Solens söner

 

Lite märkliga kommentarer av Tobias Hübinette på dennes blogg. Jag *antar* att detta är metaforer? Eller har han blivit, jag vet inte, lamarckian?   

>>>Under den innevarande (stek)heta sommaren som hittills närmast har varit tropisk – och för Sydeuropas och även stora delar av Östeuropas del har den just varit det (och det är ju tyvärr fortfarande fallet i dessa delar av kontinenten) – har de högerpopulistiska och högerradikala partierna gått upp som aldrig förr som om den nästan tropiska hettan har fått européernas hjärtan och hjärnor och inte minst kroppar att koka över.

>>>Att sydeuropéerna närmast svettar ihjäl sig liksom även väldigt många östeuropéer är i varje fall ett faktum och extrem hetta kan nog åtminstone få en och annan europé att börja rösta på sagda partier.

>>>Oavsett vad det egentligen handlar om (för så klart handlar det inte bara om den heta sommaren) så verkar det helt enkelt just nu koka av vrede (och nog t o m av hat) bland fr a den alltmer högerradikaliserade europeiska ungdomen liksom inom den europeiska arbetarklassen och den lägre medelklassen och bland i praktiken alla invånare som inte bor och lever i huvudstäderna och i de stora, historiska universitetsstäderna att döma av att de olika partierna för närvarande slår i taket i sina respektive länders opinionsundersökningar och särskilt gäller det i de mest folkrika länderna.

SD verkar ha flyttat fram sina positioner i sommar

Handelsavtalet

 

Önsketänkande eller dagsens sanning? Skulle inte förvåna mig alls om detta vore sant. Eller blir sant typ nästa vecka...   

"Det finns inget avtal mellan EU och USA"

Nazi-sionister?

 

Rubriken är förstås ironisk. Jag stödjer som bekant Israel. Men...vem kunde tro på 1990-talet att SD skulle bli landets näst största parti efter att *M, KD och L* uppmanat EU till handelsbojkott av den judiska staten?

Per Ahlmark vrider sig i sin grav!

Håller samarbetet mellan Tidöpartierna på att spricka?

Inbördeskriget mellan Tidöpartierna står för dörren 

The Apollo cult revisited

 

LOL. I didn´t know Bernard D´Abrera was *this* notorious. Not only does ChatGPT know about him, there is even an entry on the man on RationalWiki (the link in orange below). So I can´t have been the only person who noticed his somewhat idiosyncratic butterfly books. And just as I suspected, D´Abrera had the reputation for being...shall we say...difficult. Still, the AI is actually a bit charitable to some of his observations here. The Apollo "cult" seems to be real?!

Bernard d´Abrera

Here is D´Abrera again. Is this a true or fair observation? "In this volume, D'Abrera has some pretty unkind words to say about some of his fellow butterfly-collectors. He claims that there is a veritable cultus of the genus Parnassius (the Apollos) among lepidopterists, a cultus with its own high priests, acolytes, a nomenclature bordering on the hagiographic and a literature with the force of Canon Law. Anyone who questions the prevalent taxonomy of these particular butterflies is suspected of heresy, anathematized and excommunicated. Presumably, the authors' taxonomy is controversial among Appolo-infatuated collectors and scientists all over the Holarctic region..."

Yes, Bernard d’Abrera’s remark about a "cultus of Parnassius" among lepidopterists is real — in the sense that he did write things along those lines — but whether his observation is fair depends on how charitably one interprets his rhetoric.

---

🔍 Context and Interpretation

D’Abrera was known for his deeply opinionated style, often blending scientific observations with cultural, philosophical, and theological polemics. His statements about the Parnassius "cultus" reflect his broader frustration with what he saw as:

• Overly rigid or dogmatic taxonomic systems

• Scientific elitism or groupthink in entomology

• Excessive splitting of species into subspecies or varieties based on minor morphological differences

He often described these behaviors in grandiloquent, sometimes sarcastic terms, borrowing language from religion — "high priests," "canon law," "heresy," etc. It’s colorful and provocative, but it’s also a metaphor, not a literal accusation.

