“CRETIN” Comes From “CHRISTIAN”. A Deep & Revealing Truth From The European Middle Ages

Créstin From Chréstien. Calling Cretins Cretins, Starting With Christians, Made Europe Smart, Thus Strong. 

European supremacy (now quickly vanishing) rested on mental supremacy, and that, in turn demanded, and demands, a colossal contempt for superstitious religion [1].

Colossal contempt for superstition is why the word Chréstien became a pejorative, Créstin, now simplified as cretin (just as the Latin hospitale became modern French hopital).

Europe has been vastly misunderstood. It is usually viewed as “Christian”. Nietzsche correctly thought that the naive vision of Christianism ruling Europe, was just propaganda by the true masters of Europe (the “Lords” who were in plain sight, but, thanks to Christianism succeeded to make the Commons believe in the virtue of enslavement).

Christianism was just the superstition the slaves were supposed to be guided by, to “believe” in. Jesus urged his followers to act like slaves, implementing a slave morality… Meanwhile, in truth the nobles followed a morality more akin to that of the “blonde beast” (the lion), as Nietzsche put it. Indeed nothing stopped the aristocracy. Aristocrats, if hungry, would roast children (this happened during some Crusades, for nourishment of the hungry Frankish warriors… No, this is not a piece of Islamist propaganda: the Crusaders themselves related the facts, read Jean de Joinville and his friends…) 

Here I will present a further datapoint supporting the perspective that the literary class of the Middle Ages was perfectly aware of, despised and rejected Christianism, which they perceived as hypocrisy, exploitation and mental retardation combined. We owe those critics of Christianism a convenient concept and word, cretin. Amusingly Nietzsche, a French speaking philologist (i.e., linguist) did not think of this argument.

Incontrovertible! Thank You, Professor! Paris University Professor Bernard Cerquiglini, a top linguist, former director of the National Institute for the French language, confirms my long held interpretation.

In the early Middle Ages (500 CE to 1,000 CE), Europe was devastated. Population had collapsed, or was collapsing, well in excess of 50%. Say from perhaps 80 millions to just 18 millions (here is a link with some data and erroneous albeit interesting logic).    

I am aware of the explanation of crétin as a depiction of hypothyroidism and enthusiastic prolonged interbreeding… but medical science does not explain where the word came from.  

The usual, and true, and yet fake, story is that cretin comes from 1779, from French crétin (18c.), from Alpine dialect crestin, “a dwarfed and deformed idiot” of a type formerly often found in families in the Alpine lands, a condition caused by a congenital deficiency of thyroid hormones, and lack of iodine. After brandishing that medical description from the Nineteenth Century, the Christian apologists pretend that the word is of uncertain origin. They are trying to hide the auditory evidence: in Old French, “créstin” and Chréstien (christian) have the exact same pronunciation.

Indeed defining “cretin” as a mental condition, does not explain where the word  comes from. I am a native French speaker (learned in Black Africa as a child, indeed). I also studied the question in depth, because, well, that’s what I do. “Cretin” comes from chréstien… “Christian” in English. In Vulgar Latin *christianus “a Christian” had generally the sense of poor fellow… or, in context, poor idiotic fellow. Throughout the Middle Ages, “Christianus” had a connotation of simpleton or mental retard. Here is a French specialists’ abstract confirming that observation:

“Plusieurs spécialistes contemporains de l’étymologie du français, tels Alain Reya ou Walther von Wartburg, estiment que l’explication la plus vraisemblable est de faire dériver crétin de chrétien, par euphémisation, un crétin étant considéré comme un innocent, un bienheureux 3,4,5,6, ou parce que les arriérés étaient recueillis dans les monastères au Moyen Age.“

(Several specialists of French etymology, such as Ar or WvW, ascertain that the most likely explanation is to make cretin derive from christian, by euphemization, a cretin being considered an innocent, a happy person, or because mental retards were welcome in the monasteries of the Middle Ages.)

Well, and if it was not just an euphemization? A look at the factual history and historiography of the middle Middle Ages shows that it is not just those in command who despised and did not obey Christianism. Those who wrote also loudly shared in the rejection and contempt of the religion which supposedly ruled the souls.

***

Below the Word Cretin, What Saved Europe; Hateful Contempt For the Fanatics:

So the origin of the word “Cretin” adds a new dimension to… the understanding of Europe. Indeed, here is another explanation, this one with full semantic dimensionality: the hatred and utter contempt with which priests and their ilk were viewed in the middle Middle Ages by most of the population, and, in particular, by the intellectuals who depicted the situation then.

Remember: late Middle Aged Christianism was a killing machine (just go ask Middle Easterners). The priests and their military allies ended up killing many millions, as the Middle Ages progressed. Burning at the stake for heresy reappeared in 1026 CE, after a Frankish imposed hiatus of more than five centuries. The full Christian insanity got unleashed with the First Crusade: as the Crusade started, so did the mass killing of European Jews (who were probably, at least in part, European by ancestry, and Jewish by conversion of said ancestor… so the conventional terminology of “anti-Semitism”, to qualify anti-Judaism, is misleading).

How do I know this of this hatred against the theocrats? It was a sane reaction to Christianism as war and genocide, the vision promoted by Saint Bernard (personal enemy of the great philosopher cum songwriter Abelard). The hatred against Christianism a la Saint Bernard was more than justified. Just an example: the (Fourth) Crusade against the Cathars killed as much if not more, in percentage terms, as the Nazis did… But the Christian leaders were themselves unhinged. To look at the Cathars again, Catharism was thoroughly annihilated, over several generations of relentless persecution. From Turkey to Spain. Not one book survived. Five millions Cathars died (at least).

