation, road maintenance, and the like. On these points, the Gemeinde apparently had a high degree of autonomy. However, the prince reserved the right to use some of the communal forests, since the timber was needed in the metallurgy industry. The Gemeinde also had to compile tax rolls, collect taxes and muster soldiers. Here, the local assemblies de facto functioned as the long arm of the central power! 

Shortly after the death of Meinhard, another important development took place, as the Gemeinde were fused with local courts known as Gerichte. These achieved "lower jurisdiction", and could hence pass judgements in cases involving local conflicts and finable offenses (violent offenses were part of the princely "higher jurisdiction"). 

For some reason, modern Tyrolean regionalists claim that a document often called "the Magna Carta of 1342", issued by the Emperor Louis the Bavarian, is the legal foundation of freedom, equality, democracy and peasant participation in the affairs of Tyrol. One of the contributors to this volume spends some time debunking this claim, pointing out that some copies of this document were never even sent to Tyrol, while others seem to have been rescinded shortly after being issued. The real champion of democracy in Tyrol turns out to be Frederick IV (Frederick of the Empty Pockets), who was Duke of Austria from 1402 to 1439. This is richly ironic. Yes, this is the very same Frederick who attacked the Appenzell Swiss when *they* demanded freedom, and lost the famous Battle of the Stoss in 1405! 

While Frederick apparently couldn´t get rid of the nobility in the way Meinhard had done, he took other measures to ensure popular support. The Gerichte were included in important political decision-making from 1410, and could select delegates to the the Tiroler Landtag from 1420. Note that the Gerichte were congruent with the Gemeinde, the local "things". In the Landtag (the local Diet), the peasants and burghers consistently sided with Duke Frederick against the noble opposition. Of course, in practice the peasant delegates to the Landtag were from the upper layers of the peasantry. Others were inkeepers. They had usually distinguished themselves as local officials or judges. One of the contributors to this volume believes that the Tyrolean peasants participated more in political events than peasants in other parts of the Holy Roman Empire, but less than in Graubünden or the Swiss confederacy. The situation changed again during the early 16th century, now to the detriment of the peasantry, as "aristocratic absolutism" gained strength. However, this book doesn´t discuss this later development.

The main take away from this volume (so far) is that Sweden, while being unusual in some ways, isn´t an entirely unique special case in Europe. Which is actually a good thing. Reading this study made me feel less claustrophobic!                   

But Trump was right...

Why on earth is this a bad thing? Biden is forced to continue and perhaps even deepen Trump´s nationalist-protectionist policies. From the website of the "International Marxist Tendency". 

"For want of a microchip, the empire is lost"

Swiss dissident

"Peasants, Lords and State. Comparing Peasant Conditions in Scandinavia and the Eastern Alpine Region, 1000-1750" is a heavy scholarly tome edited by Tove Iversen, John Ragnar Myking and Stefan Sonderegger. It was published by Brill in 2020. It forms part of Brill´s series "The Northern World". In this blog post, I will concentrate on Sonderegger´s incredibly entertaining revisionist history "Switzerland - A `Peasant State´?". Apparently, the self-conception of the Swiss is still that their little "confederacy" is some kind of special case in Europe (or the world), a nation founded by medieval peasants who valiantly fought for their freedom and direct democracy against the Habsburgs and other tyrannical overlords. Everyone has heard the stories of William Tell, and in Switzerland itself, Uli Rotach is another folk hero, associated with the historical canton of Appenzell. Rotach is often depicted in peasant dress and is said to have perished in the flames of his own farm, after killing twelve Habsburg enemies in man-to-man combat. Another similarity with Tell is that Rotach probably never existed in the first place...

