The following blogspots center on a variety of subjects, which I have initiated. You are invited to look and respond.

http://esoschronicles.blogspot.com/ Not-Violence main subject

http://melnaysjanis.blogspot.com/ Temple of Janis (John) site

http://the-not-voter.blogspot.com/ Arguments for systems change

http://the4thawakening.blogspot.com/ Sacrificial crisis in Latvia

http://oedipusrexrewritten.blogspot.com/ Oedipus Rex Rewritten

I suggest you look at the links imbedded in these blogs or at the end of the blog as an integral part of my argument.

The 4^th Awakening

32 Another Helpful Whisper

© Eso Anton Benjamins

A recent lengthy “letter from Shanghai” in Rīgas Laiks (January, 2011) by Inese Lielmane, and titled Binding Activity (Saistoša rosība), discusses the Chinese principles of dougong and guanxi.

The first word, dougong, is an element in Chinese architecture that binds all the elements of a structure into one system. Guanxi does the very same thing for the Chinese, except it is a function of human relationships.

The acute ear and eye will immediately recognize both words as related to the name of “John” (Jahnis) before the name was repressed and denied its functions and turned into merely a name of an individual by neo-Christianity. This is not to say, that the word disappeared immediately. Dougong is still easily recognizable in the word “donjon”, from which also dungeon. If we assume that the letter d in “don”, too, may on occasion be pronounced as j in “jon”, then what we have “John of Johns”. The word “guanxi” may be read as “jan”xi. While the word does not at this time bring to mind any other association in Latvian except “jancihga”, i.e., haughty, it is enough to make think that the meme of “jan” remains alive both in Latvian and Chinese.

The festival of Johns, especially Johns Eve, is considered the most important Latvian Festival of the year, surpassing the Winter Solstice Festival which the Hebrews call Hanukkah (Yannukah?) and Latvians Jandahlins (Johnsdance+noise). While Latvians claim Johns Eve to be of such great importance to them, it is curious that at the very same time there are few Latvians who know anything about the festival except that it is “very old”. Whence the word John or Jahnis, the Latvians have lost all memory of, which is why neo-Christians are substituting all kinds of other names for it: Midsummer, Solstice, Green Grass, Lihgo, etc.

This brings me back to the dougong, guanxi, and jahnis. If the words have such binding connotations in Chinese, why has the principle of binding lost its connection with Latvian, except as haughty, off putting, the very opposite of coming and holding together?

The answer to that question is a long one. The4thAwakening is all about it. However, if we pick up the story at about the time of the 1905 Revolution, we see how the Herrnhuters (and through them the meme of the Hussites, Lollards, Cathars, Bogomils, etc,) has transformed itself into the Bolsheviks. Let us remember that at this time the Bolsheviks are yet pure idealists. They have not yet smeared their hands with the blood of scapegoats. They want the same thing that the Herrnhuters and those before them want, except that their want is so much more desperate.

By the time of the arrival of the Herrnhuters (1729), the forest cover of Latvian ancestors has been cut down, and the natural democracy possible when living in homesteads among trees has left Latvians standing in an open field. Latvian farm laborers are abandoning their land in droves, just as now many are leaving for Ireland and elsewhere. Those who earn their living by the pitchfork and axe are escaping from the farm to the city, where they hope to make a better living as “workers”. Now these Children of Johns have no trees to protect them—by design. The trees of the land of their forebears were turned into walls of forts and battleships.

Those who order the building of the forts and battleships took from the forest people control of the work they did and what was to be worked, which of course gave the “manufacturers” (uzņēmēji in Latvian) a chance to control the wages as well. Moreover, the wage earners were dumbed down, which is an awful image, but acceptable to those who bring it about—if one can get away with it. The trouble is that as a result of being raised irresponsible, the Children of Johns take and keep growing in numbers. Soon there are so many of Children of Johns, and they are so dumbed down (like a “couch potato”) that they no longer remember anything about Johns except that it is “a very old festival”. It is interesting how a very old festival, which has also been called “the most important festival” can be stolen from right before the eyes of the Latvians.

It is no less interesting that with the theft the community dispersed. Some went to Ireland or some like country abroad, but others dispersed inwardly. Increasingly the Jahnis Festival is being forgotten for something else, for example, a picnic. The Chinese may afford to go on a picnic when they come to a Latvian Johns Festival, but the Latvians cannot afford to. If this is not the day that binds them, what day does?

