Truth Asocial

Overheard on Twitter: "What if Flat Earth is a PSYOP to distract from Hollow Earth?"

Original tweet

Gorbymania redux

 

Let´s be honest. It wasn´t Mikhail Gorbachev who "abolished" or "dismantled" Communism and the Soviet Union. It was the United States through their economic-military warfare. Gorbachev was simply the Russian dude who negotiated the terms of surrender... 

We´re not the same

Are all religions essentially the same? Do they all lead to the same goal? The YouTube channel Doug´s Dharma says "no", which is interesting, since Doug is a very modernist and secular Buddhist! On this point, however, he is something of an "exclusivist". 

Doug traces the idea that all religions are really the same to 19th century American Transcendentalism, and regard it as an attempt to save religion from scientific criticism, by making its essence identical to ineffable mystical experiences, forever beyond the horizons of science or materialism. The main problem with this view is that religious practitioners themselves (including many mystics) disagree with it. They insist that their respective paths are indeed different. Also, the "universalist" or "perennialist" perspective isn´t really universal, but based on a hidden hierarchy, with Advaita Vedanta in top position. He and his source are  not the only people to have noticed this! 

As for Buddhism, the Buddha often polemicized with other teachers (often unnamed), whose paths in his opinion didn´t lead to the cessation of suffering. Despite all this, Doug believes that "universalism" can be a "skillful mean" to draw people closer to the truth, train your own compassion, avoid religious strife in society, and so on.

An interesting little piece. 

Can you forgive God?

 

A scathing, passionate attack on "the Biblical God", by a former Jehovah´s Witness who is now an atheist (although here he pretends to be a "misotheist" for argument´s sake). I actually found this a bit hard to watch...

Ascientific quote-mine

On-off-gadfly Sabine Hossenfelder (yes, she´s German) takes on (or is it off) the Big Bang theory in the YouTube clip linked above. She reaches the startling conclusion (which will be quote-mined by Answers in Genesis and Ken Hovind from now on) that...wait for it, dude...we don´t really know how the universe began?!

Which means the Great Pumpkin of the Gaps did it! 

But seriously... 

Hossenfelder believes that the current Big Bang cosmology is the most scientific explanation for the origins of the known universe, since it´s the simplest one (Occam´s razor). However, we can´t strictly speaking *know* whether its true or false. It "works" in the sense that the initial state of the universe plus various mathematical equations can "predict" the present state, but that´s all. The theory can´t prove if the equations used are the right ones. This is a problem, since many other postulated initial states with quite different equations *also* "predict" the present state of the cosmos. There is no empirical way to tell which ones are right, only our philosophical or methodological commitment to simple explanations. 

Indeed, there is neither an empirical nor a mathematical way to tell how the initial state actually looked like or behaved. This is why the initial state is a singularity. Science breaks down at this point. The Big Bang theory isn´t unscientific, but it could be termed ascientific. It´s neither here nor there. This is why all kinds of alternative theories about the origins of the universe can be put forward (one is called "geometrogenesis") and even sound convincing, but ultimately none can be proven. 

Or so Hossenfelder believes. I assume proponents of, say, Eric Lerner´s model (which denies the Big Bang) would say that the standard cosmology only works because of ad hoc assumptions (such as postulating the exact amount of dark matter and energy needed for the model to "work"), and that the theory therefore isn´t particularly simple at all...

Still, an interesting contribution. What if the answer to the question "how did the universe began" really is "We.Don´t.Know". How come we haven´t been told about this for the past 100 years or so? Fear of "therefore God", perhaps?  

All energi i samhällets ägo

Alltid lika fascinerande när Aftonbladet säger sanningen...

Politikerna har ignorerat ett viktigt säkerhetshot

Let´s dance, boys

 

Ananda Marga again...

Welcome to the apocalypse

 

"Arctic Sinkholes" is a recent NOVA documentary about the ongoing climate crisis. At the Yamal Peninsula in Siberia, gigantic craters have appeared, probably caused by methane explosions. I Alaska, new lakes have been formed due to leaking methane from the permafrost. We follow a research team to Esieh Lake to investigate the situation. The documentary also features Utqiagvik (formerly Barrow), the northernmost town in Alaska (and the United States), where the local Inuit already feel the effects of climate change. Whale meat can no longer be stored in permafrost cellars, and the coastline is eroding due to less ice protecting it against the sea. Future problems might be much, much worse...

Thawing permafrost might make it impossible to reach the global "climate goals", since enormous amounts of carbon dioxide and methane will be released into the atmosphere. The methane in particular is something of a dark horse. Although methane breaks down after only 12 years, its immidiate effect on climate change is more dramatic than that of CO-2. In the next 100 years, between 30% and 70% of surface permafrost might disappear, with essentially unknown consequences. Worse, at some places, such as Esieh Lake, fossil methane from layers *below* the permafrost is leaking, too! 

"Arctic Sinkholes" lacks the proper apocalyptic feeling (which is interesting in itself), and some of the scientists even say that the sinkholes and leaking lakes are "exciting". Well, yeah, I suppose. Still, it´s clearly implied at several points that our models might be wrong...in a too optimistic direction.

Welcome to the Apocalypse. 

What hipsters do

 

YouTube ads are usually not funny. They are mostly annoying, actually. So it´s something of a surprise that the most funny YouTube ad is Swedish. I mean, Sweden isn´t known for funny ads. Or funny anything, really. Yet, here we are!

In the ad (linked above), the teacher asks some kids who the man on the portrait is (it´s 16th century Swedish king Gustav Vasa). The little girl answers "That´s a hipster, obviously". When the teacher tries to explain that Vasa fled from Mora to Sälen on skis, an event which inspired the modern cross-country ski race Vasaloppet, the girl answers "Yeah, but that´s what hipsters do (i.e. they go skiing). And then they bake bread". 

