My neighbors are truly good people. They are a knit family, fearing God,
the like you could find in Christian America. We live in the 'occupied
territories' - 'chtachim' -, in a small 'settlement' - Yichuv -.
On the hill in front of us are Arab villages -'kfar'- from the part that are
neither under full Palestinian rule nor Israeli. There are there also great
people, some of them I happen to know. Our Arabs neighbors are probably the
happiest Arabs in the world. They are freer than any other in Arabs countries
where corruption and violence is the law, including in the Palestinian authority.
They do business with both Jews and Palestinians. They are mostly independent
from both and, contrary to the huge propaganda, they wouldn't change for any
other place in the world. They live the life they have chosen for millenaries,
unabated. They wouldn't move to Sweden, California or the French Riviera. Some
drive brand new Mercedes. They build beautiful homes, they plant wonderful
gardens and they have good children. They also fear God and we salute each
other saying Salam Aleykum, Shabbat Shalom.
My neighbors work in Jerusalem. They don't like government but they
wouldn't lift a finger against it because, contrary to Arabs, they need it,
they respect it, they are taught by the Rabbis they trust to abide by the law,
they believe the law is good, alas Arabs do know the law is corrupted. Arabs
live freely without much crime with no need of secular laws. Their law is
Allah. Jews' law is not the Torah, it is the Rabbis' who get their power from
the government. Big difference.
Arabs won't rebel against the government because they don't need it,
they don't want it. They know better than us. Jews won't rebel against the
government because they trust it, they need it.
Most people in the world won't move against the law because it is good,
in their mind, they need it. Humanity will not change the evil rules of the
Powers that Be until they will understand to abide by God's laws. As Arabs do
on the hill in front. Man cannot live in a vacuum with no law. All the 'waking
up' will never stand without trusting in God, freely, absolutely, permanently.
The NWO has a smooth play at hand because they know that all religions on
earth are corrupted enough to withheld people from God. All religions are
chained with governments and they support each other knowingly as much as
corporations and governments are tied intimately. If people around the world
would do a revolution against the banksters, it would end badly enough as long
as they do not fear God as the Arabs on the hill in front of me do.
Dr Jim Sheedy
The Sudden Meeting of Old and New Civilizations
The ancient civilizations in the Old World (i.e. Europe, Asia and Africa) could not survive the developing Western Civilization lead first by the Greeks and then by the Romans. However, ancient civilizations in the New World (i.e. the American continents) such as the Aztec, Incan, and Mayan, because of their remoteness and complete lack of communication with the Old World were able to persist without outside influence until the discovery of the New World in 1492.
These New World ancient civilizations bore similarities to the Old World ancient civilizations. These civilizations were totalitarian and built around totalitarian rulers who were associated with God. They were hierarchical societies headed by noble classes of warriors. The first Europeans to view these civilizations noted the cruelty of the rulers towards the masses of workers and towards other peoples. These societies also relied upon large working classes that appeared to have unquestioning support for the god-rulers. These unquestioning workers were able to build large temples that rival the Egyptian pyramids in terms of size and magnificence. Of course, these temples and pyramids were part of the religion that played a major role in the society. The rulers were intimately involved with the control of that religion and used human sacrifice in those temples, often on a large scale, as part of their control tactics. In the dedication of the great pyramid of Tenochtitlan in 1489 as many as 20,000 people were sacrificed.
These ancient New World civilizations, like those of the Old World, were not based upon the free will of individuals. They also seem to bear resemblance to bee and ant colonies; individuals did not have self-determination and the hierarchical society maintained strict control by the ruler.
The clash of these ancient civilizations with the more advanced Western Civilization is very instructive. Atahuallpa was the absolute monarch of the Incan nation and was worshipped as a sun god. The Incans were the largest and most advanced civilization in the New World. Yet, in 1532 AD, the Spanish conquistador Francisco Pizarro, with 168 Spanish soldiers was able to easily take over the Incan empire of 12 million people and its army of 80,000 soldiers. How was this possible ?
In this most remarkable clash of Western Civilization with an ancient civilization, Pizarro was able to quickly subdue the Incan nation. Jared Diamond provides first-hand accounts from some of the Spanish soldiers. First of all, the soldiers were so scared by the massive display of the Incan military manpower and the extravagant and opulent display of power wielded by Atahuallpa that many “urinated without noticing it, out of sheer terror.” However, Pizarro outsmarted the Incans by tricking them into thinking they came in peace. Pizarro and his men were probably much more skilled at deception than the Icans had ever previously experienced. Pizarro and his men also set a fairly transparent trap into which Atahuallpa, in all his glory and with his several layers of high chiefs and councilors, unsuspectingly and ceremoniously was carried. They out-thought the Incans – unfortunately deceit is one of the attributes of advanced human thinking. The Spaniards also had a large advantage in terms of having 62 horses (horses were not available in the New World) and steel weapons. Pizarro’s dozen muskets were probably more psychological than tactical. The superiority of weapons by itself cannot explain overcoming the almost 500:1 manpower superiority of the Incan military.
