Wednesday, October 31, 2018

The Incoherence Of The Philosophers (c).

I deliberately used in the header of this post the title of Al-Ghazali's famous 11th century treatise which, effectively, shut down any legitimacy of  deterministic causality in Islam, promoted by early Islamic philosophers such as Avicenna, and ensured the victory of Asharite school of thought. It also is in the foundation of overall backwardness of contemporary Ummah the scale of which most Western so called "scholars" simply fail to grasp. Yet, as much as The Incoherence Of The Philosophers cuts contrary to every single experience of modern West (Russia including in this case), the title itself is perfect. Here is why. 

In times of Greek philosophers such as Plato it was, not taking away genius and incisiveness of their views and thoughts (Republic, anyone), truth is--life was primitive. Anyone with even average intelligence could, if  he (she) would put some effort into it, grasp how the stone masonry was done, how the sword or spear were made, how sail worked--in all, with the exception of more advanced math, people would see and understand how things worked. Philosophers would know this too and then they will generalize what they saw and develop their own abstracts to describe what they saw. Great! We owe them a lot, to say the least--we owe them one of the major pillars of our culture. 

Then, later on, things got a little dicey, more complex in terms of philosophy and Christian theology interacting with each-other but, in general, things remained pretty much the same as they were in Greece and Rome with Byzantine. Pretty much same sail ships, same swords, same masonry etc. The world for the most part remained in material sense very much unchanged. That is until Renaissance hits the fan, we get people of the immense scale such as Leonardo, and voila'--the world begins to progress really fast and is becoming increasingly complex in its material expressions, from printing press to powder and muskets with artillery. Suddenly, it stops being that simple for a laymen. The world outside begins to require for philosophers a grasp of very many complex things. Yes, ballistics required people of mathematical mind of Nicollo Tartaglia  to describe. Algebra, physics, astronomy, mechanics became much much more complex and all this ends with Sir Isaak who invents calculus (real one, not the stone of the same name in ancient Roman empire). No wonder that most middle-age philosophers were primarily men of precise sciences, such as Rene Descartes. Make a note for yourself--people of Science, from Galileo to Copernicus, to already mentioned Descartes, to well, Carl Sagan and Stephen Hawking.  From there we get what Marx considered in Das Capital a key development--steam powered machines and belt transmission. Welcome to the dawn of the industrial capitalism and everything it brought us--it changed the face of the world, both in positive and negative ways, and made this world in the 20th century immensely complex. Complex as in laymen NOT being able anymore to grasp all laws and patterns behind increasingly complex material world.

Here we are, today, in the world of global communications, space travel, signal processing, mind-boggling weapons and warfare, robots, multi-axis CNC machining centers, nuclear energy, commercial airspace, lasers, computers etc. It is the world in which knowledge of how things work becomes crucial but it also becomes immensely difficult to obtain--because the way things work became immensely more complex than in the times of Aristotle and Descartes. Greek philosophers could get their minds wrapped around how Athenian economy worked or how Spartans fought, today, however, explaining to a modern philosopher what modern war is or how modern aircraft are created will be the waste of time. Unless a "philosopher" is a product of a comprehensive fundamental precise sciences or engineer background--any venturing into the actual workings of modern world for contemporary philosopher will be extremely difficult, if not altogether impossible. The spread is very simple--good level engineer, or scientist, can become a philosopher (in fact, many do--again, Carl Sagan, Hawking, Michio Kaku etc.), the opposite is usually impossible. Specially trained philosophers make very bad engineers, worse scientists, lousy military leaders and, not always good, electricians. That is why we had such things as The End Of History and Iraq War, and suicidal concept of multiculturalism--all products of modern "philosophers" who got simply lost in complexities of a modern world and are not capable to distinguish between information and knowledge.

Contemporary philosophy today is akin to a local jazz music festival where audience is hard pressed to recognize whether the band is really good or if it pretends to be good and hides behind complexities of jazz music. 