I admit I have no idea what the heck this is supposed to mean, LOL. Nor do I understand the connection between hipsters, skiing, king Gustav, and the "KPA". The KPA? Yes, that´s who made the ad. But what *is* the KPA? As far as I can make out, it´s a national pension plan for Swedish local government employees?!

Not sure why on earth they even *need* an ad (does anyone voluntarily say no to their pension plans?). Which just makes the whole thing even more crazy, somehow...

Lost in an acausal realm

 

David John Wellman (the Youtube counter-apologist with a strange love for guinea pigs) takes on the "moral argument for God" here. 

I found the clip interesting, since I used to have a position similar to DJW at one point: the "Platonic realist" position that morality exists in an "acausal realm". But in sharp contrast to him, I didn´t regard this as an "atheist" position, but rather as deist or even theist. For what *is* an acausal realm of moral principles if not God, or at the very least, one possible God-concept? 

If the acausal realm is hyper-cosmic, yet has relevance for human minds, doesn´t that point straight to a transcendent creator with an interest in human affairs? 

Still, a good intro into part of the problematique. 

Bondeoffer

 

Eftersom Putin mycket väl kan ligga bakom både mordet på Darja Dugina och hussprängningarna på 00-talet...varför inte? Ryska ledare offrar regelbundet sitt eget folk (och sina egna medarbetare), så varför skulle Putin inte kunna göra det också? Observera förresten att avståndet mellan det där kärnkraftverket och "ryska gränsen" är ännu kortare än vad Hansson uppger, eftersom ryska gränsen de facto går precis norr om Krimhalvön. 

Vad Hansson inte nämner är att det finns kallhamrade cyniker även på "vår" sida. Jag tror som bekant att 9/11 inträffade för att USA medvetet sänkte garden eftersom Bush ville ha en ursäkt för att invadera Mellersta Östern och driva igenom hårdare lagar på hemmaplan...

Putin är beredd att offra sitt eget folk

Turn or burn

 

A criticism of the worst argument for Christianity: Pascal´s Wager. From Youtube atheist David John Wellman. 

"Vi skiter i västs sanktioner"

Sanktionerna mot Ryssland har misslyckats. Från Aftonbladet. Läs artikeln den innan den blir låst!

"Rubeln värd mer nu än före kriget"

The fourth fascism

 

I actually read "The Fourth Political Theory" by Alexander Dugin. My review is linked below. A propos recent events in Moscow, and so on. 

The nihilistic fascism of Alexander Dugin

What´s the time?

 

This is mind-boggling. Can somebody please debunk this?

It struck me that the "block universe" is similar in some ways to how some theologians see God. 

Does this prove that the world is God, or that the world is in God, or that God is in the world? 

Panentheism (pan-en-theism) again! 

Assassination in Moscow

 

The Russian secret service FSB claims that a Ukrainian woman with connections to Azov single-handedly carried out the recent assassination of Alexander Dugin´s daughter Darya in Moscow. This is an almost brilliantly incompetent propaganda lie. Or maybe not, since I don´t know how paranoid the average Russian is right now. Or how paranoid the FSB want them to be! 

If taken at face value, though, the FSB version is absurd and actually paints Russia in a very bad light. If a single Ukrainian fascist can sneak into Russia, assassinate the daughter of a high profile Putin supporter in Moscow, and sneak out again, *the Putin regime has no control over its own territory*. Maybe Paddington the Bear can travel to Russia on a Peruvian tourist visa and blow some shit up, I don´t know, some Gazprom-associated marmelade store? 

The most likely explanation is the conspiracy theory that Putin had Darya Dugina killed as a warning to Dugin, god knows about what. Maybe they are bickering behind the Kremlin walls? Or maybe they just wanted to carry out a really good false flag, the Dugin family being sort-of-innocent victims? 

Could it be some Western intelligence agency? I´m not an expert on that particular demimonde, but assassinating Darya Dugina strikes me as very "esoteric" somehow. If Dark Brandon wants to escalate against Russia, wouldn´t a more likely target be Putin himself? Or somebody directly responsible for running the Ukrainian war? Compare the car bombing to covert US-Israeli attacks on Iranian interests. These weren´t directed at some obscure cult leader...

Verdict: Probably Putin. Just another Tuesday! Or in this case, Saturday. 

Just another Tuesday

 

"Gemini Man" is a 2019 US film starring Will Smith in three different roles. Smith portrays a retired and disillusioned former sniper, Henry, whose last mission was the killing of a high profile Russian agent and bio-terrorist. Or maybe not, since Henry soon realizes that the agent was innocent, and that people inside the DIA (the intelligence agency Henry worked for) are spinning a vast conspiracy...and that *he* is the next target. 

When Henry and his female love interest manage to escape a DIA elimination patrol, agency head Clay Verris sends out a trained assassin who can mysteriously anticipate Henry´s every move. The hitman, known as Junior, turns out to be a younger cloned version of Henry himself! After the usual chases (somewhat unusually taking place in Cartegena and Budapest), Henry manages to "turn" Junior, who have exactly the same fears and doubts as Henry himself struggled with all his life. Verris therefore sends out *another* cloned version of Henry, called Senior, from which all such emotions have been erased. Indeed, that seems to be the point of the conspiracy: to breed a new race of cloned super-soldiers, who feel no remorse for killing and are disposable, thereby "saving" ordinary Americans from going to war themselves...

Funniest comment in the film is when a Russian named Yuri tells Henry: "So your government, which you have worked for all your life, is trying to kill you? And you are angry? In Russia, we call this Tuesday!". (As in "just another day".)

"Gemini Man" (gemini means "twins" in Latin) isn´t the best film around, but it´s much better than "After Earth", in which Will Smith starred against his real son. Here, he stars both himself and his own son?! Without the clone gimmick, the film would probably be quietly forgotten, but with it, it works tolerably. Budapest in Hungary is a magnificent city, although it looks almost computer-animated in this version, and I sure hope the fight between Henry and Junior in the local catacombs was actually filmed back in Hollywood! 