A key to the Incan conquest was the capture of Atahuallpa and the effects it had upon the entire Incan Civilization. When the god-ruler was plucked from the civilization, the entire society folded. Just like plucking the Queen Bee. It is likely that neither the group-think nor the thinking of individuals nor the breadth of experience of the Incans was any match for the thinking abilities that Western Civilization had given to Pizarro and his men. The Incans were no match for the superiority of the Western Civilization mind.
Also, the Pizzaro “conquest” of the Peruvian Incans can give us further insight into an old Theocracy.
“In Cuzco in 1589, Don Mancio Serra de Leguisamo — one of the last survivors of the original conquerors of Peru—wrote in the preamble of his will, the following, in parts: We found these kingdoms in such good order, and the said Incas governed them in such wise [manner] that throughout them there was not a thief, nor a vicious man, nor an adulteress, nor was a bad woman admitted among them, nor were there immoral people. The men had honest and useful occupations. The lands, forests, mines, pastures, houses and all kinds of products were regulated and distributed in such sort that each one knew his property without any other person seizing it or occupying it, nor were there law suits respecting it… the motive which obliges me to make this statement is the discharge of my conscience, as I find myself guilty. For we have destroyed by our evil example, the people who had such a government as was enjoyed by these natives. They were so free from the committal of crimes or excesses, as well men as women, that the Indian who had 100,000 pesos worth of gold or silver in his house, left it open merely placing a small stick against the door, as a sign that its master was out. With that, according to their custom, no one could enter or take anything that was there. When they saw that we put locks and keys on our doors, they supposed that it was from fear of them, that they might not kill us, but not because they believed that anyone would steal the property of another. So that when they found that we had thieves among us, and men who sought to make their daughters commit sin, they despised us."
The above description of the Incan behavior provides insight to a very moral and well-behaved society. This tranquility seems similar to that found in the Egyptian Civilization. God is in charge! When God is in charge, everybody behaves. It is the only way that it can be done. The behavior patterns are rigidly laid out and so strongly held by the group that enforcement is perhaps not even necessary.
Theocracy – an animal model ?
It is tempting to compare the organization of the Egyptian and other ancient civilizations to something we see in the animal kingdom today – ant and bee colonies. Such animal colonies are highly organized with a queen at the top and various levels of subservient individuals below the queen. There are several classes of workers, each with distinct roles in the colony or community. This organization resembles ancient human civilizations.
JM Roberts, author of A Short History of the World, writes: “Most animals which live in groups – ants, bees, herds of deer – look very well-regulated. It seems that they are better at keeping rules in their societies than human beings. Yet that is only because they are in fact very different from humans. They are not actually obeying rules (as we understand them) at all, but are behaving almost automatically; they do things because they are programmed by their genes or by patterns of behaviour imprinted so deep that we call them “instincts”. They could not behave otherwise if they wanted to, indeed, they cannot want to.”
These animal models of group behavior, which served as the models for the earliest human civilizations, are those developed with vision-based minds coming from the animal world. There were no thoughts.
JM Roberts further states that: “Human history began when the inheritance of genetics and behaviour which had until then provided the only means of survival was first broken through by conscious choice” (italics added). This statement is consistent with the story of Adam and Eve in which Adam’s choice was the first step in our separation from Nature.
Animals seem to make choices such as when to eat, sleep, or hunt – but since they do not have words their consciousness and means of making a choice must be different than ours. They certainly don’t debate with themselves about what to do. Only humans have a thinking consciousness and can make thinking decisions. Animals and our pre-human ancestors did not have a thinking consciousness and reacted more by instinct and automatic reflex.
The group-think of Homo sapiens in the earliest civilizations was not as sophisticated as today. The earliest civilizations had evolved from the vision-based animal world.
Just as worker bees and ants seem to work incessantly to build their colonies, the Egyptian workers were able to build monumental structures like the pyramids that remain for us to see yet today. Their group-thinking was likely more like ants and bees than our current group-thinking.