In his contribution, Sonderegger systematically deconstructs the Swiss peasant myth. The real movers and shakers of Swiss constitutional development were not assemblies of peasants or cowherds, but the burghers in the towns. In 1377, five districts (Ländlein) of the Appenzell joined the Swabian League of Cities - the only rural areas allowed to do so. The reason was that Appenzell was economically connected to the town of St Gallen. Both town and hinterland saught liberation from the rule of the abbey of St Gallen (the abbot was also a powerful secular lord). The towns of St Gallen and Konstanz were tasked with representing the Appenzell Ländlein in the Swabian League. They also set themselves up as a "Schutzmächte" (protective power) over the Appenzell, with comprehensive powers to act in the name of the League. The towns demanded that the four Ländlein unite into one territory, the Land Appenzell (the future Swiss canton Appenzell). They were also told to elect a council of thirteen men to represent the Land when negotiating with the towns. The council was also supposed to become a kind of internal government of the Land Appenzell itself. That is, the constitutional development had nothing to do with free peasants meeting in a direct democratic assembly, rather it was an initiative of the cities from above. This is further shown by Appenzell´s first seal. It was adopted shortly after the rural districts had joined the League and was obviously based on the seal of St Gallen. Seals were associated with towns or the royal power, not with rural Länder. 

The battle of the Stoss on 17 June 1405 during the Appenzell Wars of Liberation has aquired a near-legendary status in patriotic Swiss historiography as a victory of armed peasants against an imperial army. It was during this pivotal event that Rotach supposedly died the death of a national martyr. Sonderegger believes that the real story shows that the town of St Gallen and the armed peasants cooperated against the army of the Duke of Austria, Frederick IV. The duke was never at the Stoss (a mountain pass), instead he made an attempt to besiege St Gallen. In the skirmishes that followed, 30 men from St Gallen were killed - their mass grave has been found. Ironically, there is no archeological evidence for the battle of the Stoss, although Sonderegger doesn´t deny that it took place. His point is that the resistance of the townspeople might have made it easier for the peasants to gain the upper hand at the pass. 

There were definite material reasons for the close alliance between St Gallen and the Appenzell. While the town was of course dependent on the rural hinterland for food, there were also dependecies the other way. In certain parts of the Appenzell, specialization in livestock rearing and viticulture developed. These areas were dependent on the town markets for their food (since they didn´t grow any food themselves). Much of the grain sold to these areas was originally imported all the way from Swabia! Above all, the townspeople extended credit to the peasants and pastoralists. There were also estates in the countryside owned by townspeople. The point is that the economies of St Gallen and the Appenzell were closely integrated. There was no special "peasant interest", but rather a joint regional interest transcending the urban-rural divide. 

The article also attacks the romantic view of the Swiss Confederacy that emerged during the 18th century. As an example, the author takes Frankfurt professor Johann Gottfried Ebel´s depiction of Switzerland from 1798. The Swiss peasants and herdsmen are depicted as simple, pure and strong, practicing a direct democracy which reminded Ebel of the ancient Greeks! Except, of course, that they were not. Sonderegger doesn´t deny that there might have been some kind of direct democracy in the Appenzell during the early 15th century, but during the late 16th century, power had slipped away from the popular assembly to the council. While the council was nominally elected by the assembly, it was dominated for centuries by the Zellweger family, rich burghers with substantial interests in the textile industry (during the 18th century, Appenzell Auserrhoden was apparently one of the most industrialized regions in Europe). To show their wealth and power, the Zellwegers even had stone palaces erected around the cantonal assembly place in the town of Trogen. For 74 years, a Zellweger sat in the "chair" at the assembly, the symbolically most prominent position. And not just symbolically, apparently! The democracy of pristine peasant and pastoralist savages turns out to be the flamboyant rule of textile barons...

I can´t say I´m entirely surprised by any of the above, provided the historical revisions are accurate. I´m not an expert on Swiss history! What national legends are true, anyway? Next, I´m going to read the chapter on Tyrol... 

Stay tuned for more myth-bashing. 

This week´s safe space

 

Alla älskar schweizerost

Hur många vet att 81% av Vorarlbergs befolkning år 1919 röstade för att området skulle införlivas med Schweiz, istället för att som tidigare tillhöra Österrike? Inte många, inte jag heller, men jag får väl lita på Wikipedias allvetande i denna fråga. Vorarlberg är förresten fortfarande en del av Österrike...

Tillplattad

 

Har inget särskilt att göra så här på söndag morron, så jag har toksurfat på nätet och hittat lite konstiga grejer, exempelvis den här informationen om corona på Plautdietsch, alltså plattyska. Eller rättare sagt den särpräglade dialekt av plattyska som i huvudsak talas av mennoniter. 

Okej, då vet vi det. :D 

PS. Här är förresten ett utdrag ur bibelöversättningen till Plautdietsch. Närmare bestämt från "Daut 1. Buak Mose", alltså Första Mosebok. 

