The crazy professor Edward Dutton argues that the bodies of Wokesters literally reward them for trying to destroy humanity. More specifically, the "love drug" oxytocin.
The connection between this and Christmas escapes me completely, since the real message of the Jolly Heretic is that you absolutely *shouldn´t * love thy enemies...
Trigger warning: Pretty damn yuge!
"Why the US
is British and should never have left the British Empire” is a grossly mistitled
YouTube clip featuring Über-gadfly Edward Dutton (The Jolly Heretic). The title
is probably trolling, since Dutton seems to be arguing for the exact opposite
position in the actual presentation: the United States is actually “the real England”
(representing the Anglo-Saxons), while Britain is “Norman” and “French”.
It´s not
entirely clear whether the Heretic actually believes this, or whether he is
only describing a pervasive Anglo-American worldview. He references the book “The
rise and fall of Anglo-America” by E Kaufmann, which I haven´t read. Even so,
the bottom line is that the colonies did the right thing when breaking with the
British Empire!
The views
in this clip (and, I suppose, Kaufmann´s book) could be contrasted with “American
Nations” by Colin Woodard, who argues that the United States has always been multi-national
or multi-ethnic, with several of the “nations” being English-speaking. Dutton
touches on this when he mentions the contrast between the Puritan colonies and
the Cavalier settlements further south, but then leaves the topic.
Still, an
interesting contribution.
YouTube clip above, link below, about how the British military spied on lockdown critics during the pandemic, including politicians and prominent journalists.
Rubicon!
.svg/800px-Logotype_of_Botkyrka_Municipality_(color%2C_centered).svg.png)
Det här är extremt allvarligt, om uppgifterna stämmer. Faktiskt något av ett Rubicon. För både svensk socialdemokrati och vissa andra saker...
Ledande socialdemokrat avsatt av den organiserade brottsligheten
This is a very
interesting little lecture on IQ levels by Edward Dutton (aka The Jolly
Heretic) in which he argues rather forcefully that the so-called Flynn effect
is an illusion. After World War II until the mid-1990´s, IQ test scores in the
Western world rose so quickly that a genetic explanation seems out of the
question, which in turn has been used to argue that IQ (and intelligence as
such) is largely the product of nurture (society or culture) rather than nature
(genes). This dramatic rise in IQ is known as the Flynn effect after the
scientist who described it. The usual explanation for it seems to be that
education has improved during the post-war period. Dutton, who believes that
intelligence is strongly hereditary, argues that in reality people in the
Western countries have on average become *less* intelligent since around 1900 (or
perhaps even earlier).
Interestingly,
Dutton actually questions IQ testing. First, IQ tests can be culturally biased
(note that this fact is here used by somebody who argues for a “far right”
position). They therefore cannot pick up actual intelligence among people with
a vastly different culture than the test-makers. This is true not just between
different nations, but also through time. The culture of, say, 1940´s England
was very different from the today´s culture in the same region. It´s obvious in
cases where the tests are in English, but the test-takers don´t speak the language
fluently enough. Further, IQ tests can be more or less “g-loaded”. “G” or “general
intelligence” is what IQ tests are supposed to measure. According to Dutton,
intelligence is like a pyramid, with “analytic thinking” at the bottom. IQ
tests are good at measuring this bottom rung of the g-pyramid, and we have
indeed become better at analytic thinking due to better education, more
exposure to “scientific” ways of thinking, and so on. Indeed, we have also
become better at responding to IQ tests, since we encounter them more often!
The Jolly
Heretic argues that analytic thinking (which is indeed nurture-related) has been
pushed to its “phenotypic maximum” and overwhelmed all other factors linked to
g, thereby making it look as if intelligence on the whole has increased and
isn´t genetic. But this is an illusion. Dutton takes the example of body length:
apparently, the length of legs is more nurture-related, while the length of the
trunk is genetic. Thus, if the legs get longer, the body as a whole gets
larger, even though the trunk might get smaller! This “co-occurrence” is also at
work in intelligence: yes, analytic thinking has improved and hence we look “smarter”
overall, but all other metrics suggest that we are really getting more stupid.
Our stupidity has been cloaked by the Flynn effect.
Dutton then
mentions a number of metrics indicating that our “g” is getting lower. Reaction
times are increasing since the 1880´s, indicating a 15-point drop in intelligence.
Color discrimination has decreased by 3.5 points per decade during the 20th
century. The usage of high difficulty words peaks during the mid-19th
century. Today, we are back at the level of 1700. Backward digit span and
creativity have also gotten worse. So has levels of per capita genius. The
proxy for this is the number of new innovations, and this can be measured since
the 12th century. The peak was in 1870. Today, it´s one third of
peak – the level in 1600! Alleles (special genes) associated with very high
intelligence and high educational achievement are getting less common, at least
according to studies made on Iceland, where they have gone down for three
generations. Finally, we have the IQ test themselves, which show a “negative
Flynn effect” since the mid-1990´s. IQ levels are slowly but steadfastly
dropping…on those parts of IQ that Dutton believes are genetic.
Even
factors only weakly correlated with intelligence show the same downward
tendency. Left handedness is getting more common, we are no longer becoming
taller, and people are also getting uglier (having less symmetric faces). Dutton
believes this is due to more negative genetic mutations. A genetically healthy
population should be righthanded, tall and handsome!
Why are people getting more stupid? There are a number of factors according to Dutton. One is feminism. As women get more education opportunities, the smarter girls get educated and therefore have less children. Stupid girls are left behind, have more children and these will tend to be just as stupid as their parents (or perhaps worse). Overtime, the number of low IQ people in society will therefore rise. Note the paradox: average intelligence declines because of a better education system!