The principle of Johns ought to be at least as bonding as Dougong, guanxi. If Latvia is Jahnisland (even if for one day out of 365), who has control over corruption either then or any other day? The government at this time almost completely disconnects itself from the people through the mechanism known as “parliamentary democracy”. The Guanxi or Jahnis principle may work in China, but it does not work in Latvia. This is not to speak in symbolic terms. If the trend of the last twenty years continues twenty years into the future, what will remain of Latvia is 1.3 million people (out of the present 2.2 million) and little chance that the Latvian language will still be either a realistic or unrealistic survivor. The name of Jahnis will then be replaced by Han, who is unlikely to be able to imagine how an H can be the same thing as a Y or J.

Clever John, the hero of our story is at a point at a stage in his adventures, where a certain gullibility born out of despair actually seems to him to be an advantage—if he is to ever get himself a wagon full of gold. Clever John’s haughtiness, his bravado born of sheer stupidity, brings him to trust Crazy Jane, the Raven, and the Ocean in return for nothing more than a promise, risk has no stop sign.

The Story of Crazy Jane and Clever John, Part 3

(…story begins at blog 15),

“But… but Crazy Jane,” said Clever John, “how can I? I am over here, and you are over there.” Clever John did not quite know where “over there” was. There was a dark fog before his eyes. “I mean,” he continued, “Where are you?”

“I am right here before your eyes,” answered Crazy Jane. She indeed was there. “I told you to just rub the ring with the kerchief. Now hand those boots to me, please.”

Clever John leaned down, lifted up Rozinante’s leg and took the pair of boots off her legs and handed them to Crazy Jane. “Here they are, Crazy Jane,” said Clever John.

“Thank you so much, Clever John. I see that you are learning to be honest. Now for the other lesson.”

“What other lesson?” asked Clever John. “I don’t understand. I just gave you a pair. Rozinante really flew with them. That was quite something.”

“That is why my father now wants them back,” said Clever Jane. “He really gets off on them.”

“I see,” answered Clever John, “I am much obliged to him.”

“Clever John,” said Crazy Jane, “why do you think you are so clever when you are really not? You are no longer on that side of the mountain, which you may think you are. You are on this side of the mountain, the other side from where you rode up”.

Before Clever John could answer, Rozinante spoke. This is the only time in the whole story where Rozinante says anything. “Do you need to be reminded that you also owe her a head?” she asked.

Clever John heard the mare. He raised both of Rozinante’s hind legs and took off the other pair of boots. “Of course, Crazy Jane,” he said as he handed the boots to her, “I was just testing your memory.”

(To be continued.)

Asterisks & Links of Interest

Unchanged Feature: What is reality, what is myth?

http://www.voltairenet.org/article167588.html

Changing Feature: In the preceding posts, I started a compilation of video clips, which when seen as a linear sequence tell a story in a context which I hope will become apparent. This is a continuous story. If it began in the past, it is now moving parallel to the day we live in. Watching the film may or may not contribute to your understanding of my meaning. Put this clip as a tail to your http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2zajdE5U2e8&NR=1 so others may see. The origin of this post is at http://the4thawakening.blogspot.com/ 

Full or partial entries of my blogs may be found at LatviansOnline http://latviansonline.com/forum/ + Forum Home + Open Forum – The 4th Awakening. If you copy this blog for your files, or copy to forward, or otherwise mention its content, please credit the author http://esoschronicles.blogspot.com/, http://melnaysjanis.blogspot.com/, http://the-not-voter.blogspot.com/ or http://the4thawakening.blogspot.com/

I suggest you look at the links imbedded in these blogs or at the end of the blog as an integral part of my argument.

The 4^th Awakening

14 The Proto-Latvian View of the Here and Now (II)

In the previous blog (13), I mentioned the populist hypothesis, i.e., that the endearing word [officially (and politically) referred to as the diminutive] was embedded in the Latvian language by anonymous proto-Latvians living their own lives in the primeval forests of Europe as yet undisturbed by philosophers.

The embedment of piety (not necessarily in its “Romanized” meaning) in the Latvian language is so profound, that to this day the language retains the potential for being one of the more religiously expressive languages in the world. It stands as a mute counterargument to NATO’S aggressive and violent methods of peacekeeping of which the Latvian government forces the nation to be part. The government policy holds in contempt the spirit of the Latvian language. Only the poverty presently visiting the people has reduced Latvia’s commitment to NATO from the previous 2% to about 1% of its budget.

The hypocrisy of Latvian parliamentary democracy has its origins in the militarist atmosphere prevalent during WW1. As everyone knows, the evidence of the founding act of Latvia is but a single photograph. Moreover, the founding act is a divisive event painted over by legalistic jargon (after entering the site, go to “hronologija”, then “1918”, then to the date “18.11.1918”, and then click “Tautas Padome”—text will appear in Latvian).