 Em Aunfank schauft Gott de Himmel un de Ieed. Un de Ieed wea wiest un ladich, un Diestaness wea äwa de ruzhende Deepe [Onentlichkjeit]; un de Jeist Gottes schwäwd äwa de Wotasch. Un Gott säd: Daut woat Licht! Un daut word Licht. Un Gott sach daut Licht, daut et goot wea. Un Gott trand daut Licht von de Diestaness. Un Gott nand daut Licht Dach, un de Diestaness nand hee Nacht. Un daut word Owent un daut word Zemorjess: De 1-ta Dach.

Den var ju enkel. Här kommer en svårare!

Soo worden vollbrocht de Himmel un de Ieed un aul äa Häa. Un Gott haud aum 7-den Dach sien Woakj vollbrocht, daut hee jemoakt haud; un hee rud aum 7-den Dach von aul siene Woakjen, dee hee jemoakt haud. Un Gott säajend däm 7-den Dach un heilijd am; dan aun däm seljen rud hee von sienem Woakj, daut Gott jeschaufen haud, enn däm hee daut muak. Dit es de Entstonung vom Himmel un de Ieed, aus see jeschaufen worden, aun däm Dach, doa de Harr, Gott de Ieed un Himmel muak, un äa aulet Struck vom Feld oppe Ieed wea, un äa aulet Krut vom Feld utleet; dan Gott, de Harr haud noch nich oppe Ieed räajnen loten, un kjeen Mensch wea doa, om däm Ieedboddem too bebuen.

Där räckte nog inte skoltyskan till, tror jag. Och så toppar vi med Matteusevangeliet. 

Aus Jesus, enn Bethlehem em judeschen Laund, jebuaren wea, enn de Tiet aus Heroodes Kjeenich wea, kjeemen vom Oosten (utem Morjelaund) Stearnforscha no Jerusalem, un säden: «Wua es de Kjeenich de Jude, dee jebuaren es? Dan wie ha sien Stearn em Morjelaund jeseenen, un send jekomen, am auntobäde». Aus Kjeenich Heroodes daut hieed, wea hee erschrakjt un gauns Jerusalem met am. Un hee vesaumld aule Huagepriesta un Schreftjelieede utem Volkj, un forscht no, woa de Christus jebuaren woaren sull. See oba säden too am: Enn Bethlehem enn Judäa; dan aulsoo steit derch dän Profeet jeschräwen: «Un du Bethlehem, em Judischen Laund, du best nich de jerinjsta unja de Firste (Harscha) enn Judäa; dan ut die woat een Harscha häa komen, dee mien Volkj Israel weiden woat». {Mi.5,1} 

Och hör sen!

Let the Great Game begin anew

 

Which side are you on, punks? 

Wag the dog

This is a "review", or rather an ironic comment, originally posted at another site, since removed. It deals with one of my fortes: small sectarian left-wing groups, more specifically the "Marlenites", which are occasionally mentioned in footnotes in Trotskyist books. I actually encountered a guy who claimed to have met them, back in the 1940´s, since virtually every member of this small group worked at the same printing shop in New York City. According to other sources, they were blood relations, too! Marlen apparently broke with Communism in favor of Zionism after the war (or non-war), but that´s another story as they say!

This is a fascinating publication (after a fashion). “The Bulletin” was published in New York during the 1940´s by the obscure, small leftist group Workers´ League for a Revolutionary Party, not to be confused with the (contemporary) Revolutionary Workers´ League, nor with the (later) Workers´ League (which also published a magazine called “The Bulletin”) or the League for the Revolutionary Party (also based in New York). 

Are you with me so far? ;-)

The Workers´ League for a Revolutionary Party was led by one George Spiro, who wrote under the nom-de-plume George Marlen. For this reason, his paltry few followers are usually just called the Marlenites. Most people never heard about them, but those who have, often consider them to have been the crankiest ultra-left sect around. After reading “The Bulletin” and some other material, I beg to differ. Yes, the Marlenites were super-sectarian and had a few pretty strange ideas, but they were neither better nor worse than any other small, super-sectarian group. I can understand why Joseph Hansen´s SWP would laugh at the Marlenites, but with what right do the sectarians of today complain about Comrade Spiro and his supposed madness? Projection, much?