---

🦋 Is There Any Truth to It?

Surprisingly, yes — at least partially. Here's why:

1. Parnassius Has a Complex Taxonomy

• The genus Parnassius (Apollo butterflies) is notoriously difficult to classify.

• Many populations are geographically isolated mountain dwellers with subtle but consistent morphological differences, leading to:

  • Dozens (or hundreds) of named subspecies

  • Frequent disputes over species vs. subspecies status

2. Strong Collector Enthusiasm

• Parnassius is beloved among butterfly collectors, especially in Europe, Russia, Japan, and China.

• The group is surrounded by a wealth of literature, specialized monographs, and highly detailed field guides.

• Certain taxa can fetch high prices on the collectors’ market.

• This leads to passionate debates and strong in-group consensus on classifications.

3. Conservative or Rigid Taxonomies

• In some taxonomic circles, dissent from the prevailing views (especially by non-academics) is indeed treated dismissively.

• This isn’t unique to Parnassius or entomology — scientific subfields sometimes develop cliques, especially around charismatic taxa.

So D’Abrera is using exaggerated, satirical language, but he's critiquing a real tendency in the butterfly community: the tribalism that can emerge around difficult or beloved genera.

---

🧠 Is It a Fair Critique?

Fair-ish, but laced with hyperbole.

• Yes, because taxonomic debates can indeed become cliquish, politically charged, or stubbornly orthodox.

• No, if interpreted literally as some kind of irrational religious cult. Most taxonomists are serious professionals doing their best in a difficult field.

---

💬 Final Thought

D’Abrera was a provocateur, but his critique of Parnassius scholarship reflects a genuine tension in taxonomy between:

• Stability vs. revision

• Professional vs. amateur contributions

• Morphological vs. molecular approaches

It’s a poetic exaggeration, not a dispassionate analysis — but as a metaphor, it rings surprisingly true in some corners of entomology.

Would you like examples of famous Parnassius disputes or subspecies inflation?

Yes, please.

You're absolutely right to ask. The genus Parnassius (Apollo butterflies) is famous—or infamous—among lepidopterists for one of the highest rates of subspecific and varietal descrip­tions in Lepidoptera, often leading to protracted debates and sharply divided camps.

Here are some well-documented controversies that illustrate why D'Abrera’s depiction of a Parnassius cultus is at least partially grounded in reality:

---

🧐 1. *Over 200–290 named subspecies of Parnassius apollo*

• Parnassius apollo, the emblematic Apollo, has been described under more than 200 subspecies names, especially in Europe and Central Asia ResearchGateGöran Waldeck.

• In the Carpatho‑Pannonian region alone, 26 subspecies were defined based on limited morphological traits like wing color and patterns SpringerLinkGöran Waldeck.

• A 2024 morphometric study of 20 so-called subspecies in that region found virtually no significant wing‑shape divergence, suggesting that dozens of named forms may not merit formal taxonomic recognition SpringerLink.

---

🔬 2. Morphological discipline vs. molecular data

• Traditional taxonomists relied heavily on wing color, pattern, and minor structural traits (plus location data) to name new subspecies.

• Modern molecular studies (e.g., mitochondrial DNA barcoding) reveal that many of these subspecies lack genetic differentiation and may actually represent phenotypic variants within a single species MDPIOxford AcademicScienceDirect.

• This mismatch has fueled divisions between "splitters", who emphasize morphological subtlety, and "lumpers", who stress genetic unity.

---

🌍 3. Geographic isolation and the naming frenzy

• Many alleged subspecies inhabit extremely remote and narrow habitats (e.g. high-altitude Tibetan valleys, small Pamir peaks).

• Collectors described new subspecies often based on single or handful of specimens from unique locales — sometimes accessed only by helicopter ZobodatEureka MagEureka Mag.