In general throughout history, intelligent people will tend
to have less children when societal conditions becomes less harsh. This is
because the will to have children is an instinct, and hence takes intelligence
to overcome. Intelligent people will also become less religious in good times,
religiosity and natalism being strongly connected. Thus, in harsh Social
Darwinian conditions, intelligent people will both breed more and survive
better, but in good times, most breeding will be done by low intelligence
people who lack impulse control, can´t handle contraceptives, and so on. Paradoxically,
therefore, good times lead to a decline in average intelligence. Immigration
from Third World countries is another factor that Dutton believes lowers average
intelligence in the West. (In another video, Dutton argues that prohibition of
abortion will also be dysgenic, since more idiots will be born – something that
might rub conservatives the wrong way!)
In 2100,
average IQ in Britain will be 85 (if today´s average is set at 100). Or so
Dutton predicts. That´s down one “standard deviation”, which means
significantly lower. The level of innovation will be at the same low level as
in the year 1100. Society will simply collapse, and the presentation ends on a
very pessimistic note. Think nuclear winter and shit.
Still, a very interesting (and very disturbing) contribution…
.jpg/520px-California-condor-gymnogyps-californianus-078_(21196759264).jpg)
Female California condors reproduce through parthenogenesis even if there are males around?! The ultimate feminists? From Wiki and a science journal.
>>>In 2021, the San Diego Zoo reported that they had two unfertilized eggs from their California condor breeding program hatch. This is the first known example of parthenogenesis in this species, as well as one of the only known examples of parthenogenesis happening where males are still present.
>>>Parthenogenesis is a relatively rare event in birds, documented in unfertilized eggs from columbid, galliform, and passerine females with no access to males. In the critically endangered California condor, parentage analysis conducted utilizing polymorphic microsatellite loci has identified two instances of parthenogenetic development from the eggs of two females in the captive breeding program, each continuously housed with a reproductively capable male with whom they had produced offspring.
>>>Paternal genetic contribution to the two chicks was excluded. Both parthenotes possessed the expected male ZZ sex chromosomes and were homozygous for all evaluated markers inherited from their dams. These findings represent the first molecular marker-based identification of facultative parthenogenesis in an avian species, notably of females in regular contact with fertile males, and add to the phylogenetic breadth of vertebrate taxa documented to have reproduced via asexual reproduction.
Facultative parthenogenesis among California condors
Edward Dutton (Jolly Heretic) is back from the dead, this time with a naturalistic explanation of the resurrection of a certain Jesus Christ. First aired at Halloween, apparently! Haven´t double checked all the scary details in this one, frankly. I don´t dare to!
 |
| Credit: @ichika_a (Twitter) |
Related to Edward Dutton´s crazy clip (linked to earlier). Or not so crazy??? From Wiki. Not WikiLeaks!
>>>Sometimes an embryo may begin to divide without fertilisation, but it cannot fully develop on its own; so while it may create some skin and nerve cells, it cannot create others (such as skeletal muscle) and becomes a type of benign tumor called an ovarian teratoma. Spontaneous ovarian activation is not rare and has been known about since the 19th century. Some teratomas can even become primitive fetuses (fetiform teratoma) with imperfect heads, limbs and other structures, but are non-viable.
>>>In 1995, there was a reported case of partial human parthenogenesis; a boy was found to have some of his cells (such as white blood cells) to be lacking in any genetic content from his father. Scientists believe that an unfertilised egg began to self-divide but then had some (but not all) of its cells fertilised by a sperm cell; this must have happened early in development, as self-activated eggs quickly lose their ability to be fertilised.
>>>The unfertilised cells eventually duplicated their DNA, boosting their chromosomes to 46. When the unfertilised cells hit a developmental block, the fertilised cells took over and developed that tissue. The boy had asymmetrical facial features and learning difficulties but was otherwise healthy. This would make him a parthenogenetic chimera (a child with two cell lineages in his body).
>>>While over a dozen similar cases have been reported since then (usually discovered after the patient demonstrated clinical abnormalities), there have been no scientifically confirmed reports of a non-chimeric, clinically healthy human parthenote (i.e. produced from a single, parthenogenetic-activated oocyte).
Was the young woman a virgin, after all?
This is one of the more crazy clips I´ve seen on YouTube, in which Edward Dutton ("The Jolly Heretic"), who I assume is an atheist, argues that at least theoretically, virgin birth could be possible among humans?! Although extraordinarily improbable (it´s almost easier to believe in a divine miracle).
Reminds me a bit of another heretic, Eugene McCarthy (the scientist, not the politician), who argues that hybridization between completely unrelated animals is possible, say, between a chimpanzee and a pig...
Edward Dutton finally takes on a jolly topic. Yes, in 2022, he actually posted a clip about - wait for it - Bronies! I commented this peculiar American (and to some extent European) subculture before. It consists of adults who like the children´s show "My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic" (MLP:FIM). I didn´t know it was still a thing, though.
Unsurprisingly, Dutton reaches the conclusion that many Bronies are autistic and have a strong nostalgia for childhood, when everything was more black-and-white, innocent and predictable. Or so autists tend to think.
Dutton believes that in reality, the Bronies might have had traumatic experiences in childhood and become "stuck" in the pre-trauma phase. He also notes that a very high percentage of MLP:FIM fans claim to be transsexual. And yes, the suspicion that Bronies are really paedophiles is never far away in this presentation...