I have next to my bed all the oldest French literature surviving, including the famed “Fabliaux”, in the original 9 centuries old French.

In these books, priests, chaplains and author church authorities are central. They are depicted engaging in relentless sexual adventures and fornication, murders, tortures, rape and castration, in the most comical way… It’s all roaring comical. A priest, surprised by the incoming husband, disguises himself in a statue. The enraged husband sees the statue, which reminds him of the priest, so he cuts its appendages. The fake statue says nothing to save his life, while losing wiener and jewels.

And so on. Most devious wives have a lecherous priest in their beds. Priests are depicted as terminally cretinous. This approach to religion was not new. Although (bishop) Gregory of Tours’ book on the history of the Franks, written six centuries earlier, is full of martyrs and saints, a robust reading shows many of the admirable characters, even saints, engaged in depredation… And some priests are represented in the worst light imaginable, killing for greed in extensive conspiracies. 

What is the conclusion? We The People of the Middle Ages had a robustly correct view of the theocrats. One has to realize that those writing horrors about people of the church belong to the most intellectual part of the population. Also we know that church summities as Beranger, an abbot basically said that the entire Christian religion worked only if one realized that reason should be divine. Beranger had a powerful ally: the conquering Duke of Normandy. Beranger fought the Pope… and was not defeated. 

The literal roasting of nobles during the “jacqueries’ of the Fourteenth Century (which extended to England) proves the point that there was tremendous opposition to the establishment throughout the Middle Ages (the existence of the Cathars, and the strike of the University of Paris for a full year around 1200 CE to be taught Aristotle, demonstrates the same point). After the jacqueries, which extended to England, the nobles lived in fear of a popular revolt until the final retribution of 1789… 

It took that long, because, just as in the Late Roman empire, cretinism was a method of governance. The more cretinous the people, the easier it is to rule over them.

So we see that the middle Middle Age society was such that intellectual positioning highly critical of Christianism was, de facto, tolerated, and pervasive. Calling cretins cretins and Christians, cretins, was missing in the Fourth and Fifth Century Rome: doing so after 380 CE, under the Roman emperors Theodosius I, Gratian and Valentinian was a capital crime. 

In France, the core of Western Europe, in the middle Middle Ages, a healthy contempt for superstitious religion flourished. This was a return to an old spirit. 

The Romans of the Republic often exhibited a critical distanciation for their own original Roman religion. The examples abound: an admiral, furious that the sacred chicken will not eat, a bad auguri, threw them in the sea, observing they would be forced to drink now. Caesar, invading Africa, stumbles and falls during disembarkment, a bad omen. So he grabs the sand, and says: now I hold you, Africa. Or Cicero, having become a supreme augur, in charge of interpreting the signs, observes that this is the most powerful position of the Roman Republic… As, for example, it enables the augur to validate, or not, the elections.  

When the Roman dictatorship became a Roman Catholic Orthodoxy, all distanciation from religion was gone: only Catholicism was the state religion (and the status of Judaism was unclear).  Everybody was supposed to subscribe to that superstition and its absurd orders (such as you shall not execute murderous highway robbers). The prompt result (it took only months, starting in 395 CE) was the collapse of the Roman state and civilization, led by the collapse of secularism. 

A mind freed of superstition is freer to observe the world. China and its satellites, the only center of civilization rivalling the Indo-European ensemble, was also never too subjected to terroristic superstition. So, whereas cannibalism ruled the Americas, under a superstitious umbrella, Eastern Asians did not eat their fellow man. Foot binding was enough to satisfy the sadistic instincts. 

So what happened, starting in 1026 CE, when burning people for heresy was re-engaged? The feudal order, a plutocratic system, was fundamentally resting on inequality. It needed a fascist god to justify itself. The more fascist the god, the more fascist the plutocracy could get. Hence the Cathar insurrection… and that was broken by plutocracy, for example, the king of France who had interest in breaking the super powerful county of Toulouse, a de facto parliamentary power… And Catharism was an excellent reason to do so, once its annihilation became the object of an official crusade.

However, there is something called CULTURAL INERTIA. Once contempt had been heaped on religion, for centuries, it could not be dispelled with the magic of terror. Resistance to Catholicism, obvious by the Eleventh Century, soon became frantic, and millions were killed. After four centuries of Protestantism, potentates in Western Europe (following some in North-Eastern Europe, see the Hus affair and consequences) promoted Calvin and Luther… This time reform worked enough, to cause centuries of religious wars… instead of the simple extermination by Catholic terror of its opponents.

Resistance to superstition and authority made Europe culturally smarter. It also probably made Europe EPIGENETICALLY smarter. Because there is no doubt that stupidity can be epigenetically imposed.

Oh, by the way, Christianism, as practiced by Roman tyrants, was theocratic fascism. A particular case of intellectual fascism. Now social network monopolies are imposing their own intellectual fascism… a particular case of which being what a growing group of contemporary French intellectuals call “Pensée unique“… The single thought, supported by the single emotion, hatred against The Malicious One… a characteristic of the Middle Ages. 

Calling cretins cretins is at the core of making the advancement of civilization possible. Yes, it’s not Politically Correct, or, more exactly, plutocratically correct, of calling cretins cretin, but it is philosophically correct. If one cannot call idiocy idiotic, there is no wisdom.

Idiocy is not just to be avoided, it is a teacher. Thinkers, in particular mathematicians, learn that error is a friend, a teacher. Only those who want to protect idiocy, cover it up.

