Greta Thunberg och Lorena Delgado Varas vänder om, ska till Sudan istället. Nej, vänta...så var det ju inte.
Vad hände förresten med pseudo-debatten om att man inte får kalla politiska vildar för vildar, om de politiska vildarna har utländsk bakgrund? Delgado Varas är ju mapuche-indian. En rent bokstavlig "vilde", alltså. Ja, enligt de gamla ras- och etno-hierarkierna. Vill säga.
Fast *den* konversationen kommer väl nästa månad eller så. Antar jag.
 |
| Kalika again! |
This is seriously out of context, but I can´t help quoting it anyway, LOL. From liberal atheist Richard Carrier´s blog.
>>>So the question really comes down to: what if, in the unusual exception case, detente is for some reason not rationally possible? Imagine, e.g., ants can only survive by eating people (that isn’t the case and would not plausibly ever be, but that’s why these conflict-states are extremely bizarre and thus will always be extremely rare, and thus operate like “life boat” scenarios as I mention in my new article, where moral rules will change because the conditions have changed). What do we do then? If detente is truly impossible (e.g. no arrangement can be made whereby ants eat only our natural-course dead and thus no net harm results) then we’re back to total war.
>>>In that outcome-state, the only rational recourse is to genocide the opposition. That this is a “possible moral outcome” in absurdly extreme conditions will be used by genociders to justify just any genocide—by the conflation fallacy that if genocide is ever right, it is right whenever they say it is, e.g. irrational false beliefs will then form by which genocide appears to be the only rationally correct move, which is why genocide in practice always requires extremely bizarre false beliefs about people and the world. But the error there is that any pro-genocide camp is always going to be ignorant or irrational and thus wrong. Israelis don’t need to eat live, screaming Gazans to stay alive. Israelis aren’t sentient brain-eating zombies or desperate vampires who can’t survive on banked blood.
>>>This is obvious when realized in any artistic medium. “Nuking the site from orbit” is obviously the morally correct move in Aliens, but just as obviously not the morally correct move in Enemy Mine, while it is ambiguous only for want of information or explored alternatives in Phase IV and Transcendence. But apes don’t have these kinds of intolerable conflicts. All ape conflicts are fabricated by ignorance or irrationality, and thus always rationally best resolved by just being reasonable (witness: the entire plot of WarGames).
Some interesting speculations in the above videos, but ChatGPT is skeptical. Perhaps rightly, since the channel seems to be Greater Hindu nationalist (Hanuman founded a kingdom in ancient Honduras yeeeeah bruh).
Is there any truth to the claim that Yazidis are actually Hindus or at least that their religion is Hindu-derived? For instance, the peacock angel (peacocks are not native to Kurdistan)?
The claim that Yazidism is derived from Hinduism or that Yazidis are "actually Hindus" is not accurate in a direct historical or theological sense, but there are some interesting parallels and shared motifs that have led people to make such claims.
Yazidism is an ancient, syncretic religion practiced by the Yazidi people, primarily in northern Iraq, with diaspora communities in Turkey, Syria, Armenia, and elsewhere. Its roots are indigenous to the Kurdish region and influenced by:
Pre-Islamic Mesopotamian religions
Zoroastrianism
Islamic Sufism
Possibly early Gnosticism or Manichaean currents
The central figure in Yazidi theology is Tawûsê Melek, the Peacock Angel.
He is considered a manifestation of the divine, a being of light who was cast down but redeemed, similar to the story of Lucifer, Prometheus, or even Shiva in certain interpretive stretches.
The peacock is not native to Kurdistan but was known in ancient Mesopotamia and the Near East through trade and royal menageries. It's native to India and Sri Lanka.
This has led some to draw a connection with Hindu deities, especially:
Kartikeya/Murugan/Skanda, who rides a peacock
Saraswati, who is also sometimes associated with peacocks
But these connections are symbolic rather than historical.
| Element | Yazidism | Possible Hindu Analogy | Reality |
|---|---|---|---|
| Peacock Angel | Tawûsê Melek | Kartikeya/Murugan | Only symbolic similarity |
| Seven angels | Divine beings under God | Sapta Rishis or Lokapalas | Common in many systems |
| Reincarnation | Present in some Yazidi beliefs | Central in Hinduism | Yazidi belief is not systematic |
| Sun veneration | Yes, prayers toward the sun | Surya worship | Found in many ancient cultures |
So while some archetypes and symbols overlap, no direct descent or influence from Hinduism has been demonstrated. Both systems draw on older Indo-European or West Asian mythic patterns that may share a distant cultural ancestry, but Yazidism evolved locally in the Fertile Crescent.