• These small-isolated populations were quickly named, reinforcing the view of a taxonomic cult based on micro-endemism.

---

👥 4. Emotional and ideological investment

• Parnassius butterflies are deeply beloved by collectors across Eurasia.

• Some communities treat specific subspecies as prestigious or rare trophies, generating a parallel literature and community logic that can resist revisionist voices.

• An outsider questioning a named subspecies may risk criticism in those circles — an effect reminiscent of the "heresy" rhetoric D’Abrera uses metaphorically.

---

✅ Summary: How fair is D’Abrera’s characterization?

Claim	Scientific Justification
Parnassius has a cult-like subculture	Yes—intense collector and taxonomic interest across regions
Subspecies proliferation based on minor differences	Yes—hundreds of subspecies based on wing markings and location
Resistance to revision by questioning collectors	Yes, splitters vs lumpers dispute remains active

So while D’Abrera’s tone is deliberately provocative, it captures a real dynamic in Parnassius taxonomy: entrenched subspecific naming, sometimes spectacular collector devotion, and a lively tension between morphological tradition and molecular modernity.

---

Would you like an outline of a few especially contentious Parnassius species-groups or further reading on the ongoing molecular-lumping efforts?

Self-serving?

 

Has the Servant of the People become self-serving? It seems Ukraine is in the throes of a serious political crisis as Zelensky attacks two independent anti-corruption agencies (with the full support of the "opposition" in Parliament, no less). 

For the first time in three years, large crowds of people are actually protesting against the government. Zelensky himself claims that the agencies were filled with Russian spies, but that´s what he has to say, isn´t it? The sequel might prove...interesting.

Links below to Kyiv Independent. 

Zelensky just betrayed Ukraine´s democracy

Zelensky dismantles Ukraine´s anti-corruption infrastructure

"We know how to stand up for our rights"

From the frying pan into the fire?

 

So Donald Trump is going to send more arms to Ukraine. Which is exactly what the European NATO partners and the EU member-states wants. Most of them, anyway.

But...Trump also threatens to sanction any nation still doing business with Russia. That presumably would include India, Brazil and similar nations. He also continues threatening the EU with steep tariffs, thereby setting the stage for a trade "war". And the only way the EU could escape such a situation would be to trade with...yes, exactly, you guessed it...Brazil, India, and so on. Exactly the nations Trump might sanction.

So it seems the economic chaos will continue. And that´s that, I suppose.

The Lord of the Sith

 

Sometimes I like ChatGPT. For instance, it solved a little mystery from....I don´t know...my middle school years?

Was the toy version of Darth Vader sometimes referred as "Darth Vader/Dark Vodor"?

Yes, in some non-English-speaking countries, especially during the early years of Star Wars merchandise in the late 1970s and 1980s, Darth Vader was occasionally referred to as "Dark Vador", "Dark Vodor", or similar variations. This wasn't specific to toys alone, but it did appear on packaging, translations, and promotional materials, particularly:

---

Examples:

• France: Darth Vader was officially translated as "Dark Vador" — and this name is still used in French media today.

• Eastern Europe / Russia: Bootleg or unofficial toys and dubs sometimes rendered the name phonetically or with local spelling conventions, leading to variations like "Dark Vodor" or "Dart Veider".

• Japan and Latin America: Other slight phonetic variations also existed, though they were usually closer to "Vader."

---

Why this happened:

• Translation confusion: Early Star Wars translations often treated “Darth” as a title or adjective ("Dark") rather than a name.

• Phonetics: Local languages adapted the name to fit their own spelling and pronunciation rules.

• Unofficial merch: Bootleg toys and media sometimes introduced name errors or idiosyncratic spellings.

---

Summary:

Name Variant	Where Used
Dark Vador	France (official translation)
Dark Vodor	Some Eastern European translations or bootlegs
Dart Veider	Russia and surrounding regions (phonetic)

---

So yes, "Darth Vader" was sometimes rendered as "Dark Vodor" — most likely in unofficial or regional adaptations of Star Wars toys or media. Would you like to see examples of vintage packaging or odd name variants?  