This issue of “The Bulletin” contains one article that really is barking mad. The Marlenites claim that World War II was a bluff. Yes, really! Apparently, the Nazis and the Western powers had a secret understanding to occasionally bomb each other for show, but in reality, very few buildings or industries were destroyed. A number of peculiar news telegrams published in New York dailies are harnessed as “evidence”. The point of the conspiracy? To fool the workers and, at a later date, unite Nazi and Western forces against the Soviet Union. Even the Hitler-Stalin pact is part of the plot to attack the Soviets. Stalin has been temporarily allowed to occupy some small, neighboring nations to the USSR, which will then be used against him at a later date as a casus belli. Marlen´s analysis of the war may have looked interesting during the “Phoney War” or even after the fall of France, when a large portion of the French establishment decided to collaborate with the Nazis rather than resisting them. However, the Marlenites insisted on their analysis even during the Blitz!

Another staple of this group (the one it´s mostly known for among the cognoscenti) is the claim that Trotsky was really a Stalinist. This issue of “The Bulletin” contains an article called “The Trotsky School of Falsification”, dealing with discrepancies in Trotsky´s published statements about Lenin´s testament. The Marlenites also published a number of pamphlets, in which they accused Trotsky of being a co-conspirator with Stalin, Zinoviev and Kamenev against Lenin and Lenin´s true legacy. Once again, we are dealing with an idea which makes sense on *some* level, but which Marlen turns into a fully-hatched conspiracy theory. It´s a fact that Trotsky didn´t immediately see the danger coming from Stalin, that he (at first) didn´t fight him hard enough when he *did* realize the danger, and that he eventually united with (and compromised with) Zinoviev and Kamenev. It´s probably also true that Trotsky´s writings contain some discrepancies – I haven´t bothered checking. From this, Marlen derives the somewhat hasty conclusion that Trotsky was a “Stalinist”. He even claims that Stalin may have poisoned Lenin, and that Trotsky knew about it! 

While attacking The Old Man in this manner, the Marlenites nevertheless had essentially the same analysis of the Soviet Union as – wait for it – Trotsky. This raises the question why a “Stalinist” and traitor like Trotsky could possibly have developed a correct analysis of the Soviet Union and its degeneration? No answer is forthcoming. In a very real sense, Marlen wanted to be “more Trotskyist than Trotsky”! 

The rest of “The Bulletin” contains polemics against competing anti-Stalinist Marxist groups, both those that mattered (the Trotskyist SWP and Schachtman´s Workers Party) and those that didn´t (the Oehlerite RWL and the Stammite RWL). The polemics are often based on a few sloppy formulations in the magazines of the competitors, which to the Marlenites prove their “opportunism”. The only polemic that makes any kind of sense is the one directed at SWP´s so-called proletarian military policy (it was controversial even within the Fourth International).

If all this sounds familiar to seasoned left-watchers, it should. This is how *all* sectarian groups argue! Long-winding polemics, pages on end, based on nothing more than a sloppy sentence or a sentence taken out of context. Complicated scenarios turned into simple conspiracy theories (Churchill didn´t *always* bomb Vichy French troops, therefore…). But, above all, the inferiority complex towards the great leader (in this case, Leon Trotsky), whose analyses the sectarian group steals, all the while attacking him and his movement.

We´ve seen it countless of times since the demise of the Marlenites. What about the “polemics” in Workers´ Vanguard, magazine of the Spartacist League? What about Enver Hoxha´s followers, who attack Maoism while calling the Soviet Union “state capitalist” (the Maoist position)? What about the bizarre groups who stole dissident Trotskyist Sam Marcy´s analyses of the “global class war”, all the while attacking Marcy´s own party? What about the ICC and their conspiracy theory about “the Machiavellism of the bourgeoisie”?

In what sense, pray tell, is this *less* insane than the strange gyrations of George Spiro a.k.a. Marlen and his small band of faithful?

I´d say it´s all the same crap. Entertaining crap, of course. Otherwise I wouldn´t be musing about it at 3 AM local time… 

Life just fucking happened

In case you wonder, the mystery of biogenesis has been solved. Life just fucking happened, dude. Cuz reasons.  