In the end, BS can always pass as an incredible insight or some truth not "understandable" by mere mortals. And here is one such example, which fits perfectly my point (on Russia). In the magazine Questions (Issues) Of Philosophy, no less, real Ph.D in Philosophy, Boris Mezhuev waxes "intellectual" and comes up with this of ever so important question if Russia has her own civilizational code (in Russian). Here is English summary:
The analyses of the arguments and discussion of many conservative Russian publicists on the presence and existence of our country’s special “civilizational code”, which differs it from the West, is presented in the article. An attempt to rationally understand, what can be the sense of such type of thoughts, is conducted, as also the attempt to understand why does this topic earns to be considered by politologists and sociologists. The latter should in any case answer the question, if the newest western sociocultural innovations would be mastered and accepted by Russia, and if not, how can the resistance to changes be explained. The author bases on the intellectual conceptualization of the “Russian idea” in the history of Russian philosophy, on the school of Russian civilizational analyses from N.Ya. Danilevsky to V.L. Tsymbursky. He makes an assumption that “civilizational apartness” of Russia has its own spiritual prerequisites and tries to define, what they can be. The author’s main assumption presupposes, that Russian culture resists the common European trend of patriarchal decline in family, church and state. By itself this resistance can have both positive and negative consequences. However, it is obvious that exactly this indicates now, for which extent Russia’s claims for special civilizational status can be considered as real.  
Unlike unhinged illiterate dumbfvck such as Egor Kholmogorov, who passes as "conservative thinker" (the guy dropped out of the first year of history in MSU--shows the level of "intellect") among some confused people, Mezhuev is bona fide philosopher with a lot of "scientific" credentials to back him up, including teaching position in Moscow State in the department of History of Russian Philosophy. So, Mezhuev goes full philosophical "retard" in the issue which is, indeed, important for Russia but while doing so, invoking all those great ghosts of important Russian thinkers  such as Chaadaev, Kluchevsky--you name it. He arrives to this "philosophical" conclusion: 
Если у России и существует некий особый «цивилизационный код», то он состоит в явном сопротивлении тренду на дискредитацию фигуры Отца-Царя-Бога, то есть в спасении основ патриархальной цивилизации, но в рамках христианства.
Translation: If Russia has any unique civilizational code, then it is in resistance to the trend on discrediting of Father-Czar-God figure, that is in saving of fundamentals of patriarchal civilization in Christian framework.  Well, it is all fine and dandy and I actually agree here, but Mezhuev immediately makes this remark:
Собственно, сейчас, в эти годы, даже месяцы Россия тестируется на всамделишность ее многовековых претензий на «цивилизационную особость» – нельзя исключать, что идущие с Запада социокультурные инновации рано или поздно будут приняты и у нас, тем более что ресурсная база «внутреннего Запада» в России более значительна, чем материальные возможности всех потенциальных изоляционистов. Однако нельзя исключить, что в ближайшие уже годы мы увидим медленный дрейф российского общества в сторону принятия европейских стандартов: и в плане культурной открытости трансгендерам и сексуальной меньшинствам, и в виде изживания следов патриархальности в политике, культуре и религии. Это будет означать только одно: что Россия откажется быть цивилизацией, выбрав путь конформного приспособления к нормам Евро-Атлантики. Никто не поручится, что, в конце концов, Россия не изберет именно этот конформистский путь, который «внутренний Запад» назовет передовым, а агентура цивилизационной самобытности, соответственно, пораженческим.   
Translation: Actually, now, these years and even months, Russia is being tested on realness of her centuries' old claim to civilizational uniqueness--one can not exclude that socio-cultural innovations coming from the West, sooner or later, will be accepted in Russia, especially because resource base of "internal West" in Russia is more substantial than material capabilities of all potential isolationists.   However, we can not discount the possibility, in the nearest years, of witnessing a slow drift of Russian society towards acceptance of European standards: in both cultural openness to transgender and other sexual minorities, also in terms of purging the traces of patriarchy in politics, culture and religion. That would mean only one thing: Russia's refusal of being a civilization, instead choosing the way of conformance to the norms of Euro-Atlanticism, the way which "internal West" will call progressive, while agents of civilizational uniqueness will call it defeatist. 