The film is actually on now, as we speak, on a Swedish cable channel... 

Plötsligt bara händer det

Det verkar som att Wolfgang Hansson faktiskt förespråkar att alla energiskatter ska avskaffas... 

En tanke jag själv lekt med här och på andra forum.

"Europa står inför en energipandemi"

What a summer

 

What a summer. William Lane Craig works overtime to lower the epistemic bar for evangelical Christianity, while Sam Harris just managed to blow New Atheism sky high. With both the strong guys bound, or at least down for counting, maybe we can now have a conversation about alternatives? Pseudo-Neoplatonism or something... 

Gods, titans, animals, ghosts and hell-beings can´t be saved in Buddhism

 

That´s where you´re wrong, kiddo. 

Irony?

 

I assume there is some kind of irony in here somewhere...

Håll käften, Annie

 

En enkel fråga till Annie Lööf om Vänsterpartiets PKK-flaggor i Almedalen. 

Anser Lööf att Barack Obama och Donald Trump gjorde rätt när de understödde YPG i norra Syrien med tunga vapen i syfte att bekämpa den s k Islamiska Staten?

Om svaret är ja, varför är det då fel att vifta med YPG:s flagga? Om svaret är nej, betyder det att Annie Lööf stödjer Islamiska Staten? 

Ovanstående är den så att säga "retoriskt effektiva" frågan. Annars kan man ju ta ett längre snack om, jag vet inte, NATO-landet Turkiets säkerhetspolitik eller något sådant...

Djävulens mormor (eller dotter)

Tänk att vara liberal eller på något sätt "vänster" och hamna på samma sida som Liz Cheney, dotter till Dick Cheney, som antagligen låg bakom 9/11. Trodde *jag* var en cynisk realpolitiker... 

Så ska dumpade Cheney hämnas på Trump

Incel magick

 

Some kind of "incel magick" in this clip by Thomas Sheridan, on temporary shore leave from Branch Covidian coverage. Not sure what to think about this, frankly. Just get laid the usual way? Note the comments on Led Zeppelin! Thelema? 

Winter is coming

In the essay linked below, John Michael Greer argues that the pandemic and its fallout might be "the straw before the last straw" that breaks the back of the current system. 

Maybe, maybe not. 

Unless I misremember, a certain Joe Biden won the POTUS elections in 2020, the US midterm election polls are tightening (i.e. are to the detriment of the GOP), and I don´t see any food riots, baby formula riots, or wildcat strikes. In fact, I don´t see or hear much questioning of the official COVID narrative either. People act as if the pandemic never happened. That being said, I might simply be overcautious. The "Revolution" has a strange way of always delaying itself... 

There are people in the alternative milieu who warn that the Winter (2022-2023) will be that last straw, with millions dying of disease, freezing temperature, famine, or what not. 

But here is an idea: what if the governments simply ditch the "green" energy programs, and go all in with coal, while refraining from further lockdowns of the economy even if COVID makes a comeback? Then, the darn system might survive...again. (Take the L in Ukraine might "help", too.) 

Until the next winter, I suppose. 

The Great Rehash, Part Three: Unsafe and Ineffective

Say what?

 

Some rando on YouTube who claims that ADD, ADHD and depression (sic) don´t really exist. For discussion purposes only... 

Karma is a bitch

 

Me, 40 years in the future? 

There´s something wrong with...I don´t know...belief-o-matics or something. I mean, during my most "based" period, an American GAL-TAN test showed me being somewhat to the left of Bernie Sanders. OK, let me guess, they asked all the wrong questions? Sure, I´m for single-payer health care, if that´s what you want to know... 

The religious belief-o-matics are even more weird. I constantly come out as New Age, New Thought and/or Unitarian Universalist. Except the first time, when the test showed that I must be...a Sikh! And don´t freak?

So for da record, I don´t do crystals or channeling, don´t await the arrival of benign space brothers to some hippie commune, nor do I do affirmations in the hope of selling off real estate at inflated prices (in the neighborhood of Boston, presumably). I don´t even wear a turban and a golden dagger, although I suppose that could be interesting pastimes, especially in the middle of a pandemic! :D

So I don´t know, man. Isn´t there any option for, I don´t know, pseudo-Neoplatonists or something?  

Is it possible...?

 

Bakom stålvallen

Credit: TT 

Och så finansierade han Ebbe Carlssons "privat"spaning mot kurder... 

Hübinette om Tomas Fischer

The Devil we didn´t know

 

Finally, some informed opinions on Yazidism, the peculiar minority religion of Kurdistan. 

The Aztec Empire never left

 

An interesting clip on the bizarre cult of "Santa Muerte" (Holy Death) in Mexico. Popularized academic material. It seems the Aztec Empire is still going strong...

Veckans Strasser

 

Utmärkelsen "Veckans Strasser" går denna vecka till...mig själv. 

Efter att ha gjort diverse "valkompasser" har det nämligen visat sig att mina åsikter står närmast SAP och SD. Det parti jag står längst ifrån är Centerpartiet. 

Vilket väl inte var så oväntat.  

The Assumption of Mary

 

The mystery of the Druze

 

An interesting YouTube clip about the Druze, a minority religion in Lebanon, Syria and Israel. Popularized scholarly material. 

The Great Life

 

An interesting clip on Mandaeans, a peculiar ethno-religious minority from southern Iraq, sometimes regarded as "the last Gnostics". Serious scholarly information! 

300 stood against many

 

So I recently watched "300", the pseudo-historical fantasy film from 2006 about the Battle of Thermopylae (in 480 BC) . The film isn´t bad, but it does suffer from a horrid "Lord of the Rings" complex - as in Peter Jackson´s films. Many of the Persian troops look like Orchs, the traitor Ephialtes is obviously Gollum, Theron has similarities with Worm-Tongue, and the Ephors are probably based on Saruman. Two of the Spartan soldiers banter in a way similar to Legolas and Gimli. David Wenham, who starred Faramir in "LOTR" evolves into a more Aragorn-like character in this production. There are also some similarities with "Gladiator". 