Ah, and why is European supremacy vanishing? Because, precisely, Europe had increasingly learned to tolerate, or even revere cretinism. But the US President got blocked on “social media”, when all sorts of monstrosities and threats are not, and, suddenly struck by an epiphany, many leaders of European  cultural descent, worldwide, condemned the censorship. This is an encouraging sign, as censorship is the first step towards cretinism.

Our species is defined by wisdom. Cretinism is not just the religion of error embraced, it is as inhuman as one gets. This point of view carries real humanistic power. Take for example Nazism. Not too many whined that it looked cruel. But of course the Nazis got elected by pretending that they were good people, keen to resurrect Germany (defending minorities, of all things). So to counteract the nazis by claiming they were bad, when they claimed to be good, was not a powerful argument. Instead the very powerful argument was to point out that Nazism was a form of cretinism. Why? Because it did not have a snowball chance in hell to defeat the entente cordiale of France and Great Britain… all the more as their progeny, the USA, could not be really too far behind helping its parents. To this the Nazis replied with the cretinous argument that France and England, the two most aggressive, and deeply entangled nations of the last millennium, were actually degenerate, unwilling and unable, all of a sudden, to make war… although they had the largest empires the world had ever seen, and France spent 15 centuries at war, and counting… And this was just one aspect of Nazi cretinism, there were many others, like killing off intellectuals (in particular Jews), or depending upon US plutocracy to have an economy…

Fighting cretinism is most humanitarian, and most useful, in to achieve a more human civilization. One has to realize that Christianism was a slave religion, and taught this, not just by teaching to be slapped all day long, which was already cretinous, but by an entire arsenal of stupidities which were already denounced 18 centuries ago by Celsus… If one is dumb like an ass, one can be used like an ass. In these end of times times, it is high time to give cretins their marching orders towards a more meaningful future.

Cretinism is not just a secondary effect of Christianism. It is its principal raison d’être.

Demolishing cretinism has to start by not being afraid to search for, identify, and denounce stupid ideas. That’s where much of the learning is.

Patrice Ayme

***

[1] Some Americans knowing vaguely the history of English America, will object that it was founded by Pilgrims…. Who were full of respect for Christianism. That’s only SC, Superficially Correct. In truth the Pilgrims were integrated in military-plutocratic investment venture. Once the first Pilgrims landed (not to well, and not where the army had sent them), they wrote back to their fellows in Europe to boast of the immense riches of the continent. Simultaneously, the Pilgrims discovered some English heathens who had intermarried with Native women. Revolted by these sins, they massacred them all. The same reasoning was then extended to the entire continent. Thus Christianism was used to give the good conscience necessary to massacre enthusiastically anybody who was in the way of greater riches. This was what the Late Roman and Feudal systems had done, by using the Inquisition, but on a much greater scale.

Where is the contempt for Christianism in the behavior of the English colonizers? Well, by using Christianism mostly as a sword. If one extracts the best of Christianism, all the talk about love, pardoning, mercifulness, etc… One obtains positive Christianism, so to speak, and one can do the same with other religions. However, the weaponization of Christianism, by using its Dark Side, is what the Pilgrims and their descendants human, or institutional, did. That shows contempt for the positive side of Christ.

Considering what the European colonizers did with Christianism demonstrates the point that Christianism was an instrument of subjugation. Lethal, if need be, as symbolized by the cult object of the Christians, torture to death by crucifixion. If one is greedy enough, that’s not cretinous.

ENFORCING CRETIN CULT: Why Jesus Was Invented By Emperors In 325 CE And 381 CE

(Easter Sunday, April 12, 2020, let’s celebrate Christianism and its namesake, Cretinism!) 

A virus paralyses the planet, with three billion people under lockdown (with dubious scientific justification). An earlier virus was Jesus, that ideology which terminally paralysed all of Antiquity, to the point society and the economy collapsed, and, thus, military defense imploded with it.

Can I describe a direct connection? Besides Roman emperor Valens embracing the psychology of the jealous Christian god, which brought the victory of the Goths (379 CE)… Besides the empire being made in the image of the Bible, with one big bully on top? 

Here is a direct mechanism for how Christianism collapsed the empire: the refusal of punishment of bandits by the governing bishops, after 395 CE, made trade to and from cities impossible. Thus cities became impossible, and so did farming. That collapsed the tax base, hence legions couldn’t be paid anymore, and were entirely removed from many provinces, for example Britannia, Germania, Gallia… (~400 CE.)

FASCISM IS ONE OF THE OLDEST INSTINCTS OF THE HUMAN LINEAGE:

The behavior that the fascist instinct brought is how respect was instilled in predators and how predators could be effectively fought. The group bound together by a few simple ideas and feelings acts as one to enact with lethal force its concentrated power. Hence the symbolicsm the senmiotics of fascism: rods bound together around an axe. In a democracy the ideas and feelings binding all are justice, equality, fraternity, and, paradoxically, liberty. Thus, in a democracy the axe gets deployed only when in dire need: war… But also bandits on the highways…

In a fascist imperial oligarchy, by definition it’s the imperium, the command of the chiefs, which unites. The problem is that imperial fascism, a command without a justification, except to please an oligarchy, erodes liberty in the long run, from which mental creativity arises. Diocletian, by creating its “Tetrarchy” (the rule of four), tried to go around the idea of monarchy (the rule of one). But the fact is, the emperors were like living gods. 

icon representing Constantine, covered with jewels and gold (center), at Nicaea among top bishops

Emperors Aurelian and Diocletian, re-establishing the empire under the form where the emperor was called “DOMINUS”, pushed the cult of “Sol Invictus”. Constantine, while making himself first a “compagnon” of the Unvanquished Sun, more craftily recognized that the cult of Jews was more adopted to fascism: after all, Israel had pretty much self-destroyed from unhinged bigotry. Something that stupid was what imperial fascist tyranny required! 