Today we take freedom of thought and expression to be fundamental to what it is to be human. This is especially characteristic of Western Civilization. Such individualism was unheard of and un-thought of in these early civilizations. The state of human thought was elementary compared to today. Even the earliest writings, as discussed earlier, show attribution of actions and speaking to individual gods. The early civilizations were probably the developmental endpoint of the groups that first formed around campfires, evolved into agricultural groups, and then into clusters of cities. The ruler at the top had absolute authority and was also inseparable from the god and religion of the civilization.
Living in a theocracy seems very limiting to us, because we are so used to having personal freedom. However, at that time, subservience probably met our mind capabilities and, in balance, the benefits we received from it outweighed any other options.
However, was life really bad for the people ? The Incans seemed to live very comfortable lives. There is no record of any rebellions or bad behavior among Egyptians for their 3,000 years of rule. We haven’t come close to that record; in fact the 2,000 years since then have largely been filled with hatred and war.
related:
Dr Iain McGilchrist
The Sudden Meeting of Old and New Civilizations
The ancient civilizations in the Old World (i.e. Europe, Asia and Africa) could not survive the developing Western Civilization lead first by the Greeks and then by the Romans. However, ancient civilizations in the New World (i.e. the American continents) such as the Aztec, Incan, and Mayan, because of their remoteness and complete lack of communication with the Old World were able to persist without outside influence until the discovery of the New World in 1492.
These New World ancient civilizations bore similarities to the Old World ancient civilizations. These civilizations were totalitarian and built around totalitarian rulers who were associated with God. They were hierarchical societies headed by noble classes of warriors. The first Europeans to view these civilizations noted the cruelty of the rulers towards the masses of workers and towards other peoples. These societies also relied upon large working classes that appeared to have unquestioning support for the god-rulers. These unquestioning workers were able to build large temples that rival the Egyptian pyramids in terms of size and magnificence. Of course, these temples and pyramids were part of the religion that played a major role in the society. The rulers were intimately involved with the control of that religion and used human sacrifice in those temples, often on a large scale, as part of their control tactics. In the dedication of the great pyramid of Tenochtitlan in 1489 as many as 20,000 people were sacrificed.
These ancient New World civilizations, like those of the Old World, were not based upon the free will of individuals. They also seem to bear resemblance to bee and ant colonies; individuals did not have self-determination and the hierarchical society maintained strict control by the ruler.
The clash of these ancient civilizations with the more advanced Western Civilization is very instructive. Atahuallpa was the absolute monarch of the Incan nation and was worshipped as a sun god. The Incans were the largest and most advanced civilization in the New World. Yet, in 1532 AD, the Spanish conquistador Francisco Pizarro, with 168 Spanish soldiers was able to easily take over the Incan empire of 12 million people and its army of 80,000 soldiers. How was this possible ?
In this most remarkable clash of Western Civilization with an ancient civilization, Pizarro was able to quickly subdue the Incan nation. Jared Diamond provides first-hand accounts from some of the Spanish soldiers. First of all, the soldiers were so scared by the massive display of the Incan military manpower and the extravagant and opulent display of power wielded by Atahuallpa that many “urinated without noticing it, out of sheer terror.” However, Pizarro outsmarted the Incans by tricking them into thinking they came in peace. Pizarro and his men were probably much more skilled at deception than the Icans had ever previously experienced. Pizarro and his men also set a fairly transparent trap into which Atahuallpa, in all his glory and with his several layers of high chiefs and councilors, unsuspectingly and ceremoniously was carried. They out-thought the Incans – unfortunately deceit is one of the attributes of advanced human thinking. The Spaniards also had a large advantage in terms of having 62 horses (horses were not available in the New World) and steel weapons. Pizarro’s dozen muskets were probably more psychological than tactical. The superiority of weapons by itself cannot explain overcoming the almost 500:1 manpower superiority of the Incan military.
A key to the Incan conquest was the capture of Atahuallpa and the effects it had upon the entire Incan Civilization. When the god-ruler was plucked from the civilization, the entire society folded. Just like plucking the Queen Bee. It is likely that neither the group-think nor the thinking of individuals nor the breadth of experience of the Incans was any match for the thinking abilities that Western Civilization had given to Pizarro and his men. The Incans were no match for the superiority of the Western Civilization mind.
Also, the Pizzaro “conquest” of the Peruvian Incans can give us further insight into an old Theocracy.