But what struck me about all, was how much pop culture has changed since 2006. "300" is very "right wing", and could probably not have been made today. It would be condemned as "fascist". The Spartans (who are portrayed almost as they were in real life - or at least in Athenian sources) are the heroes clearly representing "the West". The "Persians", by contrast, are surprisingly often Black (Persia didn´t control any part of sub-Saharan Africa), Arab bedouins, or simply demonic. The film is also "straight", with Ephialtes being seduced by part-lesbian orgies, and "boy-lover" being an insult of choice against the effeminate Athenians. Leonidas, by contrast, is the quintessential heterosexual lover. I sometimes wonder if Hollywood (hardly a conservative bastion) wasn´t simply trolling, making films like "300"?

One intriguing aspect is that the Spartans are - if you look closely enough - portrayed as secular, rational and lovers of logic, while the "Persians" stand for "mysticism" and are led by a bizarre god-king. Leonidas defies both his own "gods" (the Ephors and the Oracle) and the Persian "god" Xerxes. Is this Hollywood´s secret cue that the film is *really* about atheism being good, and Christianity (not just Islam) being bad? Who knows?  

Worth pondering, perhaps. 

Answers for Southern Baptists

Here are some tongue-in-cheek answers to Norman Geisler´s "Questions for Hindus". OK, I´m bored this evening...

1. Can you explain why some Hindus believe there is one reality beyond good and evil, and yet they live as though they believe evil is real?

Advaita: Because they are still stuck in the realm of illusion (maya). 

Hare Krishna: Ultimate reality isn´t beyond good and evil, but good. So these Hindus are essentially right. The supreme personality of godhead, Krishna, is a really good guy. In fact, Krishna and Christ are the same person. That´s obvious, since they had the same name.

Tantrism: Because they are a bunch of pussies. A real Tantrika would embrace evil and ride it like a tiger!

2. If reincarnation is a result of deeds in a previous life, then how did the first reincarnation begin?

Advaita: Well, how did Adam fall if he was created perfect and had everything? Why did Lucifer fall? Can you explain this? Reincarnation is the result of karma from beginningless time. And that´s that.

Hare Krishna: It began when some human jivas used their free will and turned away from Krishna. They then fell into the material world, which is emanated by Krishna for that very purpose. Sounds familiar?

Tantrism: Exoterically, it began when Shiva decided to play hide and seek with himself. But of course that´s just an old wives tale. Not even the Crone Goddess believes that one. The real truth is that the hyper-cosmic energy of creation and destruction is eternal. If you can ride the wave (or that tiger), reincarnation is a *good* thing! Ye shall be like gods, hiss...

3. If those suffering in this life are being punished for deeds in a previous life, then why show any compassion to help the downtrodden and needy? Are we not just tinkering with their karma and delaying their punishment to a further life?

Advaita: Yes, exactly. It´s a bit like Calvin´s predestination, you know.

Hare Krishna: Yes, exactly. But you can nevertheless destroy negative karma by intense bhakti for the supreme personality of godhead, so the best you can do for the homeless is to make them join in when you sing and dance in the streets of New York...

Tantrism: Yes, exactly. However, if you live among the homeless, eat garbage, and then kill them and eat *them* as blood sacrifice, you will overcome your own negative karma and reach transcendental states scarcely imaginable by mere Southern Baptists!

4. If evil is not real, then how did the illusion begin? Why is it so universal? And why does it seem so real?

Advaita: Maya is inscrutable. Now, please solve the theodicy problem.

Hare Krishna: Evil is real, and the world isn´t an illusion. Maya is the material energy of the supreme personality of godhead. See previous answer!

Tantrism: Oh, evil is real, alrightie. Who told you it wasn´t? Wanna touch my skull-staff? Mu-hah-hah-hah...

5. If we must undergo a changing process of enlightenment to discover we are one with the Absolute, then how can we be the Absolute since it is unchanging and never underwent such a process?

Advaita: What part of "Maya is inscrutable" don´t you understand?

Hare Krishna: We are *not* one with the Absolute. You sound like an idiotic impersonalist.  

Tantrism: Who´s "we", sucker? The true Tantrika is both one with the Absolute and ever-changing, precisely because he is enlightened, but unless you imbibe the method of the Siddhas (and quantities of soma enough to kill an Asian elephant), you will never understand this, White boy!  

Aftonbladet har fallit

Wolfgang Hansson (han som tidigare påstod att Mariupols fall var "Putins enda seger") har ändrat sig om kriget i Ukraina...

Man kan väl säga att Hansson har fallit. 

"Zelenskyjs vision om Krim framstår som önsketänkande"

Dark Brandon did this...no wait...

 

A quote from "Arctic ice and the ecological rise of the dinosaurs" by Paul Olsen et al. 

>>>Even as it has become clear that many dinosaurs were insulated with protofeathers, the idea that non-avian dinosaurs were predominately denizens of warm climates in an ice-free high PCO2 hothouse Mesozoic world has persisted. 

>>>It is now apparent here based on empirical evidence (rather than just models) that freezing temperatures occurred seasonally at high latitudes during the Late Triassic and Early Jurassic despite exceptionally high PCO2. Being primitively insulated, dinosaurs were able to take advantage of the rich plant resources in the high latitudes. 

>>>Through their adaptation to cold temperatures, dinosaurs were able to survive the CAMP volcanic winters and thereby expand to dominate terrestrial communities for the next 135 Ma, and, as birds, remain two to three times more speciose than mammals to this day.

Hmmm...

Wat means? 

Dark Brandon strikes again

Some of Dark Brandon´s new trinkets...

Pentagon acknowledges sending previously undisclosed anti-radar missiles to Ukraine

"I am the storm, kiddo"

 

Did "Dark Brandon" just bomb the Crimea? This story is getting stranger and stranger all the time!