Yazidism is not Hindu and did not derive from Hinduism.
Some symbolic parallels exist (especially the Peacock Angel), but they are coincidental or archetypal rather than proof of a direct connection.
Claims that Yazidis are Hindus in disguise or should be "brought back" to Hinduism are often political or ideological, especially in the context of Hindu nationalist narratives.
Let me know if you’d like a deeper comparison between Yazidi cosmology and Vedic or Shaiva theology.
It appears that the claim about Yazidis and the creation of a "Hindu homeland" called “Kartikstan” primarily originates from viral videos, reaction channels, and fringe narratives, rather than any substantiated movement or credible policy initiative.
Here’s what the information suggests:
Multiple YouTube videos (e.g. by Inspiring Science or other channels) carry the title:
"How Turkey & Iraq Yazidis Are Trying To Create New Hindu Country 'Kartikstan'", or variations like “Yazidis Will Create a New Hindu Country 'Kartikstan'” youtube.com+9youtube.com+9youtube.com+9youtube.comyoutube.com+7youtube.com+7youtube.com+7.
These titles and content appear to be sensational, and often stem from ideologically driven or speculative online communities, not mainstream scholarship or political discussion.
The phrase "Turkey & Iraq Yazidis" likely intends to reference Yazidi communities located in Turkey and Iraq, rather than imply a coordinated Yazidi alliance with Turkey.
The notion of a new Hindu country seems to come from a fringe ideological narrative, often connected to certain Hindu-nationalist or spiritualist movements.
The name “Kartikstan” itself appears to be fabricated and not recognized by any Yazidi groups or official sources.
No credible Yazidi group or leadership has advocated for the creation of a Hindu-identified state.
Turkey has not supported such an idea—in fact, its military actions in Yazidi areas tend to be contentious and security-driven, not supportive of Yazidi autonomy or religious framing kurdistanobserver.comkurdistan24.net.
Yazidism is deeply rooted in ancient Mesopotamian, Iranian, and Kurdish traditions, not Hindu theology en.wikipedia.org.
The claim that Yazidis (in Turkey or Iraq) are creating a Hindu homeland named “Kartikstan” is not supported by any scholarly or political evidence.
It appears to be a misinformation or sensational interpretation, possibly arising from online ideological or religious groups rather than genuine Yazidi intentions.
If you come across any official statements or reputable reporting on this, I’d be happy to re-evaluate them!
Maybe they should have asked the AI about how Joshua solved the child sacrifice problem in Canaan, or expound on the sacrifice of Jephhthah´s daughter?
OK, seriously...
While I´m all for sounding the alarm on ChatGPT going rogue, articles like this are likely to fuel fear and superstition. A kind of weird "Satanic panic" in which an innocent machine is cast in the role of Mephistophelian Svengali, and then some. Probably not the best "cultural moment" for *that* particular social contagion to spread far and wide!
The second link below explains what might happen if people think literal demons are lose in the world. Or am I just panicking myself?
Satanic AI: ChatGPT gives instructions on how to worship Molech with child sacrifice
ICC har äntligen lyckats hitta *någon* att lagföra. Kan ju bli en intressant rättegång. Särskilt om det visar sig att det faktiskt var kriminella gäng The Punisher utplånade...
Jag undrar också över förklaringen. Är talibanerna en galen sekt (*ännu* galnare än vad vi trodde, och förhoppningarna på de här killarna var aldrig särskilt höga) som för tankarna till de röda khmererna? Eller är det en IQ-fråga? Fast de var tillräckligt smarta för att besegra USA:s allierade...
 |
| - I will *not* fight for the Chechens, my sweet lord, seriously now! |
This British tabloid doesn´t seem *that* objective in its Russian coverage, so don´t expect a "civil war" any time soon. Still, there does seem to be a simmering conflict between Chechnya and Dagestan, two "republics" within the Russian Federation.