Hence Christianism, a particular form of fascism, political and intellectual, was invented by the fascist in chief, as a coherent doctrine which could seduce what was left of the intellectual class of the empire, vital to administration. One had to marry the “Logos” of the Greeks with the superstition of the Jews. This is what Nicea accomplished.

The resulting ideology was then officialized as “Catholic Orthodoxy” (“Common Opinion Universalism”) and later “Nicene Creed” from the city of Nicaea, where Constantine postured as the “13th Apostle”. Constantine and His mother are saints of “Orthodox” Christianism. https://patriceayme.wordpress.com/…/emperor…/

Constantine Sol Invictus Coin: Solis Invictus with the legend SOLIS INVICTO COMITI: CONSTANTINE, COMPAGNON OF UNVANQUISHED SUN

Nicea was when many points of Christianism were decided. The faith was literally invented through non-ending debates….For at least three months (May 20-August 25).  In particular the idea of the Trinity was decided, and the co-essential divinity of the Son,… against Arius, a famous cleric in Alexandria. The bickering debates were unending, Constantine got exasperated. The co-essential divinity of the Son, was decided… That’s the so-called Jesus… In particular, when to celebrate Easter was decided…

***

So, fasten seatbelts, oh sheep of the shepherd… Who heard of Nicaea 325 CE and Constantinople 381 CE… when Christianism was invented, under the presidency of Roman emperors? (Both of whom were famous, and very lethal generals…) I am going to try to enlighten the abyss…

The First Council of Nicaea, starting on May 20, 325 CE, invented and adopted the Nicene Creed which described Christ as “God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father“, and the “Holy Ghost” as the one by which was incarnate… of the Virgin Mary“: “the Word (“Logos”: Logic!) was made flesh and dwelled among us“. About the Father and the Son, the creed used the term homoousios (of one substance) to define the relationship between the Father and the Son. After more than fifty years of debate, homoousios was recognised as the hallmark of orthodoxy, and was further developed into the formula of “three persons, one being“.

Jesus Christ is described as “Light from Light, true God from true God“. 

Jesus Christ is said by the “Nicene Symbol” to be “begotten, not made,” asserting that he was not a mere creature, brought into being out of nothing, but the true Son of God, brought into being “from the substance of the Father.“

Christian level reasoning: Clearly the Moon looks like it’s melting into the sea. The evidence is strong. Science is wrong, Jessusss save us! Especially if you don’t exist! No wonder the most useful word “cretin” was derived from “Christian”. Never say Christianism doesn’t have some uses…

He is said to be “of one being with the Father,” proclaiming that although Jesus Christ is “true God” and God the Father is also “true God,” they are “of one being,” in accord to what is found in John 10:30: “I and the Father are one.” The Greek term homoousios, or consubstantial (i.e., “of the same substance) is ascribed by Eusebius to Constantine who, on this particular point, may have chosen to exercise his authority. The significance of this clause, however, is extremely ambiguous as to the extent in which Jesus Christ and God the Father are “of one being,” and the issues it raised would be controversial in the future.

The Nicene Creed said little about the Holy Spirit. All attention was focused on the relationship between the Father and the Son, without making any similar statement about the Holy Spirit (this would come in 381 CE):

“We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of all things visible and invisible. And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, begotten of the Father [the only-begotten; that is, of the essence of the Father, God of God,] Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father; (…) And [we believe] in the Holy Ghost. (…).” — Nicene Creed

Toward the end of the Council, the majority of bishops present (officially 318) excommunicated Arius and others they didn’t like. 

Constantine, glittering in threads of gold through his clothing, sparkling with precious stones, then pronounced civil judgements. The emperor banished those excommunicated attendees into exile (as a result, Arius would convert the Germans). This state violence inaugurated the practice of using secular, arbitrary imperial power to establish doctrinal orthodoxy within Christianity, an example followed by all later Christian emperors, which led to vicious circles of Christian violence, which would culminate in the Thirteenth Century with the holocaust of all the Cathars (“the Pures”, in Greek), more than five million Christians who disagreed with fine points of the Nicene Creed… killed to the last, with all their books and documents. That would teach them to have women bishops… 

Also burning Jews and various heretics alive, some still girls, until the Nineteenth Century, to Voltaire’s indignation… 

The next major Christian fascist, Roman emperor Theodosius I, established outright Christian terror and Inquisition, up to the penalty of death, according to his imperial whim. Non-Catholics were declared to be “madmen”… subject to the whim of the emperor. 

***

At the First Council of Constantinople (381), the Nicene Creed was expanded, becoming the Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed, which says that the Holy Spirit is worshiped and glorified together with the Father and the Son. Many details of the adventures of the “Son of God” were then established on paper, to make sure of what the “faith” was going to be exactly about… Disagree with those fine theological points, and the emperor may have you burned alive (after confiscating your property). Hence the veracity of all this became more than a matter of faith, but the very essence of survival… It didn’t matter how well you thought: you had to believe correctly, or secular power could burn you, as recommended by Saint Paul…

So no wonder “He” left no historical traces: “He”, Jesus, was debated and constructed, three centuries after he supposedly lived. “He” actually mostly lived in the heads of Fourth Century bishops. Actually, because it looked as if “He” was born rather in Spring, according to Gospels, the bishops in command of the empire after Theodosius I’s death (395 CE), moved “His” birth to the Winter Solstice, which with its “Saturnials”, cut conifers and exchanges of gifts, was the most popular holiday… For more than a millennium… More precisely even, Christmas was set to December 25th because it was the date of the festival of Sol Invictus, the major Greco-Roman deity. On 25 December AD 274, the Roman emperor Aurelian made it an official cult alongside the traditional Roman cults…