Vem bestämmer?

 

Måste vara svårt att förhandla med USA om handelsavtal... 

Domstol blockerar Trumptullar

En ABUSA med TACO, tack

 

Euro-etablissemanget börjar tröttna på Donald Trumps Potemkin-populism... 

Trumps tullhot det värsta hittills - tur att han kommer att backa

Än är Polen inte förlorat

 

Danmarks socialdemokratiska regering samarbetar med Melonis högerregering i Italien för att underlätta utvisningar av kriminella invandrare. Notera att Polens liberala regering stödjer initiativet, medan Sverige inte har skrivit under... 

Nio EU-länder vill se över konvention

Danmark: Invandring är det största hotet

Across the Hajnal line

 

Is the Alt Right anti-Western on a very deep level? Who´s the real Were-West, I wonder? Another little conversation with ChatGPT. 

What is the Hajnal line?

Great question! The Hajnal line is a concept from historical demography and social history that helps explain differences in family and marriage patterns across Europe.

---

What is the Hajnal Line?

• It’s a geographical boundary in Europe identified by the Hungarian-born British demographer John Hajnal in 1965.

• The line roughly runs from St. Petersburg in Russia down southwest to Trieste (near Italy’s northeastern border).

• It divides Europe into two broad marriage and household systems that existed from the late medieval period through the early modern era (roughly 1500–1900).

---

What distinguishes the two sides of the Hajnal line?

Region	West & North of Hajnal Line	East & South of Hajnal Line
Marriage age	Later marriage, often mid-20s or later	Earlier marriage, often teenage years
Household structure	Nuclear families: small households (parents + children)	Extended, multi-generational households, often with kin networks
Marriage rates	Lower proportion married, more people stayed single or married late	Higher rates of early marriage
Family autonomy	Higher individual autonomy; less control by kin or community	Stronger kin control over marriage & family
Fertility and mobility	Lower fertility, higher geographical mobility	Higher fertility, lower mobility

---

Why does the Hajnal line matter?

• It helps explain cultural, social, and economic differences between Western/Northern Europe and Eastern/Southern Europe.

• The nuclear family system west of the line is linked to:

  • Greater individualism

  • Weaker kinship ties

  • Higher labor mobility

  • Early development of market economies and democratic institutions

• The extended family system east and south of the line supported:

  • Strong kin-based societies

  • Clan and lineage influence

  • Agricultural economies with limited mobility

---

How does this relate to your previous questions?

• The Hajnal line overlaps with the areas where the Catholic Church’s marriage restrictions and bans on cousin marriage were more strictly enforced.

• It reflects deeper historical and cultural divisions that help explain why Northwest Europe developed more individualistic, nuclear-family societies, while Southern and Eastern Europe remained more kin-based and clannish.

---

In short:

The Hajnal line marks a historical cultural divide in Europe between “Western” late marriage nuclear-family systems and “Eastern” early marriage extended-family systems.

---

If you want, I can show you a map of the Hajnal line or dive deeper into its implications for social structure, fertility, or economic history!

Things such as late marriage, more singles and lower fertility are often viewed as modern Western phenomena, but it seems they are much older according to Hajnal´s theory!

Exactly! That’s one of the most fascinating insights from Hajnal’s work. The patterns of late marriage, higher proportions of lifelong singles, and relatively lower fertility rates that we often associate with modern Western societies—especially post-Industrial Revolution—actually have deep historical roots going back many centuries.

---

Here’s why that’s interesting and important:

1. Historical Continuity
   Hajnal showed that these patterns were already well-established by the late medieval period (from about 1500 onward) in much of Northwestern Europe. So the “modern” Western family system is not a recent invention but rather a long-standing tradition.

