The Despair of Stalin (2)
Regrettably, Professor Girard contradicts himself by belatedly arguing that the sacrifice of the king must be avoided. If so, he cannot be serious that what he himself calls “a sacrificial crisis” is real enough to awaken in humans such profound unhappiness as in the past only a human sacrifice (including the sacrifiee of Jesus) could solve. Does he mean to say that with the arrival of neo-Christianity and increased military violence, humans have found a solution?
Girard does a literary three card monty https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o2kO_5cNF5k , and side-slips the ‘sacrificial crisis’ (the heart card) with a trick unbecoming a literary critic. Girard renames and then replaces the sacrificial card with a “persecutor” card (clubfoot king), then insists that the persecutor “hates without a cause”. Such a ‘sleight of word’ makes ‘sacrificial crisis’ read what the neo-Christian church wishes it to read: hate without cause “…will gradually pervade all the converted [by Jesus who miraculously escapes his story through a magician as its rewriter], teaching them [the converted] to recognize the persecutor’s account of persecution and reject them….*”, i.e., reject ‘it’, the need of self-sacrifice.
In short, the replacement of the religion of egality http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/EGALITY takes place as the religion of the princes (capitalism) has envisioned it: without the resistance of self-sacrifice. In spite of having written numerous books on the subject and having shed considerable light on the subject, in the end Girard surprises by taking his analysis back. Like most Westerners, he fears and denies the necessity of self-sacrificial blood in the formation of community, and returns to the neo-Christian tradition, which supports the notion that the human community is a consequence of creation by violence.
The consequence of living ‘life’ without self-sacrificial responsibility, and accounting for the appearance of evil therein as a mysterious and an inexplicable ‘sin’, has Girard—in his final analysis—mysteriously and self-contradictorily deny self-sacrifice of life as an organic necessity.
However, what if self-sacrifice is, nevertheless, organic to the maintenance of a healthy community? And what if denial of ‘sacrificial crisis’ equals to the denial of Abel’s lot (see Ch 12)? Moreover, if Cain is not a killer of his brother, but the executor of God’s (the community’s) will?
What then about Stalin? Does not God or the Big Other (the community) protect the reputation of Stalin ‘sevenfold’? It would seem so, except….
There is one major objection to equating Stalin with the Biblical Cain. The reason is that by taking upon himself the role of executioner of those who fail to keep their oath to serve the community with self-sacrifice, Cain took upon himself also the role of the self-sacrifice. Like his brother Abel, whom he executed, Cain took an oath to give his life to the community. However, the Bible does not go on to tell us what happened to Cain. Perhaps his death is deliberately blotted out to avoid raising the subject of self-sacrifice. Be that as it may, we know that Stalin did not take his own life, but—if Beria did not poison him—may have died of a heart attack. Therewith, the curses that have fallen on Stalin cannot be removed.
All the same, it is interesting to imagine what would have happened to Stalin’s reputation if he had taken his life in a self-sacrificial act.
Could it be that had Stalin sacrificed his life, the
would still be in existence? Who would dare doubt his commitment to the
Revolution and once it was put into motion for pressing on until its enemies
were defeated? Of course, these are hypothetical questions, and we will never
know the answer.
Nevertheless… there is reason to believe that mythology embodies evidence of what it takes to bring about a community. This knowledge was once common in the Middle East—in the
Byzantine Empire, among the Turkic people.
This knowledge is the Heisenbergian ‘quantum jump’ of repressed history. In the
case of the Turkic people (possibly also the Israelis of Khazaria) government
was represented by two kings. The first king, was called ‘Khagan’, the second
‘Bek’. Khagan was the ceremonial or spiritual king, while ‘Bek’ was the
executive king http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khagan_Bek
. We will not be far off the mark if we claim the year (1118) as the year of
not only the death of Jesus The Bogomil, but as marking the end of the rule of
the sacrificial king, i.e., the Khagan.
Thereafter, all authority gravitated toward the ‘Bek’, the executive and military head of the community who displaced affection for the sacred with cynicism. It is out of this cynicism that emerged the “unknown known”, the fact that the profit oriented princes of the West (most likely the Franks http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franks ) in order to consolidate their power were promoting the Bek (one of their own), and thrust Jesus The Bogomil (also the Khagan) into a pit filled with red hot coal and incinerated him.
While the Pope and Western leaders continue to play ‘dumb’, at least Zbignew Brzezinski http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zbigniew_Brzezinski knows that the Russian Orthodox Church is to be feared. According to Aleksandre Latsa http://www.voltairenet.org/article177054.html , Zbigniew Brzezinski, in a speech in 2007, said … that "After the collapse of the
USSR, the main enemy of the will be the Russian Orthodox
Church." By saying this Brzezinski, a Catholicized Slav was not
projecting a personal religious prejudice. USA
A scan of words by the pareidolic technique will discover that the word “khagan” may have given rise to the name ‘gypsies’ (called Chigahni in Latvian, Ciganer in German). The gypsies were a nomadic people who in the distant past may have traveled through many kingdoms selling children (meriahs) for human sacrifice rituals. The Chigahni, may once have lived in Orissa,
in close association with a culturally distinct tribal group known as the Konds.
Originating from among the Konds (who were culturally destroyed by the
British and Christians) http://tourism.oriyaonline.com/kondha_tribal.html
, the Gypsies may long ago have fled from the muslim invasion of Orissa to Puri
and sought the protection at the Jagannah temple http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jagannath_Temple,_Puri
As a consequence of their dispersal, these ‘traveling salesmen’ may have expanded the trading range of meriahs. Indeed, the meriahs may have been traded until the death of the last Khagan, Jesus The Bogomil. With the rise of the secular Bek, the authority of sacrifice, its very idea, was violently repressed. We continue to see the effects of such repression on the Tibetans by the Chinese http://www.savetibet.org/resource-center/maps-data-fact-sheets/self-immolation-fact-sheet.
The advantage gained by violence created liberal democracy, which has resulted in minority capitalism enslaving the majority of the population. Of course, while natural resources were plenty, liberal capitalism (aided by the discovery of the steam engine) flourished. In fact, capitalism flourished on the surplus resources of our planet so well that it was able to coerce through material temptation (false gifting) the majority to relinquish the freedoms it had enjoyed while practicing survival in a subsistence economy.
With the arrival of the 19th century, however, destruction of society as an entity ‘sufficient unto itself’ was screaming in pain. The scream was heard by Marx (1818-1883), Engels, Lenin, and Stalin (1878-1953) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marxism . As the last man of this quadruped and with no solution in sight (let us remember that the 'known' of the 'unknown known' or history was pretended to have been lost), Stalin (born in Georgia and educated by Orthodox priests) fell into despair and began to slaughter the ‘traitors’ of Eastern Christianity with no regrets.
*Rene Girard, “The Scapegoat”,
Press, pp. 103-108. John Hopkins