You see, what I am talking about? I just wrote and published one book on that, and writing another--that allowing all kinds of ignoramuses waxing philosophical and geopolitical without knowing that Russian civilizational code IS warfare on unprecedented scale and her Armed Forces, in the words of Prokhanov, is Second Church... Well, you know--that is what one gets from people who have no knowledge of both West and Russia, especially her history which IS the history of wars and survival. I do not want to continue dragging this for much longer but here is one reason why those "European standards" will not be accepted--Russian society is, using Western parlance, "militaristic one", it has to be--it is the culture which extols warrior--it is environment where Moscow hipsters (a precise environment of Mezhuev's academic activity) and their behavioral matrices can not survive. While bunch of Moscow douche-bags try to get into Timathy's Burger Place on new Arbat, 30 000 people of Voronezh lined up for the last goodbye to Major Roman Filipov. In the end, Mezhuev better watch this:

And ask himself a question: will the society which marches in tens of millions to commemorate their heroes accept gender neutrality and debilitating culture of mostly large urban centers Russian "internal West". But here is the point--for me to explain to philosopher WHAT and HOW goes into Russia's defense on material, economic, scientific, cultural and spiritual level will be impossible--philosophers are simply incoherent and not educated enough to get it in this immensely complex and confusing world of ours. As per Russia, she always was:

Tuesday, October 30, 2018

Russia's Non-Jewish History-2.5. (Request).

Elena Prudnikova, one of the most erudite modern Russian historians ever (she has degree in Physics), brilliant woman, and yes, devout Russian Orthodox christian. Here is her one of many statements on Russian peasantry. Sadly, again, in Russian only. 

As a woman with brilliant intellect and in possession of true scientific method (expected from M.S. in Physics) she owns most crucial numbers and real historical sources which make former and present fake Russian "patriots" look like amateurs, most of who they really are. Sadly, Prudnikova, same as some other brilliant contemporary Russian historians is not available in English. So, anyone can help? I will take care later about RKMP's industrial and military "development", especially against some military operations, described by such people as Anton Denikin who fought in WW I.

Russia's Non-Jewish History-2.

Continuation from here.
For any Westerner who ever tries to get an honest grasp of the Russian modern history (19th Century till present) detaching oneself from own historical, Western, in general, and American especially, experiences is a must. Those are absolutely inapplicable to Russia with a sole exceptions of Western liberal influences the way those were consumed, converted, Russified that is, and transplanted by what is known as Russian 19th century intelligentsia—overwhelmingly Russian in its origin. The ever important Russian issue of the land, serfdom, peasant commune (aka Mir) and backwardness when compared to the West is what drove Russian history in the 19th century. Of course, Russia's intellectual and art history of a period is very important. As Aileen Kelly noted in her introduction to Isiah Berlin's wonderful collection of essays known as Russian Thinkers:

The view that despotic socialism was no more than Russia deserved would be accepted by many western liberals as not unjust, at least with regard to the 'devils' of Dostoevsky novel, the Russian radical intelligentsia. In the degree of their alienation from their society and their impact on it, the Russian intelligentsia of the 19th century were a phenomenon almost sui genereis. Their ideological leaders were a small group with the cohesiveness and sense of mission of a religious sect. In their fervent moral opposition to the existing order, their single-minded preoccupation with ideas and their faith in reason and science, they paved the way for the Russian Revolution, and thereby achieved major historical significance.  