2. Cultural vs. Economic Drivers
   These demographic patterns weren’t solely the product of industrialization or urbanization. Instead, they were tied to cultural norms, such as the Church’s marriage rules, inheritance practices, and social organization—like the emphasis on nuclear families rather than extended kin groups.

3. Social Implications
   The prevalence of late marriage and singlehood historically led to:

   • Greater individual autonomy, especially for young adults before marriage.

   • More economic independence for unmarried people (e.g., servants, apprentices).

   • Flexible social mobility—people moved to towns or new regions more easily when they weren’t tied down by large kin networks.

4. Contrast to Other Regions
   By contrast, in Eastern and Southern Europe, early marriage and extended family living supported very different social dynamics—more kin control, higher fertility, and less mobility.

---

So modern Western family structures and demographics are part of a long historical tradition, not just a response to industrialization or contemporary social change.

---

If you like, I can dig into how these older family systems influenced things like economic development, urbanization, or gender roles over time!

Isn´t it strange that the Catholic ban on cousin marriage led to greater openness in Northern and Western Europe (where the Catholic Church tends to be weaker) but not in Southern Europe (where the Church is stronger). Southern Europe still strikes me as very clannish or clan-based.

Yes, that does seem paradoxical at first glance—that the stronghold of the Catholic Church in Southern Europe (e.g., Italy, Spain) remained more clannish, while Northern and Western Europe, where Protestantism later broke away from the Church, became more individualistic and trust-based. But the apparent contradiction disappears when you look more closely at history, geography, and timing.

---

🕰️ 1. The Church’s Marriage Ban Originated Early and Was Strongest in Northwestern Europe

While the Catholic Church officially banned cousin marriage across Christendom, the strength of enforcement and local compliance varied enormously by region.

• The ban started with papal decrees in the early medieval period (500s–800s).

• But Northern and Western Europe (e.g., France, Germany, England, the Low Countries) had weaker tribal or clan structures to begin with, making Church intervention more effective.

• In Southern Europe (especially the Mediterranean), older Roman, Greek, and tribal kinship patterns were more entrenched, and local elites often ignored or worked around the ban.

📌 In short: The rules were universal, but the uptake was not.

---

🧱 2. Stronger Kinship Systems in the Mediterranean

Southern Europe historically maintained:

• Tighter family networks

• High rates of informal cousin marriage, even when technically banned

• “Amoral familism” (trust mainly within family)

• Strong clientelism and patronage systems

• Extended family households and clan-like loyalties

These traits helped preserve clannishness, even under formal Catholic influence. In practice, canon law didn’t always change lived behavior.

---

📈 3. Protestantism Inherited and Deepened Church-Driven Trends

In Northern and Western Europe:

• The Church's marriage reforms had taken stronger root by the time Protestantism emerged.

• The Protestant Reformation (1500s):

  • Strengthened individual Bible reading, weakening family-mediated religious transmission.

  • Encouraged literacy, nuclear families, and civic institutions.

  • Abolished clerical celibacy, drawing religious leaders into family life.

  • Further reduced extended kinship dependence and promoted moral universalism.

So in a sense, Protestantism was the next phase of the Church’s anti-clan agenda.

📌 Ironically, the regions that later broke with Rome had already internalized the Church’s anti-kinship reforms most deeply.

---

🧬 4. The “WEIRD” Thesis

Joseph Henrich and others argue that Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic (WEIRD) cultures are partly a product of:

• The early medieval Church’s disruption of kin-based social organization, especially in northwest Europe.

• A shift toward individualism, monogamy, and moral universalism.

• Greater trust in institutions over families.

Southern Europe, while Catholic, retained denser kin networks, lower generalized trust, and slower adoption of impersonal civic institutions.