Still, a fun diversion on a dark Sunday evening!
The last Russian Czar, Nicholas II, had a doppelgänger. Weirdly, it was none other than the British king George V! The Czar and the king were cousins, but cousins don´t usually look like identical twins...
Or is Wikipedia playing with us here?
Alt Right gadfly Edward Dutton (The Jolly Heretic) argues that most fake and retracted research within psychology is "leftist" in character.
Dutton doesn´t believe in egalitarianism, socially constructed intelligence, or unconscious biases. He argues that scientific papers claiming to have proved these and other leftist concepts are the result of deliberate lying...and that this in itself is caused by the bad genes of the leftist "researchers"!
Content warning: everything.
Edward Dutton (the not-so-jolly heretic) argues that the entire human civilization can collapse within the next 100 years or so, due to new pandemics and low IQ populations unable to develop new vaccines or medicines to cope with them.
Also, human civilization goes through "Malthusian cycles" or cycles of rise and decline in general, so why should we be any different?
After we are gone, a dark age that last thousands of years will ensue, although pockets of humanity might survive deep in the Amazon rainforests or at remote islands...
Not a pretty (or jolly) perspective!
Funny detail: he actually mentions Graham Hancock´s speculations about the Lost Civilization ("Atlantis").
More on the "cost of decadence crisis" from IQ-obsessed (and jolly) heretic Edward Dutton. Content warning!
Our favorite autist strikes again...
The Jolly Heretic actually claims there are studies proving that atheists are more ugly than religious people?!
I disagree with this interpretation, but I might as well link to it anyway. A non-sensationalist take on the Nephilim from Lutheran theologian Jordan B Cooper.
I didn´t know there were Laestadian Churches in the United States...
Two clips from the "secular Buddhist" YouTube channel Doug´s Dharma. The first clip contains some excellent arguments, such as Buddha´s story about Brahma and his followers.
If this is true, then religion will never go away, being a perennial mind virus and the most effective coping mechanism of Homo sapiens...
Good luck, atheistas!
 |
| "Not inviting me to your Tantric party was a reeeeally bad idea" |
Har faktiskt väntat flera år på denna manöver.
En annan möjlighet hade ju varit att publicera anti-semitiska karikatyrer av Moses som svar på anti-muslimska karikatyrer av Muhammad. För att testa "yttrandefriheten", alltså.
Fast det kan muslimer antagligen inte göra (om egyptiern nu är muslim), eftersom Moses är en av islams profeter...
Whatever happened to "neither Washington nor Moscow"? The British Socialist Workers Party comes out as Russian assets. That would be "Moscow", I think.
I admit that this is quite funny, despite the anti-Ukrainian angle. Now, the dastardly kholokhols must respond in kind! By wrestling down a wisent, perhaps?
Why do US YouTube atheists constantly insist that atheism isn´t a “worldview”, and that atheism “merely” means “a lack belief in God”? They also have a strangely broad definition of atheism. Apparently, you can believe in reincarnation and immortal souls, and still be an atheist?!
Do these
guys feel, I don´t know, lonely or something?
Nobody
outside US atheist YouTube would refer to people who believe in reincarnation,
immortal souls, magic or Svargaloka as “atheists”, least of all themselves. I think
proponents of Samkhya or Buddhism (not to mention the California New Age) would be somewhat surprised to be lumped
together with Democritus, Dawkins or Joe Stalin!
Note also
the curious fact that virtually no really existing YouTube atheist believes in reincarnation,
immortal souls, magic or Svargaloka. Note further that atheism is very much
part of their core identity and, ahem, worldview. So once again: what´s the
*point* of denying that atheism is, all things considered, a cluster of very
narrow worldviews?
Indeed,
consistent atheism *must* be a worldview. After all, the atheist isn´t denying
a purely abstract God-concept (although I suppose he or she is denying that as
well). No, he is very concretely denying Christianity. Of course this has consequences
for his worldview. How can it not? Further, atheism is denying, pardon, lacking
belief in 10,000 other god-concepts, too. But the only way you can consistently
deny almost all god-concepts is if you are a materialist. Therefore, a
consistent atheist must be a materialist. And indeed, most atheists outside the
United States do seem to be materialists. If you meet an atheist in the jungles
of ´Nam, he is usually a materialist. A dialectical materialist, to be more
exact. And, frankly, today I suspect most atheists in the US are *also*
materialists, as the older generation of dualists, panpsychists and neutral
monists quietly die away. OK, Boomer!
While it´s
certainly *possible* to be a dualist or panpsychist while also being an
atheist, it´s nevertheless a fact that religion will use these metaphysical
positions to sneak in through the back door (or is it kitchen window). Theism
will inevitably use dualism, while pantheism takes the route through
panpsychism (nobody knows what the heck “neutral monism” is anyway). Indeed, I
sometimes wonder if dualism is simply theism with the serial numbers filed off?
If *even human morality* comes from an “acausal realm” suspended in Platonic
form-space, what on earth *is* this mental realm other than the mind of God? In
the same way, panpsychism is simply shame-faced pantheism.
But there´s
more. Not only must a consistent atheist be a materialist, he or she must also
be a Skeptic. No ancient aliens, modern aliens, future aliens can be allowed to
enter the metaphysical (or very empirical) city gates of Roswell. There are,
after all, materialists who worship them as “gods”. And while Marxism is
non-shame-facedly atheist, it could be argued that Marxism-Leninism is a
deviation in a quasi-religious direction, due to its personality cult of
various Great Leaders, from Old Joe to Kim the even younger. Perhaps the
*really* consistent atheist must be a centrist liberal? Or at least a
Menshevik!
