by Jimmie Moglia for The Saker Blog
If, according to Oscar Wilde, truth is a matter of style, even more so history is a matter of opinion. An obvious and unnecessary remark, were it not for the anger of some when they dissent with the thoughts of others. To them I would recommend, with all the earnestness at my disposal, the recollection of Mark Twain’s topic and soothing ruling that, “In all matters of opinion our adversaries are insane.”
We have no other device for returning through time, except that which operates in our minds with the materials provided by past generations. Therefore I declare myself a humble vessel, into which some ancient and nearer historians have poured the fruits of their findings.
Findings that – linked by an Arianna’s thread – constitute an attempt to ascertain some ambiguities, disentangle some intricacies, and recover the meaning of seemingly inexplicable events. Some of which are lost in the darkness of antiquity and some are current, but otherwise only explainable by wholesale attribution to the inexorable and unstoppable march of folly.
We’ll start with the Arabs of the first millennium and some related little known events. Indexes really, tiny bubbles compared to their subsequent volumes, but in which there is seen the baby figure of the giant mass of things to come at large.
The Arabs, as we know, set themselves to conquer the world with the scimitar. By the way, the word ‘Arab’ originally referred to those Bedouins in the (now) Arabian Peninsula, who owned means of transportation, that is, camels. They were the elite among the camel-less Bedouins, and called themselves ‘Arab’.
As we are (were) taught in High School, Charles Martel checked the expansionist drive of the Islamized Arabs in Europe at the Battle of Poitiers, in 732 AD.
The original rules of correct Islamic practices, covering every possible human contingency, social and individual, from birth to death, went under the now familiar name of Shari’ah. Which included the Qur’an, plus certain collections of reports (hadith). Explaining the Shari’ah to the brethren was the task of the teachers (ulama).
But as Ovid wrote in his “Metamorphoses”, times change and we change with them (“Tempora mutantur et nos mutamur in illis”). After the battle of Poitiers, the Islamic world, the Caliphate, underwent remarkable transformations and evolutions. Incidentally, the term “Caliphate” has been recently associated with the ridiculously cruel and bestially grotesque ISIS. As we will see later, this is a charade and a net-trap to catch human woodcocks. ISIS’ lugubrious use of the term “Caliphate,” diffused by all arts and methods of propagation and propaganda, has nothing to do with the historic Caliphate linked to the original Arabic expansion. Though, as we know, the credulous mistake sound bites for knowledge.
The dramatic evolution of early Islamic civilization led to an equally dramatic progress in all the arts and sciences that we associate with the term ‘culture’ – mathematics, geometry, architecture, chemistry (then indistinguishable from alchemy), astronomy, medicine and philosophic speculation. For example, from the astronomer Musa al-Khwarizmi, Western Europe derived the word ‘algorithm’ – recently connected with a sinister system for deleting from the public media “fakist” (from ‘fake’) information. Which is new-speak for “information unpalatable to those whom we know who they are, but should not say it aloud.”
Toledo’s mosque and Granada’s Alhambra were and are peaks and wonders of human art. Elements of Arabic architecture heavily influenced the magnificent Gothic Cathedrals that rose in Europe during the 11th, 12th and 13 hundredth.
Of particular interest to us is the evolution among the speculatively minded sections of Arabic culture. Though the Shari’ah remained the foundation of religious faith and sanctioned social customs, a cultural movement developed, a kind of Arabic intellectual perestroika called ‘Falsafah’ – a rendering of the Greek ‘philosophia.’ Accompanied by an Arabic glasnosts, that is, openness to debate, appropriately called ‘Kalem,’ Arabic for ‘discussion.’
Two characters important for this analysis were Avicenna (Ibn-Sina), d. in 1074, and Averroe’ (Ibn-Rushd), d. in 1111. Avicenna, among other things, published a 5-volume treatise on medicine, used until the 1500 in European universities. Avicenna and others translated Aristotle, Plato and various Greek philosophers into Arabic and Hebrew. That is, they introduced Greek philosophy, culture and values to the rest of Europe. St. Thomas Aquinas (d. in 1274), who extensively commented Aristotle, blending his teachings with Christian philosophy, repeatedly quotes and makes reference to Avicenna in his writings.