Jesus The God was a sin against reason of the Late Roman empire, and a cause of comorbidity of the empire by making it intolerant to reason, and in love with stupidity. Christianism was not an innocent cult, but a lethal passion masquerading as respectable. The respect was owed to Constantine, mass murderer of the eunuch Egyptian priesthood, killer of his nephew, executioner of his son, boiler of his wife, for all to see: it was a matter of personal survival. Constantine contrasted “the houses of lies” (Pagan temples) with “the splendours of the home of truth“. Weird in someone who boiled an empress mother of five of his children. But Christians get the Saints they deserve…  

So, Christians, please enjoy Easter! Roman tyrants invented it to subjugate you, and their modern descendants are grateful that the old trick still works…

Patrice Ayme

***

***

P/S: Immediately after this was published, I was banned and blocked from the largest philosophy club on Facebook, with nearly 300,000 members: I can’t access it, it disappeared, with all my interventions, comments, contacts, etc. For Easter one of the “moderators” had written a few lines observing there was no historical proof of the existence of Jesus (a theme I have broached myself long ago). I intervened and added that actually most the Jesus theory, and even when he was born, was decided in the Fourth Century, in particular in 325 CE and 381 CE.

As a result of my annihilation, without any warning, that notion will then not be disseminated, as it stopped existing in that part of Facebook. I don’t know who ordered my annihilation. Facebook itself?

Should the real annihilation of the virtual presence of a human being legal? The Romans practiced the method, they called it “damnatio memoriae” (actually invented much earlier, thousands of years earlier, in Egypt) No, not without a justification that could hold in court. It’s not just a question of etiquette, it’s a question of diversity of thought, and fighting the hatred of tribalism, which is always founded on alienation (makin the oher foreign).

Frightening McCarthyism Style Senate Hearings For US Supreme Court

Abominable sexism is all over the planet. It needs to be fought. The sword of mental progress should decapitate sexism. But a sword works best when it has not been shattered, by striking too hard an object of no value, gaining naught. This is the problem caving to the Kavanaugh hearing hysteria. I am for the hearing, not the hysteria. [Thereafter Kavanaugh will be K and his accuser F.]

This is a philosophy site. Philosophy means loving wisdom, which can’t be accomplished without hating stupidity. And thus, in particular, hating the stupid (Sade, Hugo, Nietzsche did that well). Thus, creating philosophy has rarely been perceived as nice by most contemporaries. New philosophy exists by finding ways to contradict yesterday’s wisdom, uncovering stupidity, thus the stupid.

Individuals with over-wrinkled (F), marked, or reddish faces (from alcohol blown capillaries, watch K’s ruddy face and pink cheeks) and, or neurologically frazzled behavior (both K and F) show evidence of alcohol damage to various tissues. Thus, ex-old drunkards testify in front of the US Senate. Yes, because they both admitted to heavy  drinking of alcohol… while underage, and thereafter. K has made many statements about the festive state alcohol put him into, during many public events he was invited to in the past. Accuser Ford? The woman was a drunkard at the time… and what was a 15-year-old girl doing at a drunkard’s’ party  with older boys? If not for enjoying inebriety, trouble and illegal behavior?

A few points to which the USA seems most immune to: 

1. crimes, except against humanity, shouldn’t be prosecuted 36 years later: no serious defense can be set-up.  
2. Even more importantly, both K and F were children at the time… Ah, but the professional prosecutor who interrogated K said that even “horseplay” (what children do) could be sexual in nature, thus… a crime!  

A grotesque standard was established by the prosecutor: “sexual behavior” was defined as “genitals touching” (whatever “genitals” are) voluntarily or not, through clothing or not (this probably makes jammed subway people and football/rugby players sexual behaviorists engaging in “unwanted sexual behavior”). Puritanism gone mad, and vicious: because people are really sent to prison in the USA for behaving, at some point, for a second or two as if they were in Tokyo or Paris subways… This is deep inside the violence, judicial or social of the US: prosecuting what are basically non-crimes, enables the prosecution and law enforcement, and legislating bodies to ignore real crimes, as if it was not their fault. They just ran out of attention, cognition, reflection, time and energy you see. Instead they all worry about the hand of a child, perhaps, on the mouth of a drunk 15-year-old girl… 36 years ago.

An entirely grotesque process then. Kavanaugh the judge was the object of 6 FBI inquiries prior, before his various nominations as a judge. The accuser suddenly remembers in 2012, under “therapy” what happened in 1982. I have been assaulted much more severely, more than once… A tendency is to forget assaults, just to get inner peace, not to suddenly remember them. But never talking about them after they happened? No way. One is forced to share trauma.

***

Before gaining altitude, in a follow-up essay on sexism, to come later, let me reiterate the obvious:

Dreaming is best done above the clouds, for those who search ultimate wisdom, freedom

I am no philosophical friend of Kavanaugh, but mostly his enemy. In particular, I don’t like show-off Christians (they are liars: who can believe all the Jesus fable? Lunatics? Pedophiles?)

Nor do I like drunkards: the good judge was always one of them. I believe drunkards tend to forget, make up stories to fill-in the missing memories (I believe Ford was sexually assaulted in one of her drinking bouts, and that’s why she drank; whether K jumped on top of her, horseplaying, I don’t know, and it doesn’t matter: these were kids, but they shouldn’t have been drinking alcohol). Even more, drunkards can’t live with themselves. Socrates was a drunkard, and proud of it. But how can one be proud of “know thyself” and yet proud of messing up with one’s ability to gather knowledge?