But we
could go even further. It could be argued that a consistent *materialist* must reject
all forms of teleology. Indeed, that is what many materialists are arguing
themselves. It´s therefore quite ironic that many atheists are teleological,
either in an explicit and often quite brazen manner (post-Marx Marxism and
Marxism-Leninism, although Marx and Engels themselves perhaps weren´t entirely
clear on the topic) or in a cryptic manner (almost everyone else). But then, materialism
probably isn´t a coherent position anyway. All forms of materialism that
actually tries to explain what the heck is going on in that “material” cosmos
of theirs, end up sneaking in panpsychism through the back door. And since not
even that can provide the poor materialist with Meaning, he sneaks in cosmic
teleology, as well. Is materialism the real shame faced pantheism?
Maybe the Amerikwan
YouTube atheists are right, after a fashion. The only thing they do deny is the
Christian god-concept…
There are
many peculiar Hindu sects, and this week I discovered another one (OK, not
really – they have been around since 1535). The group in question is known as
the Radhavallabha Sampradaya (further RVS) and was founded in Vrindavana by Sri
Hita Harivamsha (1502-1552). That is, the earthly Vrindavana in Uttar Pradesh,
India! Back in the days, Vrindavana must have been a really busy place, with
constant kirtans thrown by a wide variety of Krishnaite groups, including the Gaudiya
Vaishnavas. RVS seems to have been one of the more “radical” groups, and I actually
found an ISKCON-related website warning visitors to Vrindavana about the RVS temple, Radha Vallabha Mandira! The ISKCON condemns RVS as “sahajiyas”, a generic
slur against everyone who interprets the famous love play of Krishna and Radha
a bit too literally…
First, a brief background (most info in this post is mined from "Krishna as Loving Husband of God" by Guy L Beck, included in the collection "Alternative Krishnas"). Hindus who worship Vishnu (or one of his avatars) as the supreme god are known as Vaishnavas. Vaishnavism is usually associated with Brahminical orthopraxy, Vedanta philosophy and the most boring parts of Right Hand Tantrism (temple icons and such) but now and then antinomian Vaishnava currents arise, taking the path of devotion (bhakti yoga) perhaps a little bit too far. The most obvious point of departure for such groups is the illicit amorous relationship between Krishna (seen as an avatar of Vishnu) and Radha, his favorite gopi (cow-herd girl).
This erotic mysticism is present in the Gaudiya Vaishnava
tradition, which worships Krishna as the supreme god and sees Radha as his “shakti”
or creative energy. Indeed, the founder of Gaudiya Vaishnavism, Caitanya, is
seen by many in the tradition as a double incarnation of Krishna and Radha. Today,
the ISKCON (“Hare Krishna movement”) is the most well known representative of Gaudiya
Vaishnavism, at least in the Western world. Gaudiya Vaishnavism consider the
erotic mysticism as a higher stage of spiritual accomplishment (“raganuga bhakti”),
and hence calls on its supporters to begin at a lower rung characterized by strict
rules and regulations (including of sex). Indeed, ISKCON founder Prabhupada
more or less prohibited his followers from reading the sections of Shrimad
Bhagavatam (an early medieval work used as the ISKCON´s main normative
scripture) dealing with Krishna´s erotic dance with Radha and the gopis (the “rasa
lila”)!
Others are not
so coy, and one of these accursed sahajiyas was the above mentioned Harivamsha.
According to RVS´s hagiography, Harivamsha received revelations from Radha already
as a kid, and seems to have lived a somewhat unconventional family life. At one
point, he abandoned his wife and three children to become a wandering ascetic,
but then married two women simultaneously! Supposedly on the orders of Radha,
no less. Eventually, he reached Vrindavana where he founded the Radhavallabha
Sampradaya. Outwardly, the group looks orthoprax enough, with temples, pujas, a
hereditary male priesthood, and so on. However, its actual theology and
practice is peculiar even for Vaishnava bhaktas. Rather than seeing Krishna as
God and Radha as his subordinate (Radha can be seen as both a human female, a
goddess or as God´s shakti), the RVS see *Radha* as the supreme deity, and
Krishna as her subordinate! (This notion is foreshadowed already in the Gitagovinda,
a famous 12th century work of poetry, in which Krishna worships
Radha´s feet and even lets her place them on his head.)
Interestingly,
the “real” Radha in the RVS theology is seen as invisible, ineffable and
formless, but for the benefit of her devotees, she takes the form of a
supremely beautiful goddess, forever love-playing with the god Krishna (not
sure where he comes from in this system). The RVS puts so much emphasis on Radha-Krishna
devotionalism, that everything else in Vaishnavism or Hinduism-at-large is strongly
downplayed: caste duties, life cycle
rituals, fasting, fire sacrifice, the Sanskrit language, the elaborate mythology
around Vishnu, and so on. Everything is subordinated to a mystical (?) vision
of seeing Krishna and Radha having sex in the forests of Vrindavana. The
devotees are supposed to identify with the “sakhi”, the handmaiden of the
divine couple, who follows them around the forest and sneak-peaks at their
sexual union (!).