“In Cuzco in 1589, Don Mancio Serra de Leguisamo — one of the last survivors of the original conquerors of Peru—wrote in the preamble of his will, the following, in parts: We found these kingdoms in such good order, and the said Incas governed them in such wise [manner] that throughout them there was not a thief, nor a vicious man, nor an adulteress, nor was a bad woman admitted among them, nor were there immoral people. The men had honest and useful occupations. The lands, forests, mines, pastures, houses and all kinds of products were regulated and distributed in such sort that each one knew his property without any other person seizing it or occupying it, nor were there law suits respecting it… the motive which obliges me to make this statement is the discharge of my conscience, as I find myself guilty. For we have destroyed by our evil example, the people who had such a government as was enjoyed by these natives. They were so free from the committal of crimes or excesses, as well men as women, that the Indian who had 100,000 pesos worth of gold or silver in his house, left it open merely placing a small stick against the door, as a sign that its master was out. With that, according to their custom, no one could enter or take anything that was there. When they saw that we put locks and keys on our doors, they supposed that it was from fear of them, that they might not kill us, but not because they believed that anyone would steal the property of another. So that when they found that we had thieves among us, and men who sought to make their daughters commit sin, they despised us."
The above description of the Incan behavior provides insight to a very moral and well-behaved society. This tranquility seems similar to that found in the Egyptian Civilization. God is in charge! When God is in charge, everybody behaves. It is the only way that it can be done. The behavior patterns are rigidly laid out and so strongly held by the group that enforcement is perhaps not even necessary.
Theocracy – an animal model ?
It is tempting to compare the organization of the Egyptian and other ancient civilizations to something we see in the animal kingdom today – ant and bee colonies. Such animal colonies are highly organized with a queen at the top and various levels of subservient individuals below the queen. There are several classes of workers, each with distinct roles in the colony or community. This organization resembles ancient human civilizations.
JM Roberts, author of A Short History of the World, writes: “Most animals which live in groups – ants, bees, herds of deer – look very well-regulated. It seems that they are better at keeping rules in their societies than human beings. Yet that is only because they are in fact very different from humans. They are not actually obeying rules (as we understand them) at all, but are behaving almost automatically; they do things because they are programmed by their genes or by patterns of behaviour imprinted so deep that we call them “instincts”. They could not behave otherwise if they wanted to, indeed, they cannot want to.”
These animal models of group behavior, which served as the models for the earliest human civilizations, are those developed with vision-based minds coming from the animal world. There were no thoughts.
JM Roberts further states that: “Human history began when the inheritance of genetics and behaviour which had until then provided the only means of survival was first broken through by conscious choice” (italics added). This statement is consistent with the story of Adam and Eve in which Adam’s choice was the first step in our separation from Nature.
Animals seem to make choices such as when to eat, sleep, or hunt – but since they do not have words their consciousness and means of making a choice must be different than ours. They certainly don’t debate with themselves about what to do. Only humans have a thinking consciousness and can make thinking decisions. Animals and our pre-human ancestors did not have a thinking consciousness and reacted more by instinct and automatic reflex.
The group-think of Homo sapiens in the earliest civilizations was not as sophisticated as today. The earliest civilizations had evolved from the vision-based animal world.
Just as worker bees and ants seem to work incessantly to build their colonies, the Egyptian workers were able to build monumental structures like the pyramids that remain for us to see yet today. Their group-thinking was likely more like ants and bees than our current group-thinking.
Today we take freedom of thought and expression to be fundamental to what it is to be human. This is especially characteristic of Western Civilization. Such individualism was unheard of and un-thought of in these early civilizations. The state of human thought was elementary compared to today. Even the earliest writings, as discussed earlier, show attribution of actions and speaking to individual gods. The early civilizations were probably the developmental endpoint of the groups that first formed around campfires, evolved into agricultural groups, and then into clusters of cities. The ruler at the top had absolute authority and was also inseparable from the god and religion of the civilization.
Living in a theocracy seems very limiting to us, because we are so used to having personal freedom. However, at that time, subservience probably met our mind capabilities and, in balance, the benefits we received from it outweighed any other options.
However, was life really bad for the people ? The Incans seemed to live very comfortable lives. There is no record of any rebellions or bad behavior among Egyptians for their 3,000 years of rule. We haven’t come close to that record; in fact the 2,000 years since then have largely been filled with hatred and war.
related:
Dr Iain McGilchrist
After The Master and His Emissary was published, McGilchrist discovered a quotation attributed to Albert Einstein that he felt neatly supported his thesis. He uses this quote at the end of his RSA talk: “The intuitive mind is a sacred gift and the rational mind is a faithful servant. We have created a society that honors the servant and has forgotten the gift.” But did Einstein actually say that ? The Internet is awash with dubious Einstein quotations, and we were unable to locate the original source of this one. If any reader can verify its authenticity (by citing the original text, speech or conversation) please leave a note in our comments section. Meanwhile, you can watch McGilchrist’s entire half-hour RSA lecture here.
No comments:
Post a Comment