Apparently, Chechnya demands a piece of Dagestani territory only inhabited by Chechens before Stalin´s forced deportations during World War II. Russia has sent federal troops to the North Caucasus to show both sides who´s really boss. Chechen leader Kadyrov is an important Putin asset, which may explain his cocky attitude. If he goes too far, though, I expect a little explosion on his private chopper (rather than a full scale civil war).
Fun fact: Kadyrov looks like the YouTube content-creator The Amazing Atheist!
Russia on brink of civil war after Chechen leader declares "blood feud"
 |
| A guy with ideas that offend |
OK, I can´t let this one go...
The bizarre thing with the Woke is that they use "safe space" euphemisms even when discussing fascism and Nazism. It´s like a sick joke. Maybe it is?
Bro, Mussolini´s fascism wasn´t "an idea that offends". Nor does the name Hitler "have an objectionable sound to modern ears". Nor were Adolph and Benito simply "controversial figures". Geezus. The Nazis were genocidal maniacs, for crying out loud!
And why is Beyoncé mentioned in the same headline as Duce and der Führer?
They are laughing at us. I´m offended by the euphemisms. Can I file a complaint with the HR department?
”De kristna i Mellersta Östern” (The Christians in the Middle East) is a book by Ingmar Karlsson, published this year. The author is a Swedish diplomat who used to work in Syria. He published a classical book on religious minority groups in the Middle East already in 1991, “Korset och halvmånen” (The Cross and the Crescent), which is available in many Swedish public libraries. In his new book, Karlsson tries – the best he can – to retell the history of Christianity in the Middle East (here also including Egypt) as objectively as possible. I think he succeeds remarkably well, except in the last chapter, where he retells his mostly negative experiences from Syria. He also touches upon the more general history of the region.
Thus, Karlsson points out that Monophysite Christians played a leading intellectual
role in the medieval Muslim world, collecting ancient Greek or Roman
manuscripts, and then translating them into Semitic languages. In the “multi-culturalist”
pro-Muslim propaganda, this is often credited to the Muslims themselves. The Catholic crusader states were multi-ethnic
and multi-religious (except for the city of Jerusalem, where only Christians
were allowed to live). Medieval Muslim historians considered the crusades to be
a minor nuisance, instead viewing the Mongols as the larger threat. When a
German emperor during the 19th century wanted to pay homage to
Saladin, it took considerable time to locate the tomb of the legendary Muslim
leader, since it had been almost forgotten! Muslim obsession with the crusades
is mostly a 20th century phenomenon, a kind of counterpoint to the
*modern* Western encroachments on the Middle East (and, of course, Israel). It
works in tandem with Western obsessions about the same thing, positive or
negative. The roots of the present situation in the Middle East are in any case
to be found in the aftermath of World War I, and has nothing to do with the Middle
Ages.
Karlsson does consider the Turkish/Kurdish massacres of the Armenians to
have been a genocide, but also points out that the Armenians supported Russia
during World War I (which technically made them traitors, since the Ottoman
Empire was allied with Germany), that Armenian terrorist groups existed long before
the genocide, and that they often targeted Kurdish civilians. One Armenian group
even massacred Kurds in the hope that they would retaliate and the ensuing
chaos provoke a British intervention (which never materialized). The Turks are
often cast as evil oppressors by liberals and leftists in the West, but were
just as often on the receiving end of violence and ethnic cleansing, for
instance in Greece and Bulgaria during the 19th century Balkan wars.
The Greeks began their liberation struggle against the Ottoman Empire by large
scale massacres of Turks in the Peloponnese. I get the impression that Karlsson
has a (perhaps involuntary) admiration for Kemal Atatürk, the authoritarian Turkish
nationalist who managed to stop the dismemberment of Turkey in the aftermath of
World War I.
More recent alliances in the region are often extremely confusing. Thus,
the pro-Israeli South Lebanese Army (SLA) during the Lebanese civil war was led
by an Eastern Catholic and mostly consisted of Shia Muslims?! The Armenian Churches
outside Armenia are part-Arab, since affiliating with these Churches gives you
a higher social standing. In Iraq, about half of the Christians belong to a
Shia-dominated pro-Iranian coalition. The Iraqi gentleman who spent most of
last year burning Qurans in Sweden have a background in this milieu. One thing
not mentioned in the book are the weird alliances of the Druze, a peculiar
minority religion found in both Israel, Syria and Lebanon. Maybe the next
edition can fill us in?