While this
is all frankly nuts, it seems that not even the Radhavallabhis could go all the
way to outright feminism. Since the relationship between Krishna and Radha as
depicted in the classical sources is adulterous and hence scandalous, many
Hindus apparently try to downplay this, by claiming that the couple were married. The Gaudiya Vaishnavas have chosen a different route, instead trying to spiritualize
the erotic pastimes of Krishna and Radha, even to the point of seeing them as a
kind of double deity. You would expect an oversexed sect like the RVS to claim
that the relationship was both illicit *and* real, but instead they have chosen
the first strategy. Yes, the RVS actually claim that Krishna and Radha are
married! Nor is it clear to me whether any female devotees participate in
visualizing the sexual congress of the divine couple, or if these pastimes are
male only…
In the end,
the Radhavallabha Sampradaya is one gigantic anticlimax.
I think Turkish top honcho Erdogan will eventually relent and approve Sweden´s NATO application. But...
The fact that he tries to obstruct it now (and also Finland´s application - Finland borders Russia and has nothing to do with Quran burning or the PKK) raises questions about his reliability after Sweden and Finland actually joins.
Can we trust that Erdogan will *actually* cooperate in the defense of northern Europe against Russian threats? Can we trust that he won´t sell Swedish and Finnish defense secrets to Putin?
No, we can´t. The problem with Erdogan isn´t that he´s an "Islamist despot" (although I suppose you could call him that, too). Many Islamist despots used to be "ours". The problem is that he is a notorious, unreliable multi-vectoralist.
Therefore, Erdogan must be overthrown. Replace him with Gülen or Ergenekon. Time for a little color revolution in Ankara!
I didn´t know that possession by mermaid spirits (!) was a thing, and that charismatic Christians try to exorcise them. Not just in Namibia, but also in the United States?!
Note how the little girl is being publicly exorcized with the full support of her parents. Her "crime" is apparently that she said she was a mermaid after seeing a fake documentary on YouTube...
I knew that some charismatics were wild, but this trumped even my worst expectations!
The clip is narrated by a former exorcist (!!) who is now an atheist.
This one is interesting...
A former Christian fundamentalist, now an atheist, travels to Israel to get over his on-off paranoid fear of ending up in Hell. He actually visits Gehenna, a real place outside Jerusalem. Gehenna turns out to be a tranquil, peaceful park?! Well, at least today...
The anti-Hell discourse is based on a book by (anti)Biblical scholar Bart Ehrman, which I unfortunately haven´t read. The short form is that many references to "Hell" in the Bible are annihilationist and reference either the apocalypse or a gloomy Hades-like place. Not a literal lake of fire in which souls burn forever and ever (and teeth will be provided).
Not sure if I entirely buy that scenario, but there you go.
"Genetically Modified Skeptic" is an YouTube atheist (and ex-Indie Baptist) of some standing. Here, he discusses the weirdly repetitive and downright cultish behavior of many religious fundamentalists.
Irish
Traditionalist and (perhaps) fascist Keith Woods argues against the idea that
fascism is “capitalism in decay”, an idea usually associated with
Marxism-Leninism. It´s not entirely clear what Woods´ alternative thesis is,
though. It´s also intriguing that he doesn´t mention the Strasser brothers,
instead focusing on Joseph Goebbels (and Mussolini).
Naturally,
the “socialist” rhetoric and populist appeal of both German Nazism and Italian
fascism are mentioned. Woods argues that Mussolini´s regime was independent of
the big business interests. German industrialist support for Hitler and the
Nazis peaked around 1930, and had actually went down by 1933. Many backers of
the Nazis were White Russian émigrés (i.e. White Guards), who were “feudal”
more than capitalist and supported Hitler for ideological and geopolitical
reasons (anti-Semitism, anti-Communism, etc). Woods argues that Henry Ford in
the US (who apparently provided the NSDAP with funding) acted out of
ideological conviction. He actually *lost* money due to a boycott of the Ford company.
That
fascism can´t be an expression of “decaying” capitalism is also shown by the fact
that the fascist movements sought to modernize the economies of their respective
nations, and indeed often did so after taking power. Thus, the German economy experienced
economic growth under Hitler, not “decay”. In general, fascism appealed to groups
inside nations *with* “decaying capitalism” (or semi-feudalism) as a strategy
to *overcome* it.
Despite the narrators clear pro-fascist (Nazbol-ish) sympathies, still an interesting take on things.
I don´t like Father Casey, who comes across as a Catholic fanatico, but he does raise some interesting points in this clip, even sounding a bit "panentheist" (pan-en-theist) or "animist". Note that he is a Franciscan.
His main criticism of Protestantism seems to be that God is de facto seen as transcendent only, while Catholics also emphasize the divine presence immanent in the world. Both the sacraments, the clergy and the Church itself are examples of such "mediation". So is the Virgin Mary.
That God is present in the world in *this* sense is indeed very hard to believe...
 |
| Probably not a Darwinist... |
>>>The order of the Dashavatara (ten principal avatars of the god Vishnu) is interpreted to convey Darwin's evolution. British geneticist and evolutionary biologist J B S Haldane opined that they are a true sequential depiction of the great unfolding of evolution.
>>>According to them, like the evolutionary process itself, the first avatar of God is a fish - Matsya, which depicts aquatic life, then comes the aquatic reptile turtle, Kurma, which depicts creatures moving to land, then a mammal - the boar Varaha, then Narasimha, a man-lion being, which is sometimes taken to mean creatures like Okapi, Archaeopteryx and others, then comes Vamana, the dwarf hominid.
>>>Then Parashurama depicts humans when they were in the caveman stage. And then, Rama depicts the rise of civilization and kingdoms. (Sometimes, when Balarama is taken into account, he is taken to represent the growth of agriculture.) Krishna is taken to symbolize the growth of art and crafts and Buddha is taken to depict the embarking on philosophical and religious thought. Kalki is not yet born.