Averroe’, on the other hand, stood on the radical side of the Kalem. He was a Pantheist. God and the world are one, he said. Reason, not faith can explain the Universe.
Less known, but crucial for the future history of the Arabic world, was another thinker named Al-Ghazali. He summarized his views on Falsafah and Kalem in a book meaningfully titled, “Deliverer from Error.” In essence, Falsafah and Kalem – he said – will lead the Arabs astray. For only the Quran and the Shar’ia are the models, necessary and sufficient to guide the Arabic nation through the uncertainties of life with the certainties of faith.
The purported decadence of Arabic culture – or rather the lack of further development after brilliant beginnings – starts with the victory of Al-Ghazali’s ‘fundamentalism.’
One assumed, barely unsaid but broadly hinted justification for the Israeli-driven America’s destruction of Iraq, Libya, Syria, Yemen, for the organized ‘color revolutions’ in Egypt and Tunisia, and the support for the land grab of Palestine and Palestinian genocide – is that Arabic culture is ‘inferior.’
Zionism is a socialist-atheist ideology, but it can make use of religion as needed. In the instance, for the Arabs, who are Semites, Ishmael, son of Abraham is their founder. Abraham had married Hagar, an Egyptian princess, because the other wife, Sarah, could not have children. To bypass the issue, Rabbinical theology has determined that Ishmael was a bastard because Hagar, though married to Abraham, was not Jewish. It is sobering to think that such galactic-sized BS is the ‘ethical’ justification for the slaughter of millions, and for treating the Palestinians as dirt.
The fancy of a witty orator may paint such claims in the strong colors of ridicule. For, if the Israelis could steal Palestinian lands because they lived there 2000 years before, even more so the Italians could claim most of Western Europe. For Julius Caesar conquered France, Belgium, Holland, Switzerland, Austria, part of Germany and most of England, up to the Hadrian Wall. Thank God, the idea did not cross Mussolini’s mind. But nefarious powers can whip up nonsense as if it were cream.
I digress… After the Arabs, the Turks took up the expansionist drive of Islam. They were checked first by their defeat in the naval Battle of Lepanto (1570). Then in 1683, the Polish general Sobieski defeated them after breaking their two-month long siege of Vienna. Collectively, we escaped becoming Muslims by the proverbial thread.
On another historical front, Western Europe, after sailing through the good and bad of the Renaissance, faced the challenges of the Reformation. Which – the Reformation – had three main protagonists, Luther, Calvin and Henry VIII with his Church of England.
Luther accepted Christianity, but all superfluous ornament was rejected by the cold frugality of Protestant churches. Agnostic art lovers admit that Catholic superstition, though the enemy of reason, is often the parent of the arts.
Henry VIII’s Church of England is not greatly different from the Church of Rome, in its structure and ceremonials.
But the Protestants, those who left England for America in 1620s, were Calvinists. Calvin radicalized Luther, especially on the issue of predestination. Life, Calvin said, is predetermined and man cannot sound the mind of God on the subject. But the unfolding of events can provide useful hints. If, via personal initiative, a man becomes rich, that’s a good sign that God will also proportionally reward him in the afterlife.
In an updated version of Dante’s Divine Comedy, the ultra-rich of this earth have the VIP seats in Paradise. Said it another way, the Calvinist God socks it to the poor, both in the earthly and the unearthly world.
This runs totally opposite to the tenets of European Christianity, for, to quote Balzac, behind every great fortune there is a crime. Or, more accurately quoted, “The secret of a great success is often a crime that has never been found out, because it was properly executed.” (Le secret des grandes fortunes sans cause apparente est un crime oublié, parce qu’il a été proprement fait.) In fact, the three deadly sins of Christian Europe are, in order of badness, Avarice, Pride and Sensuality.
The dilemma whether a traditionalist Western European Christian can be a good American Christian is not new. In 1889 Pope Leo XIII responded with a letter to a question from the American Cardinal Gibbons, whether Catholics could adapt themselves to the “American Spirit” of Calvinist inspiration. Leo answered at length and concluded that Christianity was incompatible with Americanism. Which also seems, with due modifications, the conclusions reached by today’s nation of Russia.