The sea is too salty: Understanding the failures of post-Marcyism

 

The Center for Political Innovation (CPI or CPIUSA) is a marginally interesting group of the Stalinist-populist-nationalist variety. While they are (of course) leftist, unkind people might call them "Strasserite". The CPI seems to be a split from the late Sam Marcy´s Workers World Party (WWP), something as peculiar as a pro-Stalinist Trotskyist group (complete with heavy doses of identity politics). The article linked below, written by CPI leader Caleb Maupin, explains the group´s basic perspectives. I have also read some other items on their website. 

My impression is that the CPI wants to combine recruitment of left-radicalized youth with an orientation to right-wing populism, somehow identifying the latter with "the working class" (or at least a substantial portion of it). "Populism" and "patriotism" are used as positive buzzwords, and the perspective could be described as nationalist. The goal is to save the United States from societal collapse, not to smash it or let it rip. The reformed America will then join the new geopolitical order, which CPI believes is dominated by Russia and China. Even Jesus and the Bible (and sometimes the Torah and the Quran) are appealed to. It´s probably unintentional, but CPI at times sounds like a more "Marxist" version of the LaRouchians, who also call on the US to join with Russia and China, and has a similar combination of apocalypticism (new Dark Age/societal collapse) and cornucopian optimism (re-industrialization, no Green limits). It´s also interesting to note that the CPI sound anti-vaxx and anti-Big Pharma. 

Some of the formulations in Maupin´s article are surprising, to say the least. Here is a central paragraph: "Trump is not Hitler. The USA is not Weimar Germany. Furthermore, the crowds of middle-class CNN college liberals being mobilized to defend the wildly unpopular Biden administration do not represent the proletariat. The BreadTube/Young Turks/DSA cult that mesmerizes its recruits with infantalizing corporate-style “Wokeshops” rooted in scientology practices, while calling for concentration camps for the unvaccinated and equating “Tankies” with Nazi holocaust deniers, is not where serious revolutionaries should be attempting to recruit. While conservatives and right-wing dissidents often appear open to conversation despite their backward views, the vile, hateful entity called “the movement” looks a lot more like fascism to those who understand what the term actually means."

Thus, the CPI regards the radical-liberal left as completely bankrupt, a process that started already during the Cold War, but has accelerated in the last couple of decades. The "movement" (the rad-libs and their nominally Marxist hangers-on) is completely pro-imperialist, indeed, a creation of the "liberal" faction of the imperialist establishment, and therefore lacks any progressive significance whatsoever. Still, it´s astounding to see a formulation like this on a Communist website: "While conservatives and right-wing dissidents often appear open to conversation despite their backward views, the vile, hateful entity called “the movement” looks a lot more like fascism to those who understand what the term actually means." Does this mean that the CPI are willing to bloc with Trump´s supporters against the Democrats and the radical-liberal left? How do you fight "fascism" in America? 

Personally, I don´t think CPI will succeed very well, certainly not in their current political incarnation. Their politics are still too leftist to appeal to right-wing populists. For instance, their support for LGBT rights. And what about immigration? There are no visible articles on the border crisis at the Center´s website, but they certainly don´t sound anti-immigration or anti-immigrant (unless I missed some code words). But the main obstacle to said orientation is their open identification with Russia, China and the former Soviet Union. This can be clearly seen in the bizarre pageantry I linked to in my previous blog post, where CPI activists even hold up the Czarist-inspired banner of the Donetsk People´s Republic. Now, that´s an interesting popular front, if I ever saw one! It´s possible that the broader populist current in the US doesn´t care about Russia and Ukraine, but they are certainly anti-Chinese, seeing the PRC as both unreliable Reds and globalist stooges at the same time. This sentiment won´t be easy to shake off, since China in a sense *does* threaten the jobs of American workers, even if Russia doesn´t. 

I have no idea what will happen to the CPIUSA, nor do I particularly care, but I suppose they could recruit from other left formations with a (supposedly) "populist" orientation, say the newly minted People´s Party? But eventually, I think the CPI project will fail, since few people would want to join a pro-gay, pro-trans, and pro-immigration group of "nationalist" pro-Russian sycophants...  

The masses are the water: understanding the failures of late-Marcyism

Amerika 2022

This is some kind of bizarre neo-Stalinist outfit in the United States, the Center for Political Innovation or CPIUSA. Note the similarity with "CPUSA" (Communist Party USA). 

What I find most appalling about this group is their pageantry, which doesn´t even look "Communist". Rather, it looks like the anti-Communist stereotype of a Communist from some Reagan-era TV series! 

Update: I briefly checked the website of the CPIUSA and it turns out to be a split of some kind from the Marcyites, or perhaps the group are The Only True Marcyites. Sam Marcy, the founder of the so-called Workers World Party (WWP) was something as peculiar as a pro-Stalinist Trotskyist. (I´ve blogged about the WWP before.)

As far as I know, however, the WWP were too clever to show their true colors in *this* fashion, preferring instead to hide behind united fronts of various kinds... 

End of message. 

Going bananas in Kaliningrad

 

I´m sure this is a slightly esoterick comment on Kant´s first critique, or something to that effect... 

What a beautiful day, everything is gay...

 

Credit:@hr_sasja (Twitter)

Credit:@MagnusKolsjo (Twitter)

Two bizarre pics from the recent Stockholm Pride march.

The first shows Antifa marching ahead of a contingent of employees from Handelsbanken, one of Sweden´s largest private banks! 

The second shows Ebba Busch (to the left), who is the leader of the conservative Christian Democrats, and Nooshi Dadgostar (to the right), who is the leader of the Left Party. The guy in the middle is apparently a Christian Democrat. Note his gay t-shirt with the "KD" caption (as in Christian Democrat).

The popular front has never been so broad. It seems everyone is for gay rights. Somehow, I find that hard to believe...