Oh No! Biogenesis is Impossible?? A case study in creationist lies

Bögporren räddad, siegish heilish

Vilken tur att nassarna vann den där märkliga tönträttegången om Esias Tegnér och Hávamál. Det betyder att jag även i fortsättningen kan citera "Mein Kampf" under mina bögporrfilmer, utan att De Aderton kan stoppa mig med hänvisning till klassikerskyddet. För visst är väl Adolf Hitlers magnum opus en klassiker? Eller nej?

För att bli *lite* mer allvarlig, så betyder detta att ateister (inklusive riktigt elaka specimen) även fortsättningsvis kan citera Bibeln i mer komiska sammanhang. Följden av en fällande dom hade rimligtvis varit den motsatta. För visst omfattas väl i så fall Bibeln av klassikerskyddet?

Koranen får man däremot inte håna. Den omfattas nämligen av lagen om hets mot folkgrupp!

Perfectly wild

"A Perfect Planet" is a new series shown on BBC Earth, narrated by David Attenborough. When shown on Swedish TV, however, we have to rest contented with Henrik Ekman! I recently watched the first episode, "Volcano".

It´s ostensibly an educational production about the pivotal role of volcanic activity in sustaining life on Earth. Except, of course, that it isn´t. The "educational" angle is just an excuse to show the most spectacular footage of wildlife the BBC could lay their hands on this season. No hard feelings, btw! I mean, who cares about geology, anyway?

First, we get to see Lake Natron in Tanzania, a large volcanic lake where literally millions of lesser flamingoes breed and nest every year. It looks like another planet. Unfortunately for the flamingoes, but fortunately for the ecological balance in nature, marabou storks also gather to feast at those young flamingoes which aren´t fit enough to run away. I assumed the truly spectacular footage from Lake Natron was made by drones (the lake seems to be strongly acidic) but actually it was shot by an actual human who reached the interior of the lake area with a hovercraft! The local Massai tribeswomen even had to help him repair the hovercraft´s skirt... 

Next, we get to see some bizarre footage from the Galapagos Islands. At the small island of Wolf, one of "Darwin´s finches" (actually tanagers) have evolved a truly remarkable behavior. The "vampire ground finch" sometimes attacks the Nazca boobies and literally sucks their blood, weirldy enough without the boobies even noticing. At the island of Fernardina, an iguana climbs down into a volcanic crater 800 meters deep to lay its eggs in the hot sands surrounding the volcanic lake. This almost literal descensus into hell is extremely dangerous for the lizard, due to steep cliffs and falling rocks. 

This first episode ends with scenes of otters and coyotes from Yellowstone and a large gathering of cute-looking but dangerous brown bears from Kamchatka in Russia. 

I´m not sure if "A Perfect Planet" really proves that the planet is perfect, but at the very least, it does seem to be perfectly wild! 

I will certainly continue watching this series with great interest. 

Favorit i repris

Ursprungligen publicerad den 3 augusti förra året under BLM-protesterna (kravallerna) i USA. Här kommer den igen. Varför det? Mest för att jag känner för det! 

Jag är tillräckligt gammal för att komma ihåg en tid när vänstern faktiskt brukade inta vänsterståndpunkter. De senaste åren har jag därför baxnat över hur även väldigt radikala grupper långt ut på vänsterkanten har intagit alltmer absurda ståndpunkter. Vänstern idag verkar stödja Joe Biden, Europeiska Unionen, de stora techföretagen, ”corona lock downs”, grönkapitalism och jag vet inte vad. Kort sagt, vänstern låter som globo-liberalerna!

Och däri har vi kanske förklaringen till gåtan...

I samband med migrantkrisen 2015 blev det uppenbart att nyliberalerna och vänsterliberalerna vuxit samman till en enad globalistisk fraktion. Eller rättare sagt ett enat globalistiskt etablissemang. Vänsterradikalerna utgör helt enkelt ett bihang till vänsterliberalerna. Något vi ser väldigt tydligt idag, under kravallerna i USA, där Antifa helt enkelt är demokratiska partiets stormtrupper.

Hur uppstod denna situation? Jag antar att svaret står att finna i arbetarrörelsens misslyckande att driva igenom *sin* särskilda politik. Den enorma statsbyråkratiska apparaten valde då att inte längre knyta sina förhoppningar om ett ”rationellt” samhälle till arbetarrörelsen (och arbetarklassen). Istället började man betona olika ”identiteter” och deras tillskyndare inom medelklassen: feministerna, gayrörelsen, den anti-rasistiska rörelsen, trans och queer, etc. Samtidigt växte den byråkratiska apparaten samman med nyliberalismen. 