Furthermore, American Calvinism denies the divine nature of Christ, pays lip service to the New Testament, and relies on the Old Testament for religious inspiration and (often literal) beliefs. Readers may recall the relatively recent issue of whether American schools should teach Creationism or Evolution.
As an aside, in the early Christianity of the Roman Empire there were competing currents of thought and interpretation of the Christian religion. Important at the time was the now little-remembered sect of the Gnostics. They believed that it would behoove Christianity to completely forget the Old Testament and directly begin with the New.
The Gnostics recollected the sanguinary list of murders, of executions and of massacres, which stain almost every page of the Jewish annals. Therefore they thought it was impossible that a religion that consisted only of bloody sacrifices and trifling ceremonies, and whose rewards as well as punishments were all of a carnal and temporal nature, could inspire the love of virtue, or restrain the impetuosity of passion.
Anyway, Calvinism has its origin in Old Testament Judaism. Consequently, whereas Europe finds historical and current kinship with the moderate Arabic world, Calvinist and Judaic-inspired America sees that world as a bad reality ripe for extermination. Which explains America-Israeli’s and Saudi Arabia’s financing and setting-up of ISIS, as the perfect Orwellian enemy a’-la-carte. The unwavering skeptics may remember the Toyota pick-up trucks, still featuring the dealer’s label, shipped to ISIS directly from Texas.
And, notwithstanding doubtful claims of ‘error,’ the bombardment of ancient and precious monuments by ISIS, Saudi Arabia etc. should be considered purposeful. Palmyra, Baghdad’s magnificent museum pillaged and looted, and other monuments destroyed, were remains of ancient magnificence, symbols of a history repugnant to the Calvinist and Zionist spirit of the America that (unfortunately) counts.
Judaic-Calvinist America is anti-European, anti-Mediterranean, and an enemy of the ancient culture born in the Middle East, the Babylonians, the Assyrians, Palestine, followed by Greece and Rome. That is, the culture of Western Europe.
For this kind of America, there is no external objectivity. Reality is subjective, it is what we say it is. Principles that suggest metaphysics, or anything beyond the material, are for the birds. Dubious readers may remember the pernicious secretary of defence Rumsfeld. Who, when questioned about massive incontrovertible lies he said on Iraq, retorted in a rare moment of truth, “We create our own reality.” A mode of thought that we see almost daily in action: Assad’s chemical attacks, Putin’s poisoning of the Skripals, Russia’s interference with American elections, etc.
Picking up again the temporarily-suspended historical thread, after the Protestant Reformation, the next political European earthquake was Oliver Cromwell’s English revolution, 1642-1649.
For every momentous event, there is an official and an unofficial version. The official version claims that the rebels, the Roundheads, feared that King Charles I would restore Catholicism to England – albeit with no evidence. In the unofficial version, the roots of the revolution must be sought in the banishment of Jews from England by King Edward I, in 1290 AD.
There is an extant note by Cromwell to Ebenezer Pratt, a Jewish financier in Amsterdam, saying, “In return for financial support will advocate admission of Jews to England. This however is impossible while Charles living.”
Follows an exchange of communications between the two. The last note to Cromwell by Ebenezer Pratt says, “Will grant financial aid as soon as Charles removed and Jews admitted. Assassination is too dangerous. Charles shall be given an opportunity to escape. His recapture will make trial and execution possible. The support will be liberal, but it is useless to discuss terms until the trial commences.”
Just such an event took place in November 1647. The recaptured and tried King Charles I was executed in 1649. Cromwell readmitted the Jews to England, just as 150 years later, following similar circumstances, Napoleon emancipated the Jews in France after the French Revolution.
But unlike France, England restored the monarchy with the return from exile of Charles II, son of Charles I. Then, after the ‘Glorious’ Revolution of 1688 – so called because it was bloodless – the new King, William of Orange, came from… Holland.