However, this is a witch hunt: the alleged assault, had it happen, barely qualifies as such. It qualifies as horseplay on steroids. And the fact is, the accuser didn’t go to the police (she had probably committed crimes herself, hence her lack of alacrity to testify then or now).

Real assault, something I am all too familiar with, is something quite different. One doesn’t wait 30 years to “remember” it, as Ford claimed. One wants to share it with others, share the sense of injustice. I had a few near-death experiences (some from assault), and I am not mute about it, never was. It’s actually normal to mention violent occurrences… as long as one has nothing to do with the situation which led to the aggression.

Next: why sexism should be eradicated. Ah, last but not least: the prosecutor, a woman, was morbidly obese. That’s a form of violence, even lethal violence. Some will say:’Oh, but she kills only herself.’ No, she enjoys millions of women to view putting a hand on a mouth, or “genitals” through clothing somehow colliding with some other organics under clothing, as a most major crime. But dying of obesity pretty soon? That’s the American way.

I see a violence in obesity, as I do in prosecuting hand on a mouth 36 years later, or judging children as adults, 36 years later, but not of the parents who failed to provide supervision… 

Another point: while I am as anti-sexist as they come, I can see perfectly that sexism is a two-way road. Clearly, in the society at large, women are not on top proportionally to their number and, or, education. However, that should be no excuse for the self-described (pseudo) “resistance” to mimic McCarthyism, just worse. Some may scoff that, surely, this is not as bad as McCarthyism.

But consider this: the original population of Western Europe and North America is not reproducing, it’s actually dying, at a very fast pace by historical  standards. It’s not as fast as the collapse of the Aztecs (which went from say 16 million in 1520 CE to one million in 1600 CE). However, the Aztecs, like other American Native got crushed by Eurasian disease their genetics was weak to resist: it was a special situation. Now EU authorities say they need to welcome (mostly Muslim) immigrants, because European youth is collapsing.

Maybe, tighten the seat belts, please, maybe what is collapsing quite a bit too much, is good old machismo (I will not Tweet this, lest I lose plenty of followers…) If men of a particular ethnicity are going to be terrified of all and any “horseplay” with women, that particular ethnicity won’t just stoop to the level of fanatical Islam in its relationship between men and women. It will also implode. White Euro-American populations will also be replaced by Fundamentalist Muslims, because the latter reproduce aplenty… The reason is obvious: Fundamentalist Muslim males are not living in terror of approaching women when, and where, and how it really matters as far as survival of the “race” is concerned. Differently from all these disheveled white men on the run…

And the worst? All this is fake. The anti-machismo movement is supposedly to help women… But, in the end, it just helps those who have it all…  Those old white men it pretends to excoriates… By removing the fangs which could tear them up, and only fangs will do.

The point of this essay is this: whenone is civilized, it’s important to be civilized in-depth. In depth, Kavenaugh represents much that I condemn, and despise. The sort of aggression Ford claims she was victim of, I also despise and condemn, however much she assiduously prepared herself to be a victim of, with systematic drinking. However, one can’t judge civilization in-depth alone, especially regarding individuals. After all what is going down in-depth is hard to ascertain. Whereas superficial forms are easy to observe: acceptable form, appearance, politeness have also to be extended too, it’s a matter of civilization one can see and judge easily. When Feinstein and other “Dems” (Demons?) sat on the accusation against Kavanaugh, keeping it secret, until they could spring it at the last moment, they were sabotaging the (pseudo) democratic process of Supreme Court generalissimo selection.

Applying full adult justice on children, decades later, only an unacceptable civilization would do this. As Kavanaugh himself said:’What goes around, comes around.” In their fight to death against Trump, the “democratic” powers that be play a dangerous game: they create a precedent of using any sort of propaganda, however improbable (Trump as Russian agent… when Trump is on tape as having exactly the same opinions when the USSR already existed and Trump was fighting… Ronald Reagan’s plutocratic globalization).

One should not forget (should one know it) that the Roman Revolution which ended up with Augustus as dictator, started with legitimate gripes of the soldiers of Octavian army. Centurions went ahead, one bared and brandished his sword at the… Senate, the Roman Senate, and declared that if the Senate didn’t take the right decisions, his sword would. We are not yet there, and Trump is craftily surrounded by generals. But this is the nuclear age, and history goes fast….

Patrice Ayme

***

***

Note: The pseudo-left has also issued scathing comments about the Senate being full of old white men (as the tips of all hierarchies)… First that’s grotesquely ageist, a form of discrimination just as bad as discrimination against children, as the old can’t defend themselves well. Worse: there is a reason it’s called a “Senate”. Like in “Senior”. It’s about older people giving advice, because they have little personally to gain in giving poisonous counsel. Age discrimination is one of the worst thing: it is not just unfair, it deprives humanity of wisdom. Learn.

Why This Site Shouldn’t Interest Most Americans

Very few Americans don’t believe in a God, or Life Force, Spirits and other Superstition (according to many polls, one of them reproduced below). I of course believe that all those who believe in superstition or divination are victims of a lack of introspection, resulting in a regrettable submission of (their) perception to domination. This the foundation of their political subjugation. It’s also the royal road to subjugation. Thus countries friendly to superstition and the religions attached to it, are typically submissive to mighty plutocracies.