What is left to ask, in this case, is WHAT made Russian intelligentsia so "radical"? Western liberal ideas? Sure, in the end, most of this intelligentsia, from radical Westernizers such as Chaadaev, Vissarion Belinsky or Alexander Herzen, to Leo Tolstoy (who actively read Jean Jacques Rousseau while writing War and Peace), to Turgenev, who happened to be the "resident" of Russian intelligence in Paris, were all people who knew Western Europe first hand, lived there for long periods of time and in general had means to dedicate themselves to intellectual endeavors. It matters, of course, that overwhelming majority of this intelligentsia were Russians, not Jews, and many were aristocrats and nobility. Yet, they stood, radically at that, in opposition to "regime".  How so, which is especially notable for the thinking and writing of Nikolai Nekrasov or Leo Tolstoy who were land owners and owned serfs? The answer is in the question.

Anybody, who ever visited Sevastopol and bothered to visit all of its places of combat glory in Crimean War (1854-56), from Fourth Bastion, where young officer Count Leo Tolstoy served and wrote his Sevastopol Sketches, to a Malakhov Kurgan memorial complex, to a magnificent (stunning really) Roubad's Panorama Siege of Sevastopol at Historic Boulevard, one would be struck, while walking through expositions, with few things. For starters, one is always struck with a small size of the uniforms of Russian soldiers and sailors presented in those expositions. Make no mistake, we all know that people were smaller then, but between stunning Patriotic War of 1812 exposition in Moscow's Historical Museum and those of 1854-55 there is very little difference in sizes. I, personally, was always struck by this fact. And then, of course, the guide who would be taking you through weapons' exposition underneath the main floor of Panorama will tell you, that while fighting combined forces of Great Britain, France and Turkey, trying to defend Sevastopol, Russians were armed with smooth bore muskets. The invaders—they had rifles. Those rifles had a much greater range than Russian muskets. Well, that, plus they were dramatically more accurate. Russia lost that war and abandoned Sevastopol. Humiliating for Russia Treaty of Paris was signed in 1856 and, far from this "radical intelligentsia's" condemnations of Czarism, the voices of condemnation were heard from Czar's own family. As Grand Duke Konstantin stated:

We cannot deceive ourselves any longer; we must say that we are both weaker and poorer than the first-class powers, and furthermore poorer not only in material terms but in mental resources, especially in matters of administration.   

Needless to say, combined naval Anglo-French squadron had more screw driven ships than whole of Russian Navy. Here we come to an important juncture—Russian intelligentsia, which was, sometimes not without the merit, accused of wishing a defeat to Russian Czarism in Crimean War, was not just doing that out of hatred to the regime—it was the means to an end. Obviously, many falsifiers of Russian history, such as Solzhenitsyn, consistently refused, out of faux patriotism, to attribute Russia's humiliating defeat in Crimean War to actual serious economic, material, cultural and organizational backwardness. The fault was squarely placed with those people in Russia who called for this defeat. Fine, many did call for that and that doesn't make them right, but this fact in no way removes, even under constant whining of all kinds of "patriots" about aggressive West (anybody in their own mind blames rain for being wet?) and presentation of myriad of petty excuses for a loss, the fact that when it really mattered Russia had no (with the exception of some Russian naval ships which were first in the world to utilize Paixhans Guns in naval combat) economic and technological wherewithal to deal with premier military and economic powers of the era. Truth was—Russia, for all her creative genius waking up, remained a profoundly backward agrarian society not fit to compete with emerging industrial powerhouses of Europe and North America. Crimean War exposed this sad fact completely. 

In the foundation of this backwardness WAS serfdom (virtual slavery) of Russian peasantry, medieval level of agriculture and cultural set up of Russian village, Russian peasants' Mir—a commune which pursued only one objective, survival of people who were counted for nothing by Russian aristocracy and nobility, who owned them. The warranted, in fact, irresistible question is this case is this: in what sense Jews, who themselves lived in Pales of Settlement, are related to this core issue of Russian history? Sure as hell, Jews didn't invent serfdom. Nor did they invent transition of Russia to absolutism under conditions of evolution to absolute serfdom (see Sobornoye Ulozhenie (Соборное уложение, "Code of Law"—in Russian) and virtual locking Russia into feudal economy, while the West's absolutism was growing together with the growth of industrial capitalist forces. 