Welcome to the Age of Aquarius

In New Age thinking, the Age of Aquarius was (or perhaps still is) conceptualized as a coming golden age which will combine positive spirituality and space age technology. 

Which makes no sense, astrologically speaking. Aquarius is the sign ruled by Saturn and Uranus. In other words, the planet of harsh limits meets the planet of crazy. Doesn´t sound very New Age to me!

Wait a sec...

Many on the New Age scene claimed that 2012 would mark a grand shift in consciousness. Maybe even "the end of the world". 

Perhaps they were right, in their own kind of way. 

Think about it. How has the world looked like since about, well, 2012. Exactly. The planet of harsh limits meets the planet of crazy. 

Welcome to the Age of Aquarius, guys. 

The GOP can still lose, here´s how!

 

A talkative but interesting analysis of the upcoming midterm elections in the United States. 

The Republicans have problems due to the evangelicals and their opposition to abortion and secular education. Styx is worried that the GOP might either lose the midterms or at most stalemate the Dems. 

Since all opinion polls in the US are uncertain or even manipulated, it´s really difficult to know, but I wouldn´t be too surprised if this was true...

After the Alt Right

 

Keith Woods discusses "the factions of the dissident right", most of them quite small and Internet-based. Interesting! Speaks for itself.  

Some notes on Lenin

Lenin (to the left - where else)
at the age of three

Both friend and foe alike paint Lenin as a fanaticized Marxist dogmatic. He was the purest of the pure. The friends believe that his theories are eternal and worthy of constant study and contemplation. 

And then there´s the real Vladimir Ilyich, the Lenin who was so tactically flexible that most of his latter-day admirers (both Marxist-Leninist and Trotskyist) would probably jump from a bridge rather than hear the truth about it...

This was the Lenin who had no problem working with Orthodox Old Believers, Estonian nationalists and Protestant sects. The Lenin who took money from capitalists to arm revolutionary workers, who called for a vote for the liberal Cadet party, who wanted party unity with the Mensheviks, sent Stalin to rob banks, was willing to promote a peaceful transfer of power to the soviets, and stole the program of the SRs on the peasant question. He also recieved payments from the Germans, but you´re not supposed to say that. Anti-imperialist united fronts with Young Turks, slightly older Turks, and Iranian mullahs were also part of the deal. And, I believe, the KMT. Not to mention Zionists. 

Small wonder Nikolai Lenin called his slogan "for a workers´ and farmers´ government" algebraic! 

Don´t get me wrong. Lenin´s goal was absolutely a Bolshevik ("socialist" or "proletarian") revolution in Russia, and the establishment of a Communist regime with a planned economy, and so on. This in sharp contrast to many later "Stalinists". However, Lenin was willing to strike almost any deal to get to that goal. It was precisely this combination of hardline dogmatism and tactical flexibility that made the man so dangerous! Lenin was, to re-coin a phrase, a revolutionary realist. And no, he didn´t *really* have a "theory" about it. I suspect Lenin´s theories were worked out in the heat of the moment, as products of his praxis. The scholastic BS about "permanent revolution" (for or against) was alien to the mentality of Lenin. 

"Everyone" agrees that of course the Bolsheviks made various tactical adjustments and concessions *after* the revolution. What makes you think they didn´t maneouvre already *before* the revolution? Do you think the Bolshies were some kind of purist sect or a mutual admiration society? 

Lenin was the undisputed leader of the Bolsheviks, and a master of stick-bending. He didn´t respect the rules of democratic centralism, but flaunted them constantly. At several points, Lenin threteaned to resign in order to pressure his comrades to accept some unpopular proposal of his. This kind of move was later *expressly forbidden* in the Communist International (and therefore every CP in the world). Lenin was therefore an example of leadership by a star, a genius, a man of action standing taller than even his own selected leadership team. He was everything the Bergsonians and Sorelians dreamed of being, but never really accomplished.

The really interesting question is this: was Lenin an inevitable product of the material circumstances, a product of the inexorable course of History towards socialism and communism? That would be the Marxist understanding. Or was his appearance contingent? Would there have been a revolution in Russia even without Lenin? Of course. But would it have succeeded? That is much less clear. Maybe it wouldn´t have. And that thought is staggering. *What if all of world history would have been different if Lenin had died of pneumonia circa 1900?* 

Maybe. And then maybe not, since Russia constantly oscillates between periods of anarchy and periods of autocracy. The Communist regime was a product of the former that morphed into the latter. Perhaps that is a more "Chinese" thing than a Russian thing, but it´s not entirely off topic either. So perhaps some kind of "Lenin" (and some kind of "Stalin") would have appeared anyway. That the Messianic creed that temporarily caught the imagination of the Russian "dark masses" was a secular one, is perhaps more contingent. Had revolutionary Marxism not been available, I´m sure some kind of Slavic nationalism or Christian-sectarian millenarianism would have arosen to fill the vacuum. Or even anarchism. 

Sure wonder how the Western litarati would have responded to that one... 

Idol of the Week

 

The only solution is mutant revolution

 

The last 1,000 episodes were just a dream

 

The answer at last

 

I´ve always wondered which classical dystopia would come true: "1984" or "Brave New World". Then I saw the meme above on Twitter...

An empirical god

Some kind of rant about God and metaphysics...

Here is an argument that could be used by both atheists and some theologians. 

The atheist version: Since God is (supposedly) transcendent, he can´t be detected empirically, since empirical objects and/or events only exist *within* the universe. The only way for God to make himself known would be to intervene in the universe he created. But every such intervention (presumably barring Judgement Day) would be finite. It would therefore be similar in form to...every other empirical event that happens naturally. So no empirical intervention of the transcendent God could prove that he exists. Even if you could meticulously document a miracle, say the leg of an amputee growing back, it´s still a finite event and could therefore have a finite cause, in this case, presumably a race of advanced aliens with superb medical technology (or even a race of advanced evil aliens who create a convincing hologram of a fake leg growing out). Therefore, a transcendent god can never be proven, and it´s therefore unreasonable to believe in one.

