Chapter 13
The Despair of Stalin
(2)
©Eso
A.B.
©
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 Soviet Union
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 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, East India ,
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”, John Hopkins
University
No comments:
Post a Comment