Horrors of serfdom and its profound and long lasting debilitating influence on Russia are well documented and require no additional elaboration, enough to start counting peasant uprisings in Russian history, not to mention by far not exceptional cases of Russian serf-owners' sadism towards own "possessions", such as notorious Saltychikha. So, what was, in this case, surprising in the fact that Russia was not ready to enter one of the first industrial age major wars which she lost despite all efforts and heroism of her military leaders and Russian soldiers and sailors, all of who were former Russian peasants? In one of the most important pieces of Russian classic literature, Goncharov's Oblomov, main character of the novel, a lazy day-dreaming landowner has his life changed when dealing with his childhood friend Stoltz who represents new capitalist forces arising in Russia. Stoltz, being a good friend of Oblomov and who honestly tries to shake him from the state now known in Russia as Oblomovshina, inadvertently causes Oblomov a great pain with Oblomov dying in the end—an unchanged man, a personification of 19th Century Russia. Even when the serfdom was abolished in 1861, the year American Civil War started—a first fully genuine modern war of the industrial age, which also saw many Russians fighting on the Union's side with, in the end, Russian officer Ivan Vasilievich Turchaninov (Ivan Basil Turchin) becoming one of the key figures in the process which led to Emancipation Proclamation. Needless to say, Turchaninov (Turchin) was also a veteran of the Crimean War.  Interesting...

To Be Continued….     

Monday, October 29, 2018

Russia's Non-Jewish History-1

As I promised earlier, it is time for me to address this ever important (no sarcasm here) issue of Jewish role in Russia's 20th century history. It is important not for Russia, which, bar some "nationalist" fringes, long ago largely settled the issue; it is important for the United States and its current situation of departure from the so called "unipolar moment" and its own struggles, both domestically and internationally, with its own identity. So, before I proceed I need to very clearly state my position on these key issues:

1. There is very little doubt that predominantly Jewish Israeli lobby has a baneful effect on the United States by helping shape her foreign policy and wields a grossly disproportionate influence on her political discourse. Indeed, 23 (or 26) standing ovations during joint session of US Congress for Bibi, massive number of Israeli political action committees and think-tanks, Holocaust "industry"—all these are undeniable facts of America's submission, and subversion, to the interests of Israel. No one with even half-brain can deny this. Hence, often (not always) justified frustration on part of many Americans with finding their country being effectively on the service of the Israeli interest groups. It is understandable and I, myself, also am frustrated and often disgusted with that. But that is NOT the whole story and by far. Israel wouldn't have had this level of influence in the US if not for a massive support of the so called Christian Zionists, most of who are Evangelicals, as one example. And so, no matter how many warnings and studies there have been, from Alfred Lilienthal's seminal The Zionist Connection to Steven Walt and John Mearsheimer's The Israel Lobby, this all is not enough for explanation of how the United States found itself in such, rather pitiful, bondage. Yet…

2. Very many Non-Jewish and even some Jewish Americans' frustrations with America's Zionist predicament by no means can be viewed (or used) as any justification for mindless rewriting of history by some "alt-right", not to mention crypto-Nazi, American "historians" who altogether deny any kind of validity to Jewish persecutions while in the same time inflating, for obvious ideological reasons, Jewish influence around the world grossly, bordering on grotesque, out of proportions. As Russians love to quote famous Russian sarcastic line: if there is no water in the faucet—that means Zhyds (slur for Jews) drunk it all ©. This, however, also applies the other way around for Holocaust industry in the US. WW II was fought not because of Jews nor to save them, in fact, Jewish suffering in WW II was just another nightmarish chapter in the book of horrors perpetrated by Nazism. Thus, Holocaust…