And thus, as we see inequality rising around the world, it can be tracked to the imposition of the American “neoliberal” model, a modern ideology to impose the grossest traditional plutocracy!  Only 2% of North Americans do not believe in the supernatural: a god, life-force, spirits. This means that most North Americans are superstitious. In comparison, 11% of South-East Asians do not believe, in a god, life force, or spirit. One could say South-east Asia is five times less superstitious…. In France, a whopping one-third of the population don’t believe in a god, life force, or spirit. Thus the French are less ready to believe that plutocrats are benevolent, philanthropic spirits, under a merciful god… (The Market?)

The cult of all things religious has been reinforced top down in the USA since 1954, date of enthronement of “In God We Trust” (which displaced the Republican “E Pluribus Unum”).

For example, Americans are taught to venerate Pastor Martin Luther King. To esteem MLK is honorable, but his cult, at the exclusion of the cult of others, and not learning what exactly happened, arguably even more meritorious, is dubious. After all, President Eisenhower, an ex-general, and Earl Warren, head of the US Supreme Court, did the the heavy lift and courageous combat against segregation in the 1950s.  

***

Forget God and its “Pastors”: Presidents, Generals and Judges are who Order Progress:

Here is Earl Warren:

Segregation of white and colored children in public schools has a detrimental effect upon the colored children. The impact is greater when it has the sanction of the law, for the policy of separating the races is usually interpreted as denoting the inferiority of the Negro group…Any language in contrary to this finding is rejected. We conclude that in the field of public education the doctrine of ‘separate but equal’ has no place. Separate educational facilities are inherently unequal.

—Earl Warren, Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court

Much clearer than “I have a dream!”. To desegregate schools, Eisenhower sent the army. Conclusion: if you want to fight injustice, clear legal, republican thinking and the army, in other words, force, is what is needed.

This Is Why The French Revolution, Core to the United Nations’ Charter, Happened in France, and Not America!

MLK was made into a living god, a sort of Muslim-like “Messenger”. In truth he was part, and rather at the end, of a much more powerful wave he surfed on. Heroes may be useful, but the cult of the providential man prepares that of the “philanthropist” as plutocrats call themselves. (Just as in the Middle Ages plutocrats modestly called themselves, the “best”.)

Thus, when I criticize Islam, many Americans feel I defend the Bible (which is actually the source of Islam, something i know, but they don’t…)

The entire left of the world, not just the USA, suffers from searching for heroes, rather than clear thinking on the Republic. But this is precisely what the plutocratically owned media and the masters of public opinion, wanted. It’s the result of meta teaching, inculcating impotent forms of thought.

I should speak only to the French agnostics (but they don’t generally read English well enough to understand me, as a French professional philosopher once told me, thus he asked me to translate my thoughts in… French; a full-time job I couldn’t possibly do. Actually, I have no time to write a book. As Socrates implicitly pointed out, thinking per se is a full-time job… Socrates, going overboard, famously called writing “the semblance of truth”; that would make all of math, physics and now biology the “semblance of truth”… Although I do agree for Plato…)

***

Cult Of God, One & Only, Came From the Hydraulic Dictatorship Zone:

Verily, much of the roots civilization we use today appeared in what I call the Middle Earth (earliest writing is from there; although it was completely independently evolved in Mesoamerica). Egyptian civilization appeared 6,000 years ago, and the first city known in Anatolia, a few millennia before that.

However, the Middle East, central to the Middle Earth, suffered desiccation of the land, and then the minds, as it veered into . Thus it is natural that this physically sick region came up with a sick metaphysics. It is also of some import: it’s no coincidence that the Roman empire collapsed when Christianism was imposed to it, and countries such as Syria collapsed when Islamism was imposed to it (in the Seventh Century already!)

Some have noticed an analogy between “Ra” as in the theology of Egypt, AbRAhamism, and BRAhamism. This is not as ludicrous as it sounds. First, Abrahamism clearly arose in Egypt (as the Bible recognizes sneakily). Secondly Brahamanism, which gave rise to Hinduism, Jainism, Buddhism itself came from the old Vedic religion, which, in turn, comes from the Middle East. Wikipedia says:

According to Anthony: “Many of the qualities of Indo-Iranian god of might/victory, Verethraghna, were transferred to the adopted god Indra, who became the central deity of the developing Old Indic culture. Indra was the subject of 250 hymns, a quarter of the Rig Veda. He was associated more than any other deity with Soma, a stimulant drug (perhaps derived from Ephedra) probably borrowed from the BMAC religion. His rise to prominence was a peculiar trait of the Old Indic speakers.[27]”

The oldest inscriptions in Old Indic, the language of the Rig Veda, are found not in northwestern India and Pakistan, but in northern Syria, the location of the Mitanni kingdom.[40] The Mitanni kings took Old Indic throne names, and Old Indic technical terms were used for horse-riding and chariot-driving.[40] The Old Indic term r’ta, meaning “cosmic order and truth”, the central concept of the Rig Veda, was also employed in the Mitanni kingdom.[40] Old Indic gods, including Indra, were also known in the Mitanni kingdom.[41][42][43]

The preceding illustrates well the concept of the Middle Earth. It also means that 72% of the world’s population derives its metaphysics from Egypt, or thereabout). More or less (the Egyptian empire often encroached deep on the so-called Fertile Crescent, which is anchored in the West by Israel, Lebanon, Syria…

Ultimately, Egypt, soon after a remarkable attempt at monotheism (which promptly spawned Abrahamism), decayed. Why? Some will point at the invasion of the “Peoples of the Sea”, which Egypt, alone among the Great Powers, was able to defeat (at considerable cost).

***

Egypt’s Government Model Was So Obsolete, Its Civilization Became Senile:

However, shortly after, Egypt exhibited a lack of animal spirits and was durably overrun by Libyans, and then Assyrians, Persians…  Tellingly, it’s the very fierce Greeks and their uncouth students, the Macedonians, who freed Egypt.