>>>Various saints, thinkers and authors like Bhaktivinoda Thakura, Helena Blavatsky, Monier Monier-Williams, Nabinchandra Sen, C D Deshmukh have associated the Dashavatara with evolution.
Let´s be honest. The ancient Hindus probably thought the Earth was flat. And no, they had no idea that the fair Okapi even existed!
Keith Woods, an Irish Traditionalist, discusses the connection (if any) between "Woke", capitalism, Christianity and Gnosticism. Note also the interface between trans-genderism and trans-humanism, the latter to be introduced through technology.
"Woke" gives capitalism, technology and fake individualism a quasi-religious veener, while really destroying true spirituality.
Can´t say I vibrate with the collectivist traditionalism of Woods, but he does make some interesting points here. The main take away is that "Woke" is here to stay and will continue to be succesful precisely because of its aggressive quasi-metaphysics and its alliance with global capital.
This seems to be the weakest part of Woods´ analysis, since it´s difficult to see how Woke capitalism, or any capitalism really, can be sustainable in the long run...
Keith Woods discusses a number of sociological studies and meta-studies which strongly suggest that ethnic diversity lowers trust and destroys traditional working class (and perhaps lower middle class) communities in the Western world. Note also that diversity seems to lower political and civic engagement!
One aspect not covered is that immigrants (or native Blacks in the US) often want to live in predominantly immigrant (or native Black) neighborhoods, which of course is further proof that most people most of the time prefer their own kind...
"Bowling alone", the book mentioned, is a classical study of the decline of American working class communities, but weirdly I have never read it!
Keith Woods attacks really existing Green politics from a Traditionalist and far right perspective, under which environmentalism is tied to nationalism, anti-capitalism, anti-immigration stances and "pantheist" religious metaphysics.
Anthropocentrism is rejected in favor of seeing Nature as sacral and the cosmos as hierarchic. At one point, he calls contemporary Green politics "liberalism with carbon taxes"!
Even apart from his *obviously* problematic TOS, Woods is too utopian for my jaded metaphysical tastes. The alternative to eternal "progress" is a myth of eternal return to a traditional past that never really existed, not even during the Satya Yuga...
I recently wondered why there are so few protests against the cost of living crisis, suggesting a number of rather complex reasons.
Perhaps the explanation is much more simple: the media simply aren´t telling us about them! Until now, it seems.
The specter haunting Europe (and the world) is back...
Protests over food and fuel surged in 2022 - the biggest were in Europe
Food and Fuel Crises Saw Surge in Protetsts Against Western Europe
 |
| Credit: Queensland Department of Environment and Science |
Can Karl Shuker and Bobo plz weigh in on this?
G-d is a funny dude, I mean, for some reason he only cares about some nude chimpo-dimpo cousin on one tiny little planet in the vast 93 billion light year expanse...
An entertaining YouTube clip about Canadian Forteana. Some of it was known to me before, such as Ogopogo and the Raëlians, but even your favorite blogger never heard of Brother XII or prairie oysters before. Nor did I know that "Oh, Canada" was originally written in French!
The most entertaining conspiracy theory mentioned in the clip is the claim that Justin Trudeau is the secret love child of Fidel Castro! Well, Justin *does* look like Fidel when the Commendante was younger, so who knows...
Also mentions Trotsky´s brief contretemps in Canada during World War I.
No? Are you absolutely sure about this, me man? Sadhguru criticizes shamanism and related forms of magic in this intriguing clip.
Watching this as we speak. Seems interesting so far. YouTube atheist "Genetically Modified Skeptic" discusses a number of atheist communities or subcultures in the United States, including ex-Muslims, ex-JWs and ex-fundies. Still haven´t seen the parts about Pagans and Satanists! A bit surprised by the ex-Muslim section...
John Michael Greer´s recent (as in yesterday evening my time) criticism of Ken Wilber. The discussion thread is quite interesting, too.
More meat in this one than in the previous Sadhguru clips. Tantrics can make DEAD BODIES WALK in their rituals. I always assumed they were about rainbow bodies, but clearly I didn´t know half of it...
There are (supposedly) two misconceptions of Tantra. One is that it´s about sex, group sex in particular. The other is that it´s about the dark arts.
Sadhguru clearly labors under the second misapprehension, LOL.
"Tantra is not about sex", claims the old joker Sadhguru in this clip on occultism and mysticism.
No??? I´m disappointed.
It *is* a dark art, though, and so are most things in life, so perhaps there is still something to explore here...
I´m fascinated by Sadhguru´s peculiar aesthetic. Esoteric Shaivism meets Osho lite meets black holes, Big Bang and even ancient aliens?!
I´m skeptical to the Big Bang cosmology, but Sadhguru goes all in here and claims that there have been 84 Big Bangs. Or perhaps "happenings" or "roars", as he actually puts it in the clip.
We can´t say we haven´t been warned.
 |
| En centerpartist bestraffas strängt av högsta domstolen i Finspång |
Centerpartiets näste ordförande är medborgare i...Turkiet?!
Some interesting points in these ones, but I suspect Sadhguru might get in trouble when Big Bang cosmology is disproven in 20 years or so...
Kan ingen jävel täppa till käften på den här pedofilen? Hoppas Krishna straffar honom på något lämpligt sätt för att han hädiskt tagit Guds namn i sin smutsiga mun!
OK, jag vet att Sai Baba är död, but you do get my point. Är fortfarande all over YouTube...