3. Jewish Holocaust DID happen, it did happen along other, even larger, Holocaust of WW II—this one of Slavs, with Russians being the largest group, slaughtered by Nazis on an industrial scale, be them Poles, Belarussians, Ukrainians, Serbs, and I am talking about civilians, not military personnel. Obviously, the slaughter of Chinese civilians by Japanese shouldn't be overlooked either. I don't know precise numbers of Jewish Holocaust and I have my reasons for thinking about some adjustment, but it is clear that number of Jews killed by Nazis is in millions. In this case, anyone in the US who starts their legitimate struggle against Israeli lobby will be well served recognizing all those very well recorded and documented crimes against humanity committed by Nazism. Considering the fact that many (by far not all, though, thank God) of those "fighters" with Jewish lobby in the US are American Nazis, or people close to them in their world outlook, recognition of the nature of WW II for what it was is an absolute No-No for them. Hence an avalanche of the so called "revisionist", grossly amateur pseudo "history" in which almighty Jew rules the world and is a cause for all its wars and other calamities. Again, recall the line about lack of the water in the faucet. 

4. Enter Russia. And here is the trick—for people who decide to "fight" Jewish influence in the US, Russia's 20th century "history" is used as a perfect example of this almighty Jew doing his nasty against what is perceived as a Russian Orthodox Christian paradise in 1917 and later, can you imagine, those "Jewish Bolshevik Commissars" crushing "noble" Hitler, who came to save Western Civilization against those pesky Jews. Hence, as huge swaths of American "historiography" tell us—if not for those Jewish Bolsheviks, Russia would remain just fine and if not for those Jews… So, you get the picture. This (paranoid and illiterate) "version" of Russian history is needed in the US for:

a) Making the case for Jewish monstrous power (Jewish lobbies are powerful, but not as described);

b) To remove ANY responsibility from good ol' Non-Jewish America which, with or without Jewish influence, has a lot of skeletons in its own very much non-Jewish closet. 

Russia and her revolutions play in this schizophrenic (why it is so—later) ideological game an important role. No, most of those people in the West who shed all those crocodile tears about Russia Which We Lost (a famous RKMP—Rossiya Kotoryu My Poteryaly, after late Stanislav Govorukhin's grossly a-historic "documentary" in early 1990s), that is pre-1917 Russian Empire, have no love, appreciation nor any knowledge of Russia and Russians. In fact, many of them cannot stand Russian guts. They just need Russia as an example of what "almighty Jew" can do because of his "inherent evilness", plus they fire up their emotions in a way which satisfies their need for endorphins, when they "expose", and cuss, and condemn all this Jewish un-godly activity in subverting the otherwise noble and primarily WASP and, in general, West European peoples. 

Well, there is very little doubt that some American Jews in top echelons of power and influence are a part of a freak show, but then again, American political discourse today is nothing more than a panopticon of mental, sexual and moral anomalies—and those came not just through Jews. But that's the point—Russia has NO relation to this, nor can she serve as any parallels-building example for America for a simple reason—Russia's 19th and, especially, 20th Century history was not "written" or "defined" by Jews, who were merely one, and by far not the most important, of a myriad factors which set up Russia for her entrance into the 20th Century and defined her fate. "Jewish Bolshevik" Revolution is a figment of imagination implanted into the mind of ever ignorant West by the Russian immigration, of mostly well-off and formerly influential elites, after 1918-1922 period and served those people, who used to be in power in Russia, for ONLY one purpose—to justify their utter failure to modernize Russia while managing sinking her in the bloodbath of the WW I and Civil War. The myth of Almighty Bolshevik Jew was invented to cover up own incompetence, cowardice and betrayal of own people. Hm, what does this situation remind me of? Something very recent, something still in the news in America, ah, yes—Russiagate. 

So, let's take a look then at this proverbial RKMP (you know, the Russia which was lost under the sound of crunch of a French baguette), as this Orthodox Christian "Paradise", in order to understand that the whole progress of Russian history since Peter The Great lead her through several modernizing impulses until it, finally, resulted in 1917 cataclysm the scale of which is simply beyond the grasp of most Americans. And you know me, I hope, by now—I do not discuss any serious historic issues outside warfare paradigm, any discussion outside this paradigm is exercise in futility and sheer incompetence. But I already warned about this—projection onto Russia does not work and will never work. So, let's start...

To Be Continued….