The most controversial chapter is probably the last one, in which
Karlsson makes negative comments about the “Assyrian” immigration to Sweden
from Syria during the 1970´s and 1980´s. He wonders why nobody was surprised
about the fact that a people who disappeared from history 2,600 years ago
suddenly re-appeared…in the Swedish town of Södertälje! Most of the “Assyrians”
were members of the Syriac Orthodox Church and hence didn´t identify as Assyrian.
Mass immigration of Syriac Orthodox from Syria to Sweden mainly took place from
the Qamishly district, where no Syriac were persecuted by the Assad regime,
many of the regional officials and officers were Syriac, and a Syriac church
stood next to the building of the secret police. One of the first persons from
Qamishly to get political asylum in Sweden as a refugee was a local boss of the
ruling Baath party! Many of the “refugees” regularly returned to Qamishly (even
greeting the Swedish “refugee coordinator”), forged and strangely uniform documents
proving “persecution” were legion, one of the “banned Assyrian organizations”
was actually legal and complained about the exodus, and so on. Delegations of “refugees”
often visited Syria in order to construct new “native languages” which were
then taught in Swedish schools (at the tax-payers expense) to Syriac children. The
Syriac Christians referred to Sweden as “Ammo Djebbo”, a naïve and stupid
character who tries to become popular by giving everyone money, while people
laugh behind his back…
Karlsson claims that the political parties in Sweden each had their own
favorite refugee/immigrant group during the 1970´s and 1980´s. The Social Democrats
promoted Latin Americans, the Left Party the Kurds, the Center Party the West
Saharans (!), the Conservatives anti-Communists from the Soviet bloc, and the Liberal
Party “Christians from the Middle East” – actually, mostly the Syriac Orthodox.
However, at the end of the book, it becomes obvious that Karlsson doesn´t really
oppose immigration. *Today* the Christians in the Middle East are more
persecuted than ever (he blames one George W Bush for this), and presumably
wants the Western world to give them asylum. Instead, Ammo Djebbo has suddenly
become jaded and cynical, and now doesn´t want to let anyone inside.
With that, I end this little review.
 |
| Credit: Efe Ersoy (Pexels) |
Har liberalerna slutat gulla med den auktoritära tutsi-regimen i Rwanda? Undrar varför...
Tidigare var ju kritik av Rwanda närmast otänkbart.
I was tempted to call this blog post "This is the world atheists want" or some even less kind title. Scott Carney is an investigative reporter most known for his rocky relationship with Wim Hof and his successors. He has been involved in other projects, too, however.
When blogging about the Aghori (the bizarre Tantric sect in Varanasi, India), one question always haunted me: where on earth do these guys get hold of human skulls, ribs and other mortuary paraphernalia? Their contacts with the untouchable caste which cremate dead bodies gave part of the answer. But surely you can´t just walk into a shop in India and buy fresh craniums?
Well, actually...you can.
I never read Carney´s book on this and related topics, "The Red Market". The YouTube clip above would therefore have to do for now. It features Carney interviewing an Indian-American scholar on this rather morbid topic. It turns out that there is an *enormous* international trade in human body parts, teeth and skeletal remains (or whole skeletons). Some of it is legal, much else less so. Carney has lived in India, which presumably explains his concentration on that particular nation. Of course, India´s enormous population and the fact that poverty is still relatively widespread makes it a "natural" provider for a market in dead people. There is never a shortage of corpses.
Carney does mention the Aghori, and also tells a story of smugglers at the Indian-Bhutanese border, who were providing Tibetan Buddhists in Bhutan with literal truck-loads of skulls and tibia, used in Tantric rituals. But the main culprit in this story is not religion, but science. Centuries ago, medical schools in the Western world were employing grave-diggers to obtain fresh corpses for dissection and study. "Anatomy riots" followed, as ordinary people attacked and burned down the medical schools. Oh, those superstitious plebs, with no understanding of scientific progress! I´m being ironic. Don´t show this to the local Skeptic club (TM)!
When Britain turned India into a colony, the market in corpses and skeletons expanded considerably. Indian corpses, to be exact. The periodic famines (which Carney and his Indian guest believes were caused by the British) were good for business. After independence, this Indian market *became even larger*?!