Some historians hold that the real objective of the ‘Glorious Revolution’ was the setting up, in 1694, of the “Bank of England” and the institution of the National Debt, whereby lenders would secure their loans on the taxes of the country, instead of the doubtful undertaking of some ruler or potentate.
Furthermore, gold became the basis of loans, ten times the size of the amount of gold held by the bank. That is, 100 pounds in gold, held by a banker, would be legal security for 1,000 pounds of loan. At, say, 3%, therefore, 100$ in gold would earn 30 pounds in interest to the banker – with no more trouble to the lender than the keeping of a few ledger entries.
What has this to do with our story? It does insofar as, about 200 years later, the establishment of the Federal Reserve Bank closely mirrors the establishment of the Bank of England. And, as mentioned in a previous article, the Federal Reserve is proudly recognized as the achievement of a Jewish cartel of bankers and politicians.
As Dutch bankers supported Cromwell in the 1640s, American Bankers secured America’s arbitrary and unjustified military intervention in WW1, to support the tottering England, in exchange for the Balfour Declaration about Palestine.
WW1 destroyed the German, the Austro-Hungarian, the Russian and the Ottoman empires. Palestine went to England, and all the guarantees for the Palestinians (though included in the Balfour declaration), went the way of all flesh.
WW2, besides destroying Germany, also destroyed the British Empire and brought Zio-Americanism to Europe, which mixes the barbaric (im)morality of the Talmud with the absence of an objective reality. The equivalent, in politics and economy is neo-liberalism.
The ethic peddled by neo-liberal, turbo-capitalist and imperialist elites, the cult of the self, the banishing of empathy, the belief that violence can be used to make the world conform, require the destruction of the communal and the destruction of the sacred. And the elites who orchestrate this pillage, like elites who pillaged parts of the globe in the past, probably believe they can outrun their own destructiveness.
Furthermore, it is questionable whether the self-interest of a turbo-capitalist or high-finance manipulator coincides with the interests of the community, and whether the competitive winner-take-all mentality provides the dynamics of economic progress.
In the meantime… while Stalinist Communism had prevailed in Russia – that is, Communism in one country, Trotskyite Communist ideology did not die. In Western Europe Trotskyite revolutionary ideas expressed themselves with the revolution of 1968. Where the revolutionaries were no longer the proletarians but the students.
The ideologues inspiring the 1968 revolution were the Cultural Marxists of the so called Frankfurt School, which incorporated Marx, Nietzsche, and the base, degenerate, sick and disgusting Freud, with his psychoanalysis. Based on his biographies, Freud was a vindictive Marxist, fixated with money, and bent to prove that all goys are perverts. The damage he wrought on Western European culture is still to be tallied, – it’s no wonder that he became an icon of Cultural Marxism.
The objective of the 1968 revolution was the worldwide establishment of intellectual anarchism.
1968 also brought a Marx-inspired revolution to man’s inmost being. It destroyed the individual. It established American-Atlantic culture in Europe, with its accompanying infinite relativism. For when reality is what I say it is, everything goes. It was the beginning of the destruction of what there remained of the Greek, Latin and then Christian tradition.
As for to the Middle East, we should note that all the countries that Israeli-America attacked or destroyed subscribed to Ba’athism. That is, a Baath-inspired party governed those nations.
Baath, or Ba’athist means “renaissance” or “resurrection.” It began in the early 1800 after Napoleon Bonaparte’s invasion of Egypt. The nearest approximation of Baathism in Europe, are (were), the national-socialist movements in Spain with Franco, in Italy with Mussolini and in Portugal with Salazar. Ba’athism rejects political pluralism, not in principle but “temporarily indefinitely.” For how long it cannot say, because the primary and immediate aim is to advance Arab society, borrowing technology and other scientific innovations from Europe and America, but not the ideology.
Equally, Ba’athism aims at developing an enlightened, tolerant Arabic society, enhancing social progress and promoting a semi-secular ideology. As an example, Tariq-Aziz, Saddam’s Foreign Minister and Deputy Prime Minister, was Catholic. Ba’athism supports socialist economics to a varying degree, and public ownership in crucial sectors of the economy. It opposes, however, the confiscation of private property.