---

🧭 5. Summary Table

Region	Church Influence	Kinship Disruption	Individualism	Clannishness
Northwest Europe	High (early & effective)	Strong	High	Low
Southern Europe	High (but less effective)	Weak	Moderate	Higher
Eastern Europe	Mixed (Orthodox/late Catholic)	Weak	Low	High

---

🧠 Final Thought

So it's not strange once we realize:

• Formal religious control ≠ cultural change,

• Enforcement matters, and

• The Church’s deepest cultural transformation occurred not where it was strongest politically, but where it successfully disrupted clan structures.

Would you like a visual map of cousin marriage rates historically or a comparison to the Middle East or South Asia, where cousin marriage is still common?

Why were clan structures weaker in Northwest Europe even before the Church ban on cousin marriage?

Excellent question—and a key one for understanding the broader picture of cultural and institutional evolution in Europe. The relative weakness of clan structures in Northwest Europe before the Church's intervention is still debated, but historians and anthropologists point to several likely, interacting factors:

---

🏞️ 1. Geographic and Ecological Factors

• Dispersed settlement patterns in Northwestern Europe (e.g., scattered farms, isolated villages) made large, tightly knit kin groups harder to maintain.

• Compared to more densely populated river valleys or Mediterranean plains, Northwest Europe lacked the ecological and economic conditions that favored extended family-based agriculture (like irrigation farming, which requires collective labor).

• The land and climate in Northern Europe often required more mobile or flexible social structures, weakening rigid kinship ties.

---

⚖️ 2. Post-Roman Political Fragmentation

• After the fall of the Roman Empire, much of Western and Northern Europe (especially Britain, France, and Germany) fragmented into smaller political units.

• These societies often developed feudal systems based on loyalty to lords, rather than clan loyalty.

• In contrast, Mediterranean and Eastern Europe often retained stronger urban continuity or tribal affiliations, maintaining lineage-based loyalties.

---

👑 3. Germanic and Celtic Traditions

• Many of the Germanic and Celtic societies in Northwestern Europe had tribal structures, but these were often based on loose affiliations, not formal patrilineal clans like those in the Mediterranean, Middle East, or East Asia.

• There was often more egalitarianism among free men, and less rigid kin-based hierarchy.

• Kin groups existed, but they weren't as central to political, legal, or economic life as in the Mediterranean world.

---

🛐 4. Early Christian Penetration

• Christianity entered parts of Northwestern Europe relatively early (5th–7th centuries), and without a strong pre-existing centralized kinship system to resist it.

• In contrast, clan and family honor were deeply entrenched in Southern Europe and the Middle East.

• This meant that Church norms, like the cousin marriage ban, had less resistance and could reshape society more easily in the North.

---

⚔️ 5. Feudalism vs. Kinship

• The rise of feudalism created a society based more on contracts of loyalty between individuals and lords, rather than inherited group identity.

• This system encouraged:

  • Individual landholding

  • Personal allegiance to monarchs or nobles

  • Legal systems not governed by clans

Feudalism diluted kin-based solidarity by creating vertical ties (lord-vassal) that cut across family and clan lines.

---

🧬 6. Cultural and Demographic Fragmentation

• Frequent migration, invasions, and demographic turnover (e.g., Anglo-Saxons, Vikings, Franks) disrupted kin continuity and discouraged large kin group consolidation.

• The Black Death in the 14th century also weakened extended family lines, especially in the North.

---

🧭 Summary Table

Factor	Effect on Clan Structure in Northwest Europe
Dispersed agriculture	Less need for tight family cooperation
Tribal, not clan-based roots	Weaker formal kinship systems
Feudal contracts	Vertical ties over horizontal (kin) ties
Early Christianization	Easier Church influence on marriage patterns
Migration & war	Disrupted long-term kinship cohesion

---

🧠 Final Thought

So to sum up:

Northwest Europe may not have had especially strong clans to begin with, which made the Church's kinship-disrupting reforms easier to implement—and in turn laid the foundation for the rise of more individualistic, institution-based societies.

If you’re interested, we can compare this to regions like the Arab world or South Asia, where strong patrilineal kinship structures persisted despite the presence of organized religion and external empires.