Det är inte så konstigt som det vid första anblicken verkar. 

För det första är nyliberalismen fullständigt kompatibel med vänsterliberalismen och ”identiteterna”. Dessa kan kommersialiseras, och ingenting särskilt hindrar en nyliberal ekonomi från att ha en vänsterliberal kultur, så länge klassaspekterna tonas ned eller helt utesluts från ekvationen. För det andra är ekonomin inte rent nyliberal ändå. Det finns en byråkratisk apparat för att reglera kapitalismen. Problemet är förstås att regleringarna aldrig verkar gynna vanligt folk. Däremot gynnar de den administrativa klass inom vilken vänsterliberalerna har en av sina sociala baser. För det tredje ”måste” nyliberalerna kontrollera t.ex. de arbetslösa. Vilket förutsätter en byråkratisk apparat. Gissa vem som erbjuder sina tjänster? På detta sätt har en symbios skapats mellan ny- och vänsterliberaler. Förutom den byråkratiska apparaten är de sistnämnda starka inom den ideologiska propagandaapparaten, som omfattar allt från skolor till dagstidningar. Där torde de även ha sällskap av mer utpräglade vänsterradikaler.

Det är givetvis detta som förklarar varför ”vänstern” (?!) plötsligt motsätter sig Brexit, försöker censurera Michael Moores kritik av grönkapitalismen, stödjer ett globalt undantagstillstånd mot corona (d.v.s. ett undantagstillstånd utfärdat av ”den borgerliga imperialistiska staten”), o.s.v. Man undrar ju varför t.o.m. den ”revolutionära” vänstern vill atomisera arbetarklassen och sätta den i karantän. Orsaken torde vara, att arbetarna då blir beroende av medelklassbaserade lobbyister och parlamentariker för att t.ex. få ut sin A-kassa. De blir kort sagt beroende av vänstern! Den breda uppslutningen kring massinvandringen beror på samma logik. Nyliberalerna vill ha billig arbetskraft, vänsterbyråkraterna vill ha röstboskap de kan kontrollera, administrera och ”hjälpa”. Nätcensur handlar om hur vänsterbyråkrater försöker utöva press på nyliberala storföretag, dock utan att faktiskt utmana deras exploatering av billig arbetskraft. I USA är både universiteten (som har skyhöga avgifter) och det tidigare Obamacare (egentligen ett sätt för försäkringsbolag att tvinga till sig mer pengar via staten) exempel på symbiosen mellan ”vänster” och nyliberal ”höger”.

Det förklarar också vänsterns underliga tunnelseende inför BLM-protesterna i USA. Eller rättare sagt Antifa-kravallena. Ser de inte att det hela givetvis är en provokation från demokratiska partiet, ett av de ”imperialistiska” partierna i USA? Innan detta är över kommer vänstern, inklusive trotskisterna och anarkisterna, att stödja ett *öppet* globalistiskt kuppförsök, antingen i USA eller annorstädes. Det kommer att vara vänsterns 1914.

Vad kommer att hända i framtiden? Min gissning är att alliansen mellan vänsterliberaler-vänsterradikaler och nyliberaler kommer att utsättas för stora påfrestningar under 2020-talet. Vänsterns alltmer bisarra och surrealistiska världsbild (där stöd till både fascistoid islamism och trans-rörelsen ingår) kan bli droppen för många nyliberaler. 

Men framförallt kommer det att handla om ekonomins utveckling. Eller brist på densamma. Jag gissar att nyliberalerna så småningom bryter med ”vänstern” och istället allierar sig med högerpopulisterna. Det kan ske på två sätt: antingen genom att högerpopulisterna säljer sig till globalismen (många högerpopulister är ju nyliberaler i ekonomiska frågor), eller att nyliberalismen blir mer ”nationell” och protektionistisk, samtidigt som den ökar utsugningen av arbetarklassen i det egna landet. Kanske kommer båda sakerna att inträffa som två distinkta faser?  

