Hera and the HDS: Hercules Derangement Syndrome – Laying the Background Part 1

Ancient Greeks did not see Gods in the same way most modern religions conceive of them: perfect and all knowing and all powerful and (sometimes) all benevolent. Rather, they saw them as larger-than-life figures who may have had special powers, but they also each possessed very human qualities and very human failings.

Ancient Greek Gods are all manifestations of human archetypes, iconic illustrations of human nature. Perhaps the very essence of human nature.

Aphrodite (Romanized as Venus) is the goddess of beauty, love and, frankly, frivolity and vanity. She is married to Hephaestus (Romanized as Vulcan) who is the ugly and deformed god of smithing, metalwork, craftsmanship and fire. He is known to make the most beautiful jewelry (as well as very useful tools) which Aphrodite loves, rather loving him, so she is constantly unfaithful to him.

In modern terms, Aphrodite would be the cheating trophy wife and Hephaestus would be the physically inferior uber-rich man who overlooks his wife’s infidelity, because he knows she will always return to him and that is enough.  

We all know modern day couples like that!

Aside:  Aphrodite’s most common lover is said to be Aries (Romanized as Mars), the God of War, the ultimate warrior.  This is an ancient encapsulation of the archetype of ‘the prostitute and the soldier’:  Hers is the personification of femininity without a goal beyond sexuality, his is the personification of brutal masculinity without a goal beyond obeying orders of your superior commanders.

And, yes, most of us have also known couples like that.

Let’s consider Athena (Romanized as Minerva) who is the goddess of wisdom, war and crafts.  Wisdom and wars – that makes sense:  she is the personification of the wisdom when to enter into a war.  She is not the goddess of combat, the way Aries is:  she is the one whose wisdom directs whether Aries ought to be unleashed or not.  

Yet, Athena’s wisdom was shadowed by her jealousy when her mastery of crafts had been questioned.  A young woman named Arachne said she could weave better that Athena, so, Athena showed up for the challenge with her weaving loom and when it looked like Arachne was going to win, Athena – in a fit of jealousy – turned Arachne into a spider who can only weave webs.

Aside:  I think it is ironic that I paid for a big part of my University education by designing one-of-a-knit-ware (at really, really high prices) – and I am rather very arachnophobic – or is it really ‘Arachne-phobia’? 

Fall of Constantinople – Reply History

Netanyahu accurately describes the Mufti’s role in the Holocaust

Remember:  prior to the Mufti’s intervention, Hitler’s policy was to send all Jews to Palestine, their ancestral homeland.

Yes, he wanted to steal all their stuff, but he was willing to let them emigrate with very limited amount of their property.

Back then, the word ‘Palestinian’ was synonymous with ‘Jew’ – the Arabs were simply called ‘Arabs’.

It was not until the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem came to Hitler, began living as his honoured guest, and convinced Hitler that sending Jews to Palestine was ‘bad’ and that it was ‘better’ to just kill them that the ‘final solution’ had been drafted…and the Grand Mufti had been one of its chief architects.

Not only that, the Grand Mufti was also responsible for Hitler’s infatuation with Islam that had lead to his famous lament of mow much better it would have been, how much powerful the German race would have become,  if ‘strong Islam’ instead of ‘meek Christianity’ had been the heritage of Germany…

…I suppose Frau Merkel is trying to correct this error and set Germany on the path Hitler had only dreamed of…

And the Grand Mufti was responsible for the creation of numerous SS units made up entirely of Muslims, active in the Balkans and nearby regions.  If only our children were permitted to learn the truth about WWII history!!!

Well, here is someone who clearly does know history and the lessons it ought to teach each and every one of us – even if diplomacy constricts how he may phrase his words:

A question – please answer, if you can!

Yes, I usually post my never-humble-opinions.

But this time, I know I would be out of my depth had I offered one….

Still, the question itself has kept me up on more than one night.

Granted, my early schooling came behind the Iron Curtain – so, perhaps the very premises of my question are flawed.  Yet, I have read enough (among the little bits of ‘H’istory that I have indulged myself in) here, in The West, that suggests to me that this question may, indeed, be more valid today than it has been in, well, almost a century.

Therefore, my dear reader, I beg you to indulge me in asking my question and, if you can, in enlightening me with the answer.

Thank you!

Now, for my long-winded question:

Before World War 1, the movement of peoples between nations was not regulated.

At least, it was not regulated in the manner in which it became regulated later on in the 20th century.

Yes, of course, there were border controls:  but these were meant mostly for economic purposes (import/export taxes) and to apprehend criminals.

After all, it was not so long ago that mainland Europe was still using the Feudal System of governance, where the freedom of movement of country folk was under complete control of their landlords.