The Christian version: same as the above, but with the added twist that you therefore have to prove God philosophically. Only then can you start assuming that seeming miracles are actual miracles, and so on. 

"To the contrary", I suspect that you *can´t* prove God philosophically. Does philosophy "prove" anything at all, really? What´s the point of metaphysics anyway? I used to think metaphysics were necessary, but now I´m much more skeptical. What real knowledge do we get from metaphysical speculations? Thus, if God exists, you must indeed prove his existence empirically. Some metaphysical system according to which Jesus simply "must" exist doesn´t prove anything. Meeting him on the way to Damascus just might. 

That being said, the empirical-miracle problem mentioned above still stands. How *do* you prove that miracles come from a transcendent creator-god? Even in a spiritual cosmos, a miracle might simply be the result of unknown natural forces, or of intervention from spirit-beings "one level up", but no more. Maybe the Ascended Masters of Theosophy (who are finite compared to The All) occasionally answer prayers? If paranormal phenomena and religious experiences are taken seriously, we live in a vast and weird omni-verse teeming with strange and wonderful beings...but none of them is a transcendent god. 

Which doesn´t mean none exists. Perhaps mystical experiences are empirical encounters with the transcendent one? Actually *proving* that seems difficult, however. A human who encounters a higher angelic being (or a force...or even LSD) might be overwhelmed by the experience and interpret it as a meeting with "God". Proving intelligent design in nature and the universe could be another way of proving that a being standing outside the cosmos created it. But there isn´t any good evidence of intelligent design in our cosmos (which is rather a bewildering mixture of the good, the bad and the really ugly), and even a creator-god of this type could simply be one of a myriad creator-gods, each with its own universe! 

Jesus supposedly died for our sins, but since everyone is still sinning, how do you prove that proposition? Since evidence can only be empirical, you can´t demonstrate it by a "legal" theory of the atonement, since nothing *demonstrably* different seems to take place under such scenario. You just declare that it is so, there you stand, and can do no other. No, in order to prove that your sins really have been forgiven (or your negative karma nullified, to use Hindu-Buddhist terminology), you would have to demonstrate it concretely - through a concrete infusion of spiritual power, mediated by some kind of experience, which then concretely sanctifies you. That is, a position more similar to that of Catholics, charismatics or perhaps A W Tozer. 

Mathematics doesn´t prove God, but nor does it disprove God or prove materialism, since *any* kind of existence would have to be "mathematical", since that´s part of what it means to "exist". A world with God is just as mathematical as one without, since both "exist", so this pretty much makes any argument based on mathematics irrelevant. "And that is that". As for the Trinity breaking the Law of Non-Contradiction, I´m still working on that one. Maybe it doesn´t break the law, it only looks that way to us, since finite creatures can´t fully comprehend the infinite. What if one infinite person can simultaneously be three infinite persons, forever? Or maybe it´s just a very crude analogy...  

Current mood

 

The Empty Internet Theory

This conspiracy theory is obviously wrong, but it is much easier to believe than many others! (I´m a real person, btw. Although I know *that´s* hard to believe sometimes.) 

Shit

"Nuclear power can save us from climate change". That´s where your wrong, kiddo...

And no, it´s not really funny.

EDF cuts output at nuclear power plants as French rivers get too warm

The escape from tribalism

Originally published September 23, 2018

This is the first of two volumes about the history of the state, written by Francis Fukuyama. So far, I've only read the first volume, “The Origins of Political Order”. It begins in murky prehistory and ends with the French Revolution. The second book is titled “Political Order and Political Decay” and deals with the 19th and 20th centuries.

Despite its monumental sweep, Fukuyama's book is surprisingly easy to read. It attempts to answer the question why Western Europe and Western-derived societies in other parts of the world are unique in terms of modernization, democracy, the rule of law and overall social stability. While Fukuyama denies holding a near-deterministic position in which societies are trapped in their present state due to events that took place centuries or millennia ago, I think it's obvious that he *does* hold such a position. Thus, the roots of Western, more specifically Anglo-Saxon and Scandinavian, success goes back all the way to the fall of the Roman Empire and the social changes during the Early Middle Ages. In the same way, Russia, the Muslim world, India and China follow trajectories heavily shaped by ancient successes and failures.

That being said, Fukuyama does not have a “teleological” view of history, where Western modernity (or the Whig Party platform) is somehow inevitable. Nor does he believe that Western modernity and democracy are inevitable in the rest of the world as a kind of preordained endpoint of The Historical Process as a whole. Rather, Fukuyama sees human societies as products of uneven and contradictory processes. While human social change isn’t “blind”, it often has unintended consequences. Thus, the attempts by the Catholic Church during the Early Middle Ages to strengthen its power base against the Germanic monarchs unintentionally dissolved tribalism and laid the long term basis for modern Western society, which is unique in world history due to its non-tribal character. While not identical, Fukuyama's perspective does seem to have certain similarities with Stephen Jay Gould's view of biological evolution (he mentions Gould in his book). Shorter periods of decisive but often contingent change are followed by much longer periods of relative stasis, and adaptive evolution often gives rise to “spandrels”, non-adaptive structures which are byproducts of the adaptive ones, but often plays an important role anyway. If I read Fukuyama correctly, the West is the eventual outcome of historical changes that could have been different. Perhaps we simply were lucky!