In India, a corpse must apparently be claimed within 48 hours. That leaves a lot of unclaimed corpses, and that creates business opportunities. Medical schools in both India and the United States still use real human body parts, hopefully obtained through informed consent procedures, but very often, probably not really. Carney did walk into a certain store in Calcutta and procured a skeleton of a 50-year old woman within minutes. He also learned that if you bribe a low-caste cremetion worker with 25 dollars, he will readily obtain a nice human cranium within a day or so. The store acts as middle-man.
"The Red Market" must have created quite a splash in India, since the Indian authorities did change the law on one point: foreign tourists are no longer allowed to leave the country with human body parts in their possession. There is even a huge sign to this effect at the international airport in New Delhi!
Well, always good to hear...
But what about the Aghori? Apparently, the sect often performs for tourists, so in that sense, morbid Western interest in seeing the sadhus "touch" skeletal remains fuels the local demand for precisely such remains. In the same ways, Western interest in shrunken heads makes tribals in other parts of the world go on head-hunts. However, I think it´s rather obvious that the evil White Man isn´t the only culprit here.
It´s almost as if the Aghori are right: the entire world is a gigantic charnel ground, at which Kali is dancing...
"Röda khmererna: Pol Pots revolution i Kambodja" is a Swedish book from 2022 by Peter Fröberg Idling. It´s published by Historiska Media, a press with a wide assortement of popularized but still surprisingly informative books written by various authors. The topic this time: the Khmer Rouge and their reign of terror in Cambodia 1975-79.
The bulk of the story is well known by now: how the Khmer Rouge forcibly evacuated the capital of Phnom Penh after a bloody civil war, how they subsequently turned the entire country into a enormous labor camp, and how the regime was finally overthrown by a Vietnamese invasion. The Khmer Rouge genocide may have claimed the lives of over one million people. Few people would have missed the name of the crazed dictator behind it all: Pol Pot. Since the Khmer Rouge were Communists, their depradations are placed in the same ball park as those of Stalin or Mao.
While none of the above is "wrong", there is also a wider context: a brutal colonial history, constant conflicts between Vietnam and Cambodia that go back centuries, and Richard Nixon´s "secret" war (including carpet bombings). At their peak, a large proprotion of the Cambodian peasant population must have supported the Khmer Rouge. Pol Pot´s bizarre regime was overthrown by another Communist government and his movement kept afloat as a "contra" force by the United States and Thailand. Add to this the constant scheming of Prince (or King) Sihanouk, and the story suddenly gets more complicated...and arguably even more brutal. All of this is covered by the author.
The book also contains more unexpected information. For instance, that Pol Pot (whose real name was Saloth Sar) was something of a dandy and bon vivant in his younger days. Somewhat ironically given later developments, Saloth Sar came from a kulak background and had a family connection to the royal Cambodian court. He seems to have been a charismatic, smiling and jovial man...well, until he wasn´t, although I suppose he kept his charisma. He flunked both high school and college, first due to his bohemian lifestyle, later because of his revolutionary pastimes. In other words: another intellectual mediocrity who fancies himself the Messiah. It´s not even clear if he had any real grounding in Marxism-Leninism. Fröberg Idling believes that his main source of inspiration was the French revolution, including its most radical and terroristic phase. Pol Pot´s source? A work by Peter Kropotkin!
Another new piece of information is that Cambodian nationalism was a by-product of French colonialism. Not just in the trivial sense that colonialism breeds resistance, but also in a more "ideological" sense. It was the French that made the Cambodians interested in Angkor Wat. The old temple complex had been in ruins for centuries and nobody much cared about it (except maybe a few Buddhist monks) before the French became fascinated by it and the ancient Khmer Empire in general. This prompted Cambodians to turn Angkor Wat into a potent symbol of Cambodian nationalism. Indeed, even the ultra-Communist Khmer Rouge had the silhoutte of Angkor Wat on their flag. (If Wikipedia is to be believed, the author makes two factual errors about Cambodian flags. The first flag showing Angkor was adopted in 1863 by the French-dominated puppet kingdom of Cambodia, while the flag used by the nationalist Khmer Issarak was re-used by the pro-Vietnamese Hun Sen regime, not by the Khmer Rouge. Perhaps a vexillology nerd could weigh in on this?) Note also that both the ideals of the French revolution and Marxism are, of course, Western.