Ba’athist ideology does not imply state socialism or economic equality. The Ba’athists believe that moderate socialism is the only way to develop a free and united Arab society. In summary, Ba’athist ideology is nationalist but not fundamentalist.
Around 1990 new revolutionary movements arose, notably Al-Qaida, eventually transformed, through multiple rebranding into ISIS, the instrument of a new Trotskyite, world-permanent revolution.
ISIS is not an Islamic religion, it is an Islamic political ideology, a puppet in a theater where Israel pulls the strings and Zio-America pays the theater’s logistic bill, through the good offices of the other ruffian puppet, Saudi Arabia.
For the moment, as we know, the plan to completely destroy moderate Islam stalled in Syria, thanks also to Russia.
But the undeclared prize is the destruction is Europe, or rather of what is left in Europe of the Greek, Latin, Scholastic, religious tradition. With the moderate and progressive Arabic states, Zio-America used traditional bombs, with Europe they are using the population bomb.
It is doubtful whether Europe, weakened by the importation of Zio-American ideology, and by the 1968 Cultural Marxist revolution, can defend herself. Of them, whose rise we could not hinder, we solace ourselves by prognosticating the fall. But that is only wishful thinking. Sunk in hopeless dejection, Europe resembles the headless chicken, still trotting for a moment, before dropping to the ground.
2.5 billion people wait to be ferried to Europe. More sections of European cities are “zona franca.” American (Jewish) scientist, Samuel Huntington, predicted “The Clash of Civilizations” while his student Fukuyama predicted the “end of history.” Untold by Huntington is that “the clash of civilizations” is a euphemism for the Coudeneuve-Kalergi plan for the replacement of Europeans with a mongrel race ruled by “the best of the Jews” (Kalergi’s words). And that the “end of history” is the world promised to the chosen people.
All this many in the world well know, yet none knows well what to do about it. The still unaware or skeptical may eventually be persuaded via the shared network of world communications. Widespread knowledge is a challenge and a potential obstacle in the progress towards the end of history. Enter then the novel business of censoring “fake news” – namely, news unpleasant to the Kabal. It’s an Orwellian rendition of the Official Secrets Act. Which, as we know, is not to protect the secrets, but the officials.
Angry at failing to completely destroy Russia at the end of the USSR, Zio-America is seeking revenge. It succeeded in making Ukraine an enemy of Russia, which equates to Ukraine being an enemy of herself, or to Rome being an enemy of Italy. For the root and heart of Russia was the kingdom of Kievan-Rus (“Kievan” as in “Kiev,” and “Rus” as in “Russia”). Ironically, America hated the USSR because it was atheist, and now Zio-America hates Russia because it is (Orthodox) Christian.
Zio-America equally succeeded in making scorched earth of moderate Islam, but for Iran. Knowing the country well and personally, I like to believe that it will not be as easy to destroy it as they think.
There remains Russia, which, as far as we now can say or perhaps can see, may only be subdued with the Samson option (Israel’s alternative definition of WW3).
Even so, all that lives must die, passing through nature to eternity. I am innocent of the knowledge of Judaic metaphysics. There seems to be no generally shared notion of a Judaic heavenly world, corresponding to the Christian or Muslim Paradise. Their end of history coincides with a final conquest of the earthly world. Though a Judaic hell must exist, for, according to the Talmud, Christ burns there eternally in excrement. Anyway, their Jehovah-God is bitter, harsh, grim and vindictive, hence better avoided than befriended.
Dante’s Divine Comedy offers a good description of the Catholic Paradise – an intriguing though somewhat static realm. It is as if the Blessed were permanently watching splendid static images on an immense paradisiacal TV screen.
The Muslim Paradise is better suited to be understood. But 70 virgins seem excessive, I’d settle for 35. Though I am already content that, 4-billion years hence, my dust will be part of a star – and I will become veritable stardust.
1. For more on Freud, interested readers may check the article “The Fraud of Freud” (http://thesaker.is/?s=the+fraud+of+freud)
2. Readers affected by chronic or episodic insomnia, may watch one or more of the videos I produced on the History of Ukraine. (http://thesaker.is/?s=History+of+Ukraine)