And the aristocracy was not limited by borders:  crossing them freely and unencumbered to pursue political marriages.  The land they held was their only anchor to the kingdom in which they held it.

The craftsmen were also not anchored in place by ‘kingdom-governance’ (I cannot think of a proper term for this), but by the self-regulated guilds of their region, under which they were permitted to practice their craft:  guilds were built upon the apprentice-based artificially created scarcity of their products within various regions, calculated to ensure higher-than-market value of their work and thus inflating guild-members standard of living and social standing.

Similarly, scholars and artists moved freely between kingdoms, based on where they could find private patrons willing to fund them and their works.  (Note:  painters may be regarded as ‘artists’ today, but, prior to accessible photography, they were considered craftsmen and thus subject to the guild system.)  For example, consider the alchemical court of Rudolph the Second.

After centuries of feudalism, it took a bit from when the shackles were shattered to when people gathered the courage to reach for freedom and travel to far-away lands – not just to learn, or as a right of passage, but to settle for good.

At the end of the 19th and the beginning of the 20th century, the human migrations truly became unfettered and populations began to migrate.

From my own cultural background – this is where the huge exodus of Czechs into Texas began:  so great was this migration that it was not until the 1970’s that Spanish overtook Czech as the second language of Texas. The University of Austin still has the largest Czech Studies department outside of the Czech Republic…  And don’t even get me started on ‘Miss Czech Texas’..

Yes, I realize that I am providing just one example here, but, I am no historian:  which is why I hope to get responses which will enlighten me.

Now that I have set the stage…

It has been suggested that one of the most important ‘behind-the-scenes’ reasons for the First World War was the absence of proper regulation on

the migration of populations across political borders.

Yes, of course – there were the ‘obvious’ reasons:  but I have heard the claim that these ‘obvious’ reasons were, in fact, brought about because of the cultural instability and tensions brought about by, in practical terms, unregulated migration of populations across culturo-political borders.

It would be difficult to argue that what we are seeing now, in the EU in particular and in all of Europe in general is exactly the same type of unregulated migration of populations across cutluro-political borders!

But, it is even more pointed now than what it had been prior to WW1:  at least back then, the migrations did not tend to cross religio-cultural borders – something that is most definitely happening now.  The new migrants flooding Europe, without any true governance, are not just politically and culturally different, they are also religiously different:  subscribing to an intolerant, supremacist religion that permits exploitation and violence against non-members of said religion and refuses to recognize any culture other than its own…

Finally, the question:

Are the current, practically unregulated migration conditions into Europe as dangerous, if not more, than the ones that sparked World War 1?

The Truth About Abraham Lincoln

Stefan Molyneux has done a series of these ‘the truth about…’:  they are a bit long, but very informative.  So, next time you’ll be doing some house chores, put it on full blast and listen!

http://youtu.be/c-W5fGCAzOk

 

CaspianReport: Origins of the Chechen resistance

 

History: the decline of the Ottoman Empire

While the current geopolitical events are focusing our attention on the previous clashes between Islamic cultures and ‘the West’, it may be of interest to take a look at some of the factors which contributed to the decline of the Ottoman empire.

This following video, while acknowledging the external pressures, highlights some internal developments which affected the decline of the Ottoman empire – developments which we ought not dismiss out of hand:

 

Just a reminder…

…of the resolve we used to have….

…when we had no trouble in identifying who our enemy was…

C.G.P. Grey: 5 Historical Misconceptions Rundown

 

Taxes, serfdom and the story of Kozina

When the practice of ‘serfdom’ was first introduced, it was nowhere as oppressive as it grew to be later on.  In some instances, at the beginning, the ‘serfs’ had to provide as little as 3-4 days of service to the ‘lord’ per season – in return for the ‘lord’ being responsible to maintain peace and order in his domain..

Gradually, the amount of work required of the serfs kept creeping higher and higher, the responsibilities of the ‘lord’ to the serfs kept getting smaller and smaller and the powers of the ‘lord’ over the ‘serfs’ kept getting bigger and bigger as the ‘lords’ increasingly used their powers against the ‘serfs’ instead of in their protection.

By the end, things were not so good…. People were compelled – often forced by armed guards – to work for their ‘lord’ from sun-up to sun-down 6 days a week, every week…

These days, we pay so much of our incomes in taxes – it can reach more than 50% of a family’s income.  The State sets the level of taxation one-sidedly and The State has usurped for itself extraordinary powers to compel you to pay these taxes, even suspending your innate civil rights as irrelevant in the process!

Indeed, the parallels to serfdom are increasingly undeniable!

Which is why I’d like to tell you a story about a peasant who refused to become a serf (in the original, ‘robotnik’ – this is the root of the word ‘robot’).  His name was Jan Sladky Kozina.