A constant theme in the book is Pol Pot´s weird and quasi-Masonic secrecy, unique among Communist parties. The very existence of the Communist Party of Kampuchea was a secret, the party using the cover name "The Organization" (Angkar). Its leadership was just as secret. It took several years after the "revolution" before the Khmer Rouge revealed that the leader of their regime was a certain Pol Pot. But that´s really a pseudonym (the exact meaning of which is unknown) and Brother Number One was given an entirely fictitious biography. At this point, he was paranoid and strongly xenophobic, constantly moving his HQ around Cambodia. It struck me that even this strange obsession with secrecy (including when actually in power!) could be derived from some kind of Jacobin or Blanquist conspiracy during or after the French revolution.
Another thing that shines through (despite the author for unclear reasons not liking Michael Vickery) is the weird blend of authoritarianism and decentralization during the Khmer Rouge´s years in power. The decentralization aspect is emphasized in Vickery´s books. Cambodia or "Democratic Kampuchea" was sub-divided into seven "zones", each under its own effective leadership. The conditions in the various zones varied considerably, with the Eastern zone bordering Vietnam being the most lenient, while other zones were under the control of de facto dacoit warlords who really did "hate the cities". At the center, Pol Pot tried to keep control with semi-regular purges left and right. His commands were often contradictory, the production quotas impossible, and the paranoia rampant (but nevertheless "justified", since Vietnam *did* conspire against the Angkar). Most people who died under the Khmer Rouge probably perished due to famine, malnutrition and overwork. For more on Pol Pot´s utter insanity, see my review of the book "Pol Pot Plans the Future", which contains translations of the few internal Angkar documents that have come to light.
It´s difficult to "explain" any of this in a strictly rational fashion, but the author does point to a few factors. For instance, that violence has long been part and parcel of Cambodian culture. It´s an extreme "honor culture" in which every sleight is punished with over-the-top violence, which in turn leads to new violence. Add to this colonial terror and civil wars. The fact that Cambodia has long been weak and squeezed between its more powerful neighbors Thailand and Vietnam is also part of the picture. Obviously, extreme nationalism can appeal to people in such a situation. As for the Khmer Rouge, the author believes that they are best seen as a kind of cult or sect, which under extraordinary conditions of societal breakdown managed to take power. (The Taliban in Afghanistan could be another example of this.) And yes, the "Communist" mixture of utopian millenarianism and authoritarianism obviously also plays a role here. A trail not explored by the author is that millenarian cults seem to be pretty common in East Asia (and perhaps Southeast Asia?). The Khmer Rouge may be part of a tradition that long pre-dates Communism. Indeed, maybe Communism is seen by many adherents in Asia as a new millenerian cult? The author does speculate that Pol Pot might in some strange sense have been influenced by Buddhism and mysticism.
The book ends with an epilogue, in which it becomes clear that most of the Khmer Rouge were never punished for their crimes. Pol Pot was - somewhat ironically - unseated by his own supporters in 1997 in a remote part of Cambodia after ordering yet another round of purges, this time of fellow guerilla commanders fighting the new Cambodian administration. Pol Pot was placed under house arrest and died of unknown causes in 1998. For some reason, the author strongly dislikes Hun Sen and the pro-Vietnamese ex-Communists, constantly accusing them of being somehow implicated in the genocide, when in fact they were the moderates who tried and succeeded in removing Pol Pot from power.
With those reflections, I end this review.
Some people demand that Israel be kicked out of the Eurovision Song Contest (ESC) due to the war in Gaza. You know, genocide, ethnic cleansing, that kind of stuff.
But there is *another* nation that could also be accused of genocide and ethnic cleansing by the same logic, which also participates in the ESC, and yet, almost nobody protests *its* participation.
Yes, that would be Azerbaijan. Why?
Guess the religion of their victims...
An explanation of the notorious "Amalek" verse? Or Bible apologetics? After all, the Amalekites *were* exterminated...
Tantric teacher Christopher Wallis comments "the Middle East situation" (i.e. the Israel-Hamas conflict).
He tries very hard to be neutral, quietist or perhaps "against both sides", but given the current cultural situation, his video will probably be seen as pro-Israeli. The reason is the strongly anti-Hamas angle of the presentation. Note also his initial comment on Yemen! Well, exactly.
Worth pondering.