Frågan är förstås vad ”vänstern” kommer att göra. Att den skulle kunna svänga och alliera sig med en alltmer nationalistisk inhemsk arbetarklass låter inte så troligt. Ärligt talat har jag ingen aning. Jag skulle dock inte bli förvånad om dagens vänsterungdomar slutar som terrorister, när de inser att ”systemet” de försvarat bara manipulerat dem, samtidigt som de fortfarande tror på den ”vakna” världsbilden. Då kommer de att börja bomba även sina tidigare herrar och mästare på vänstersidan, och givetvis anklaga dem för att inte vara tillräckligt woke.

Vad som är alternativet till ovanstående är inte helt glasklart, men förmodligen någon form av vänsterpopulism.

White Boy Summer

 

Sorry, couldn´t help myself, LOL. 

Fantastic, now she lives in the same hood as the BLM´s White membership base

 

Fabulous. Now she can bail out more of those riotous White trans-kids from Seattle, Portland and so on...

No copyright violation intended, btw. *I* make no money out of this!

The real Otherkin

"Nationalnyckeln till Sveriges flora och fauna" is a work in progress, published by Sveriges Lantbruksuniversitet (SLU), i.e. the Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences. The original ambition was to describe all (!) species of living organisms found in Sweden in about 100 volumes, published over a period of 20 years. 16 years into the project, only 20 volumes have been published, and something tells me we will never see the happy ending of this particular project! Still, the books produced so far *are* interesting, at least if you´re some kind of super-nerd with a strong tendency to favor invertebrates, mosses or fish. I´m pretty sure volume CV is the only encyclopedic treatment of the Psocoptera *with full color photos* available on the market, to take just one example.

The latest installment in this potentially never-ending series arrived earlier today at my COVID-restricted pick up location somewhere in Sweden. Yes, it´s volume DN 110-167, titled "Blötdjur. Sidopalpssnäckor - taggsäckssnäckor. Mollusca: Cimidae - Asperspinidae". Yes, folks, it´s time to give the small subsection of the nerd community who specialize in molluscan cladistics their due! This volume covers Heterobranchia ("the different gilled-snails"), more specifically the infraclasses Lower Heterobranchia and Euthyneura, minus the superorders Pylopulmonata, Eupulmonata and Hygrophila, to be covered in another volume at some unspecified later date. In plain English, most "standard" snails and slugs (the ones you eat, the ones that eat your vegetables, etc) have been excluded from this work, which concentrates almost exclusively on marine species, many of them positively bizarre. 

The authors make a valiant attempt to sort out the cladistically correct relationships between the taxa described in the book, and an even more daring attempt to describe the often quite strange anatomy and behavior of these "sea slugs and sea snails". I´m not sure if they really succeed. What was that again about "secondary detorsion" and "internal symmetry", or whatever it was? And what on earth is a "protandric hermaphrodite"? Yes, it means that an organism is born a male and later in life switches biological sex and becomes female. It also seems that many of these Mollusca have the "wrong" body plans altogether, which I suppose keep evolutionary biologists and geneticists up all night, scratching their heads. (Creationists have a ready answer: God did it to confound the non-believers! Why he created the protandric hermaphrodites is, alas, less clear.) 

The most bizarre creature in the entire volume is Elysia viridis, a sea slug with the ability to photosynthesize sun light! The authors even refer to it as a "plantimal", a term I assume is derived from science fiction. Through a process known as kleptoplasty, Elysia incorporates chloroplasts from green algae it consumes into its own cells, thereby becoming "solar-powered" like a plant. Since chloroplasts could be considered cyanobacteria, the relationship is a kind of "symbiosis". Here we have a true Otherkin, it seems! 

Compared to this, the capture of cnidarian nematocysts (stinging cells) by the Nudibranchia is almost trivial...

The species presentations contain information on morphology, behavior and ecology (if known), and range. There is also some information on the scientific names. No English summaries seem to exist, but the keys are bilingual. Most species are illustrated by color pics of their soft bodies and/or shells. Vernacular Swedish names, many of them weird, seems to have been invented by the authors and approved by the mysterious committee regulating such things. Trust me, we don´t know what on earth "klubbnuding", "dubbelvårting" or "Y-tecknad snigelkott" is supposed to mean (well, maybe barely)! 

This will hardly be a best seller, but if heterobranchs is your main thing in life, investing in a copy might be a good idea. At least if you understand Swedish. 

And perhaps even if you don´t.