Fukuyama sees tribalism or “patrimonialism” as the natural state of humankind, rooted in our biological evolution as a species. Originally, humanity was organized around patriarchal clans where almost everyone was genetically related. Later, the patriclan gave rise to the tribe, which is much broader in composition and hence more based on reciprocal altruism than on kinship, although kinship still plays an important role on sub-tribal level, where families attempt to promote their own special interests. The tribe can be seen as a form of extended or “fictional” kinship system. War is another constant of human existence. From this follows that any political order will tend to be based on kinship, extended kinship in the form of tribalism, and territorial aggression. Political systems *not* based on tribalism will tend to devolve in a tribalist direction if given half a chance. Only Western civilization has successfully managed to escape from tribalism due to various unique historical circumstances. However, other societies have tried to accomplish the same thing through different routes than the Western one. Thus, China's history has revolved around the constant conflict between a strong state based on meritocracy and equally strong familial lineages promoting their own special interests. Some Muslim societies, most notoriously the Mamluks and the Ottomans, tried to escape from tribalism by a peculiar system of slave-soldiers and slave-officials, who stood outside the kinship system altogether and were therefore “neutral” (and loyal to the sultan and his state foremost). In Western Europe, as already noted, the dissolution of tribalism was an unintended consequence of the Catholic Church's attempt to gain control over land and other property, while simultaneously strengthening its own political power. Among other things, the Church prohibited marriage between close kin and levirate marriage, while recognizing female property rights. For these and related reasons, it became difficult to keep property within the patriclan, eroding its material base. While noble families of course played important roles in European history, they were no longer part of real clans or tribes. Very often, feudal loyalty ties were between non-kin. Kinship ties also weakened among the peasants, who gradually evolved into freeholders based on private property.

Other important changes also took place in Western Europe. Fukuyama argues that the rule of law and democratic accountability evolved already before a strong state, whereas in China the state emerged first and never permitted the two former from evolving in the same decisive way as in Europe. Once again, the Church played an important role by systematizing canon law and the Roman law. The investiture conflict between the Church and the secular rulers also created the preconditions for modernity, since the conflict ended with a compromise, in effect creating a “secular” sphere outside the direct control of the religious authorities. Another important factor was the role played by kings who supported the commoners against the nobility, thereby in the long run (and perhaps despite their own intentions) strengthening the former. Thus, in medieval England, the local courts played a curious dual role as both the king's agents and representatives of the local population. When the strong state emerged during the Early Modern Period, it had to contend with powerful traditions of legality and accountability, and also with free burghers and peasants. After prolonged conflict, this created a balance in society not found in, say, Russia where the rise of the absolutist state was accompanied by the destruction of republican forms and the enserfment of the peasantry.

In contrast to Marx, Fukuyama believes that politics and religion are independent variables which shape the course of history. The centrality of religion comes from Max Weber, although the details differ. Overall, I must say that “The Origins of Political Order” is pretty heterodox, the author constantly attacking received wisdom from Marx, Hayek, Huntington, modernization theory and yes, even Herr Weber! Often, he is right. For instance, Fukuyama points out that despite the lack of real rule of law and democratic accountability, China and similar authoritarian regimes might become very successful anyway, if the regimes feel that something resembling “rule of law” is in their best pragmatic interest. Nothing stops the Communist Party from grabbing private property such as American companies or their profits, but it's not done since it's bad for business. This sounds trivial, but it goes against the received wisdom of both liberals, libertarians and Neo-Cons (and perhaps Fukuyama himself in an earlier incarnation) that everyone will become more modern in the Western sense (perhaps with some prodding from American bombs or Open Society Foundation handouts) and that only such societies can possibly be successful, generate economic growth, etc.

Personally, I consider “The Origins of Political Order” extremely interesting. My main objection is the socio-biological perspective. Contrary to what the author imagines, matriarchal societies (using that term broadly) has existed, and so has peaceful societies, including at least three peaceful high cultures. The author (unfortunately) isn't “wrong” when pointing to patriarchal clans and warlords as important movers and shakers in world history, but as a truly universal theory, his book nevertheless falls short. But then, perhaps there isn't a universal theory in the first place? Contingent evolution, anyone? The fact that there are two species of chimpanzees with diametrically opposed behavior patterns, both equally close to man genetically speaking, should perhaps be enough to problematize any dependence on orthodox socio-biology. That being said, what the author asserts about tribalism is obviously correct: the matriclans were, of course, also “tribal”, and so are peaceful societies. The Indus Valley Civilization didn't see itself as bent on a universal mission to save mankind, after all. The tension between genetic solidarity and reciprocal altruism is a constant in human history. Humans can form non-kinship groups, including groups based on a world religion or political ideology, but they often turn into quasi-clans and get genetically perpetuated in the second and third generation by members marrying and having children. In this perspective, the West does look unique. For how long, remains to be seen. Fukuyama ends his book on a cautionary note by mentioning the deadlock and polarization in American politics (the volume was published in 2011) and points out that when democracy fails, authoritarianism and a very different kind of political order inevitably becomes more appealing…

Mixing faith with Furries?

 

Only in America. 

Mixing faith with furries

They are ten years overdue

 

Shouldn´t this have happened already? You know, 2012 phenomenon, and all that. 

The Law of One has never been more alien

 

This chart (from Twitter) seems to combine the Theosophy-derived Law of One with some other material, probably from cosmic channel Corey Goode. Where can I meet the "Golden Triangle Head Beings"? Sounds interesting... :D 

Ye shall be like giants

 

John Michael Greer´s meditation on the recently destroyed Georgia Guidestones, a mysterious monument in Georgia probably designed by Herbert Kersten, an elite environmentalist. Greer doesn´t believe Kersten had any Rosicrucian connections. 

He then discusses how post-industrial posterity will *really* look upon us: not as gods, but rather as "giants", evil creatures destroyed by the gods on account of their wickedness, greed and hubris...

Stupid of me not to see this before! Of course!

The Great Rehash, Part Two: The Future´s Cold Eyes

The dysgenic consensus

 

From Twitter, where people for and against keeping abortion legal in the US are battling it out. I think both pics are from recent protests in Indiana. 

The upper pic shows "pro-life" protesters, and was tweeted by a "pro-choice" account. The pic below shows a "pro-choice" activist and was tweeted by a "pro-life" account...

Since US protesters are generally a pretty bizarre bunch, this kind of agit-prop isn´t hard...