This is not to say that Latvia has no reason for being and is without a founding act, but the labyrinthine complexity of the last allowed the powers that arose to ignore the Latvian people as a populist entity. This in turn allowed the newly formed Latvian government to act democratically only in a “parliamentary” sense.

The people of Latvia were never allowed to participate in forming their own system of government and then a government within the system. The “culture” Latvians received was imposed on them from above. That “culture” was overwhelmingly a secularist government resting on a Neo-Christian base of lackey mediators between God and a government that presumed itself to be “the Latvian people”.

Whilst the Latvian government was pressed by the zeitgeist of the time to separate itself from the church and eventually dropped Lutheranism as the official religion of Latvia, its separation from Neo-Christianity was never complete. As a result, the Latvian people who in 1991 reconstituted themselves as a nation, never in the seventy years since the end of WW1 had the opportunity to align their subjective selves according to the sensibilities prevalent in their community. The latter has been vulgarized by such words as “paganism” (actually an echo of the repression of the Children of Johns, re pa-Yans become pagans) or become elevated to “metropolitanism”, a mystical (abstract) secular religion promoted by the American Central Intelligence Agency as a substitute for a religion of not-violent direct action.

The curious result of culture from above was a myth that claimed that culture was defined by language, the expressive forms of which language the government then felt free to repress. Having got rid of orthodox religion as its sidekick, the government engaged the public media to continue what Neo-Christianity had been doing from its inception. To better accomplish its will, the government bore down on the language of the natives with the heel of the media, which was backed by the near indestructible legal rubber of the law. The combination squeezed the subjective self dry of the last drop of anonymous reverence—as Albert Schweitzer had it—“reverence for life”. Populist subjectivity as expressed by the endearing word and its twin, rationalist piety (as brought to Latvians by the Herrnhuters), was hung to cure as shoe leather for lawyers doing the thinking for Latvia’s government officials.

As a result of their studied contempt, politicians, lawyers, and journalists now make a joke of pietistic speech; and the residue of culture—especially as it is propagated by the Latvian media—may be read in the rubbishy emails found at popular internet sites. Today the subjective elements of the Latvian language finds use only when one is back at the apartment, where, alas! one has access only to one’s nuclear family.

The denial of language while at the same time asserting its necessity is transparently self-serving, and sets up a self-referential system within which dishonesty and corruption always go unrecognized, unpunished, and are pretended to be innocent of any wrong. Such secularist and elitist pretension when continued over a period of twenty years as in the case of post-Soviet Latvia (or 70+ years as in post-1918 Latvia) inevitably brings about depression. Such a depression may rouse those sitting at the common table to seemingly unaccountable anger. The anger engenders conflicts that may become violent. It takes only one incident that leads to death for the death to be reciprocated and for the given society to destroy itself.

This is to say that sustained unfamiliarity with one’s language may lead not only to depression and civil war with close neighbors, but to the disintegration of the community. This is why the proto-Latvian community, trapped and forced to become pseudo-Latvian, may in a last ditch effort to save itself, discovers the idea of the scapegoat anew.

A long time ago, the people of one literate community (the Greeks) called the scapegoat by the name of Oedipus. Oedipus came to Thebes as if to save the city from a plague. Having saved the city’s children from being used as human sacrifices, Oedipus was certainly blessed with an overabundance of charisma. However, because Oedipus was determined to forego any sacrifice himself, many unexpected things happened. He lost his charisma, he did not save the city, and the Thebans gave him an ultimatum: either eat the mushroom we give you or be murdered by us.

 

Caught helpless by the fraternal violence brought to Christendom by the irreverent secular wing leveraging its powers to the n^th through the audacious manufacture of Neo-Christianity, the Children of Johns were left to be persecuted, killed, and forgot.

The full brunt of the persecutors of Arch-Christianity arrived in the Baltics with the Neo-Christian crusades of 1209. Some historians excuse the incursion as justified, because it stopped the fighting between the Baltic tribes, the Lithuanians against others predominating. On the other hand, surely the Teutonic Knights were interested not only in dominating the Balts, but in bringing to the Balts a secular God to eliminate the wandering Johns, the sons of the Sun and the community builders of the Balts.

The Neo-Christians were determined to make of Johns a joke and turned his Passion into a story about Clever John that was meant to be understood as a joke.

Asterisks & Links of Interest

Posted by Jaņdžs at 2:57 AM 0 comments