So I´ve been told that Bhairava is the fierce form of Shiva, only worshipped by half-crazed ascetics at cremation grounds, He Whose Sacred Animal Is a Feral Dog.
Then, I see this...
The clip is from Indian Prime Minister Modi´s YouTube account, and shows him worshipping none other than Bhairava in a temple in Benares. No stray dogs in sight either. Unfortunately, I don´t understand the narration (perhaps from Modi himself).
Is some kind of creative reinterpretation going on here? Or is PM Modi extraordinarily based?
 |
| Credit: Mikomin (@MikominCosplay/Twitter) |
 |
| Credit: Ms. Fox (@Sayathefox) on Twitter |
 |
| Credit: David Shankbone |
”The Dawn
of Everything: A New History of Humanity” is an almost 700 pages long tome by US
anthropologist David Graeber (recently deceased) and British archeologist David
Wengrow. It was published last year and received mostly favorable reviews in
the press, although I frankly wonder how many reviewers managed to read the
whole thing! I admit that I haven´t finished the book either, but at about 450
pages, I´m taking my chances posting a review! Stay tuned for further developments.
Although the book deals with archeology and anthropology, its underlying purpose
is unabashedly political. Graeber was an anarchist and activist in the Occupy
movement, and “The Dawn of Everything” could be seen as an attempted leftist or
left-liberal synthesis of human history and “pre”-history. Personally, I consider
the leftist message of the work somewhat peculiar, but I haven´t read Graeber´s
earlier books.
Usually,
leftists postulate some kind of “fall” from a pristine and primordial Edenic state.
In Marxism, the fall is connected to the rise of private property and class society.
Anarchists blame our predicament on the rise of the state. The introduction of
agriculture during the Neolithic Revolution is seen by many as a precondition
for these developments. In radical Green circles, it´s seen as the fall itself.
To some feminists, the fall comes from the outside: matriarchal Old Europe was
invaded and smashed by patriarchal Indo-European tribes from the steppes. Graeber
and Wengrow, on the other hand, reject this notion and criticize it at length. But
*why* do they do this? At least in the first 400+ pages, this isn´t entirely
clear. The authors´ vision of prehistory (probably not their term) is pluralist.
As far back as the archeological record goes, humans have always experimented
with a wide variety of cultural forms, some good, some bad, some perhaps really
ugly. There is no discernable point at which a fall (literal or even metaphorical)
from a utopian state takes place. This also means that there are no “laws” of
historical development, perhaps not even broader trends, and hence no teleology
in human history. This goes against not only Marxism, but also the Western idea
of progress in general, where we rise from a dystopian state towards a destiny
in the stars (or at least in the British Empire or American Century).
I assume
the authors regard the rejection of teleology as intensely liberating. It means
that things don´t have to be this way, that another world really is possible.
The failure of, say, Marxist teleology can thus be countered by arguing that actually
no teleology exists at all, but precisely for that reason, class society isn´t
a necessary stage (albeit a shitty and gritty one) society has to pass through
before the dawn of classless communism. History could have taken a different
turn, indeed *did* take many different turns before class society or capitalism
became dominant, and presumably could do so again.
More curious
is Graeber´s and Wengrow´s insistence that “the origins of social inequality”
is the wrong question to ask, certainly today, when opposition to increased
social inequality is one of the hallmarks of (real) leftism (as opposed to liberal
leftoid-ism). Instead, the authors seem to emphasize “freedom”, all the while
admitting that even in free societies, there could be a lot of social hierarchies.
Perhaps their point is that freedom is a precondition for everything else, including
attempts to create a socially equal society? Much of the anthropological
material deal with societies in which there is no central power, or in which such
power is heavily circumscribed, and private property can´t be easily
transformed into social power over others. Graeber and Wengrow claim that there
are really two forms of equality to begin with: one form in which everyone
really is exactly the same, and another form in which the differences between
individuals is regarded as so great that no meaningful hierarchical sorting can
be made. I think it´s obvious that they prefer option two. Of course, other leftists
could claim that maybe the writers are too moderate…
So much for
the politics of this tome. Otherwise, I admit that much of the archeological
and anthropological material presented in “The Dawn of Everything” is fascinating,
and even clears up a question mark or two I had about our distant past. For instance,
why does Göbekli Tepe suddenly emerge in the Mesolithic (or was it the
Neolithic or the Epipaleolithic) as Minerva from the head of Jupiter, fully
formed, with no apparent precursors, a gigantic necropolis of stone in an age
supposedly consisting of small bands of hunters and gatherers only? Graham Hancock
and his fans had a field day with that one, claiming it as virtual smoking gun
evidence for Atlantis. However, it now turns out that Göbekli Tepe, while clearly
a major accomplishment in its own right, *did* have precursors, both in the
Middle East and across Eurasia. Already during the Upper Paleolithic, when the
climate stabilized in the wake of the “last Ice Age”, hunters and gatherers
were building large settlements and temples, usually of wood and often temporary
ones, and also carried out sumptuous burials. It seems human creativity flourished
the moment our ancestors could think of other things than mere physical
survival. The authors argue that these building projects were perfectly possible
to carry out without a state power or even a strong chiefdom, citing known
examples in the anthropological record of “tribal” peoples where authority
structures are temporarily erected to deal with some common task requiring a
mobilization of manpower, but melt away when the task is finished.