This narration is not exactly the way the story is written up in the history books.  Nor does it match the ‘official’ or even ‘semi-official’ narratives put on the internet by people who claim (probably rightly) to be the genetic descendants of the Dogheads.  I am not re-telling the story with any claim to ‘factual accuracy’.

Rather, here and now – to us, this version of the story has great archetypal relevancy!

Like Kozina, this storyteller (who was in his 90’s when, I was a child,) was a Chod, born and raised as a ‘Doghead’ – but a ‘few’ generations too young to have lived through these events himself.  Still, he was not so young as to not have heard the story from the grandchildren or great-grand-children of the actual people who lived this story!  (While there are many guesses – some of them more educated than others – there is no definitive answer as to who the Chods were, where they came from or what their mythology truly was.)

OK – to the story, as I remember it having been told me by an ancient story teller:

The ‘Dogheads’ were not your ordinary peasants. They were a people of their own, with a proud and ancient heritage.

One of their unique skills was in animal communication and training – especially training dogs (hence they had the head of a dog in their clan symbol (is it a coat of arms when it refers to the clan and not a specific person?) – and the nomicker ‘Dogheads’). The Dogheads were the only bunch of people in feudal Europe to have a document officially exempting them from serfdom.

Many historians claim it was written by John of Luxemburg, the father of Holy Roman Emperor Charles IV, in recognition for ‘extraordinary services’.

That was the ‘outside’ story.

Our ‘inside’ tradition says that the papers GIVEN to us by John of Luxembourg were simply his acknowledgment of much older and more powerful claims/documents (depending on who told the story, it was either ‘ancient claims that everyone acknowledged’ or a chest full of very ‘ancient documents’). (A few old Dogheads actually claimed these ‘even older’ documents put the Dogheads outside the jurisdiction of even the Inquisition – but that is hard to believe…)

For centuries, all the kings respected this.

Until a bad, greedy king came to power.

He refused to recognize the Dogheads innate freedoms and documents ordering all kings to recognize our rights to these freedoms. This bad king deeded their land to a nobleman who paid him off – effectively turning the Dogheads into this man’s serfs (this was a little over 3 centuries ago).

The Dogheds were not keen on this. They refused to submit to serfdom (‘robota’) and petitioned the king, but the king refused to hear the petition.

The Dogheads did not know what to do.

Many wanted to take up arms and die fighting rather than submit to serfdom – but taking up arms against the king was abhorrent, because it would be an open rebellion against the position and not just the evil man who occupied it.

They could never justify such violent means to achieve any good end.

So, Kozina (that is how he was referred to commonly by his clan) chose a different way: He publicly displayed the documents guaranteeing the Dogheads freedom from serfdom in perpetuity, proving to everyone that the king was indeed the one who was breaking the laws!

This cost the king dearly, because all the noble houses and all the people saw him for what he was…. a criminal thug! An usurper! An unfit king!

But, he still had a big army…

Embarrassing the king publicly was not so very good for Kozina’s longevity. The king had Kozina tossed into jail and sent in his army to install this nobleman (whatever his name was, we called him Lomikar) as our overlord.

Then, the king permitted Lomikar to have Kozina tortured and publicly hanged.

At the gallows, Kozina looked at Lomikar and said:

“Lomikare, Lomikare!  Do roka a do dne, zvu te na sud Bozi!  Hync sa hukaze – “

Kozina spoke in the old Chod dialect…..and the way the words are put together is said to have the quality of a magical incantation. Roughly translated:

“Lomikar, Lomikar!  In one year to the day, I challenge you to God’s judgement! Then it shall be shown – “

He never got to say any more, because Lomikar was wildly gesticulating to the executioner to ‘get it done’ and not let Kozina talk, because he feared he himself might get lynched by the people watching the execution, as the Czechs were rather empathetic to the Chods.

One year later – on the day which was the anniversary of Kozina’s execution – everyone expected Lomikar to be judged by God. Lomikar lives – Lomikar (and, by extension, the king) was right.. Lomikar dies (and stays dead) – Kozina was right.

To show just how ‘not worried’ he was, Lomikar put on a bit of a feast to which he invited his friends (but not the Dogheads).

Just as he was about to make a toast – to mock Kozina’s last words – Lomikar grabbed his chest, fell over and he breathed nevermore…

Nobody else wanted to be the overlord who turned the Dogheads into serfs. The king was told unceremoniously to stuff it and leave the Dogheads be, because God would punish ANYONE who tried to oppress us.

So, after one year of serfdom, the Dogheads were free people once again!

I do hope you liked the old storyteller’s tale.  We still can learn from Kozina!