Another
important insight from the book is that the “transition” (to use teleological
language) between hunting-gathering and agriculture took thousands of years and
many “false starts” (to use such language again). The first exclusive farmers
in Europe were actually massacred by more powerful hunters and gatherers! Many
peoples around the world are quite happy alternating between hunting-gathering,
horticulture and agriculture, seemingly oblivious to the stages of societal evolution
imposed on them by Western scholars. Besides, “horticulture” can be highly advanced,
as in periodical burning of large tracts of wood to make certain desirable
plants grow more abundantly, rather than “primitive gardens” in some unmanaged
jungle.
The Indus
Valley Civilization (IVC) is often depicted as a gigantic anomaly, due to its peculiar
combination of uniformity and seeming lack of authority, not to mention its peaceful
character. I don´t think the authors ever address that peace dividend, but they
do comment on the first two anomalies. It turns out that there are many early
city-states around the world that share precisely these traits: uniformity of
one kind or another, and a seeming lack of authority at the center. In ancient
Mesopotamia, the Sumerian towns look more egalitarian than the tribal peoples
in the hinterland, while classical theory should perhaps expect us to find the opposite
arrangement. The authors believe that the Sumerian towns were democratic and
run on a daily basis by benign administrators, while the tribals were warriors
and brigands who rejected both democracy and bureaucracy in favor of rule by
authoritarian charismatic kings. In Mesoamerica, Teotihuacan was another
democracy, with archeologists scratching their heads about the whereabouts of
the local rulers. The authors also present evidence that at least some of the
Native peoples who supported Cortes against the Aztecs had a democratic form of
government.
If Graeber
and Wengrow have any theory of social change, it is the previously mentioned
pluralist perspective, which the authors sometimes dub “schizmogenesis”. Human
groups define themselves by consciously inventing and cultivating differences with
neighboring groups. If your neighbors have slavery and large feasts, your tribe
will tend to reject slavery and live in frugality. If your neighbors have a
democracy and are relatively peaceful, your society will become “heroic” and
war-prone. In this scenario, the superstructure seems relatively independent of
the economic base, with very different cultural patterns arising from the same material
conditions. Religion is treated by the authors as an independent variable, and
they speculate that the centralization of the Egyptian and Inca cultures was
caused by religious factors. Perhaps this *does* explain some otherwise
completely baffling tenets of the Egyptian civilization, for instance the
building of the pyramids as tombs for the pharaohs, an activity that doesn´t
seem to have any obvious “material” explanation (note also that it eventually ceased).
The authors
believe that “the state has no origins” and didn´t need to happen. They theorize
that there are three sources of social power in human society: control of violence,
control of information, and individual charisma. In a modern society, control of
violence is connected to the idea of sovereignty over a specific territory,
while control of information is exercised by a gigantic bureaucracy, and our “democracy”
is really a winner-takes-it-all contest between quasi-aristocratic factions
endowed with charisma. This, then, is the modern state. But the confluence of
these three strands of domination need not have happened, and indeed didn´t
happen for a very long time. There are cultures in which some people are
initiated into arcane religious knowledge by something resembling a petty
bureaucracy (control of information), but the two other factors aren´t present.
In other cultures, the kings and their armed retinues only exercised sovereignty
if they could personally show up and insert themselves into the plot. And
charismatic leaders can of course exercise control even without recognized sovereignty
or a bureaucracy. Graeber and Wengrow point out that today, the three types of
domination are coming apart again. There are global institutions (such as the
WTO or the IMF) without any corresponding concept of global sovereignty. Crypto-currencies
and private security companies have acquired a new significance, undermining
the state´s monopoly on currency and violence. (Perhaps there are also informal
economic networks in the wake of the lockdowns and cost of living crisis?) The “teleology”
seems to be working in reverse…
If there is
any drawback to “The Dawn of Everything”, it might ironically be the book´s
huge popularity among the chattering classes. Such things are ephemeral. Who
today remembers “Empire” by Hardt and Negri, the book that supposedly should
have changed everything back in 2000? And what happened to Naomi Klein, Shoshana
Zuboff, the Great Turning, the Fourth Turning, and what not? It wouldn´t surprise
me if “The Dawn of Everything” goes the same way, being quietly forgotten already
circa 2024. It would perhaps be a loss, since the work – despite its left-liberal
leanings – does say a lot of interesting things that could perhaps be developed
further.
 |
| Credit: Alina Vozna |
Turkiet och deras etniska kussar Ungern vill medla mellan
Ryssland och Ukraina.
Tjena.
Varför skulle dessa ökända multi-vektoralister vilja medla i
kriget? För att deras herre och mästare Putte i Moskvitj inte lyckats besegra lillryssarna,
naturligtvis.
Slutsats: Vi fortsätter motståndet. Slava Ukraini!
 |
| Ankhtifi |
From “The Oxford History of Ancient Egypt”, as quoted in “The Dawn of Everything: A New History of Humanity” by Graeber and Wengrow.
How a
supposed “warlord”, one Ankhtifi, from the “Egyptian Dark Ages” (The First Intermediate
Period) celebrated his achievements…
>>>I gave bread to the hungry and clothing to the naked; I anointed those who had no cosmetic oil; I gave sandals to the barefooted; I gave a wife to him who had no wife. (…) The south came with its people and the north with its children; they brought finest oil in exchange for barley which was given to them…
>>>All of Upper Egypt were
dying of hunger and people were eating their children, but I did not allow anybody
to die of hunger in this nome…never did I allow anybody in need to go from this
nome to another one. I am the hero without equal.
Sounds
almost like a Social Democrat. It could all be lies, of course. But that still
doesn´t answer the question: why were Dark Age warlords in Egypt lying in this
particular manner, rather than in some other way?
Or it could
be true, for all we know. Gotta love the Dark Ages!