What happened to Egypt? Long drawn out dictatorship, when the rise of new technology called for start-ups, basically Greece was full of startups. Startup city states…

True, Egypt got invaded by vast empires, modernized versions of itself. When the Persians came around and colonized Egypt, so they did because Achaemenid Persia was a multinational empire, ultramodern in many ways.

However, ultimately the tiny Athenian startup defeated Persia at Marathon, and then insolently landed an army to free Egypt (its mental benefactor) from Persia!

***

Puritanism Does Not The Best Minds Make, Deep Thinking Is Dirty:

Last week I went out with a number of friends of the Anglo-Saxon persuasion, aggravated by reactive vegetarian ethics. I was retrospectively surprised by the lack of animal spirits. How can one have artful, constructive mental intercourse without the blossoming of passion? It certainly can’t happen when all conversations are guarded. After all, that’s why the divinity was imposed: the divinity imposed a subdued mentality, a submissive morality, and, definitively, a lack of inquiry.  

Thus it’s no accident that the French, long at the forefront of the battle of ideas against the obscurity of stupor, are the ones most aware that all past superstition is just that, superstition without foundation, as reckoned by its own definition.

And these are not words without foundation: in the Twelfth century, Pierre Abelard reinvented Classical logic (and went further). In the Fourteenth century, another Parisian, Jean buridan (Johannes Buridanus), went even further with the Cretan Paradox (rendered famous by Kurt Godel). Buridan also invented the hard part of Newton’s laws (three century before Newton). Actually Buridan anticipated not just Newton, but also Riemann’s force theory (used by Einstein and Al. in the Theory of Gravitation aka “General Relativity”!)

Both Abelard and Buridan were involved in colossal struggles, fights to death, with the catholic Church. Buridan had refused to enter the faculty of theology, so that he would not have to take an oath to the god of Abraham. Abelard fought Saint Bernard to death. Saint Bernard was then the most important, and most fanatical Catholic. At the time, it looked as if Saint Bernard sort of won. But history showed he lost. Buridan’s work were outlawed by the church, under the penalty of death, except in far eastern Europe, where they were taught to the young Copernicus.  

During the period 1100 CE to 1700 CE, Christianism caused an unending succession of terror, major wars, crusades, holocausts and massacres throughout Europe, and from there, the world. How come Europe didn’t collapsed as Rome did? First Europe was governed mostly by a plutocracy which was severely related and intermarried. They killed the poor a lot, themselves, much less. And actually that plutocracy was firmly in command, in secular command.

For example a fanatical Catholic such as Saint Louis put his mother, Blanche de Castille, ex-ruling queen, in charge several times as he made war through the Middle East (and letting himself be made a prisoner by the one and only female ruler that Islam ever had, in Egypt!). So he let a woman in charge, but he also had organized a modern justice system, now copied everywhere, including the USA.

Rome collapsed, because emperor Theodosius, around 390 CE unleashed the office of “Inquisitor” he had just created, against the “Heretics” (“those who made a choice”). Inquisitor, heretics: two terms, dripping with blood and terror, bathing in fire, imposed by Roman Catholic emperor Theodosius. By 400 CE, the empire was collapsing so much that the bishops put the Franks in charge of three provinces.

The Franks were Pagans

Hopefully, they still are!

And will stay that way! Maybe Americans could join their forefathers the Franks, and realize that, if they want paradise, they can get it only on Earth. Let me rephrase this a bit: If one wants paradise, one has to work hard, because one can get it only on Earth! It means in particular that on eschews the seductions of the rule of hell (plutocracy), and better start with free universal healthcare, as those who believe it’s their task to create and make a really Good God!

Patrice Ayme’

Hawaiian Savagery & Planet Nine

New Giant Planet Around Sun? Hawaiian Savages Learned Nothing Important Yet?

After all these hard discourses, my friends, as Ludwig Van would say,  time for a little levity. Could spaceships some day fuel far out? It has long been suspected. And now indirect, computational proofs are piling up.

Science is just common sense. The edge of science is the edge of common sense, thus on the edge of the totally unfamiliar. Thus, it’s not obvious. But still, common sense should stay front and center.

For example, the dwarf planets around the orbit of Neptune and beyond, have extremely weird orbits. Pluto actually cuts the orbit of Neptune. And others do. These highly elliptical orbits always baffled me.

Or Maybe Planet Ninth Is All Frozen, Its Atmosphere All On The Ground?

[Hypothetical lightning has been represented on Planet Nine, in this art from Caltech; this was observed with other giant planets; distant Sun is visible, but won’t warm things much; at this sort of distances, only  energy of  nuclear origin could enable colonization, except if one make work completely new sources such as my suggested vacuum energy method. See: Zero Point Energy Machine.]

Caltech’s Batygin (theorist) and Brown (experimentalist) published their work in the current issue of the Astronomical Journal: “Evidence For A Distant Giant Planet In the Solar System”. “Planet Nine” explains a number of mysterious features of the orbits of icy dwarf planets, objects and debris beyond Neptune known as the Kuiper Belt.

“Although we were initially quite skeptical that this planet could exist, as we continued to investigate its orbit and what it would mean for the outer solar system, we become increasingly convinced that it is out there,” says Batygin, an assistant professor of planetary science. “For the first time in over 150 years, there is solid evidence that the solar system’s planetary census is incomplete.”

The discovery was long anticipated: I mentioned myself many times that the weird orbits made sense only if there was a huge weird planet out there. Although a star dashing through the solar system could have brought the same effect, and there was indeed such a star!

https://patriceayme.wordpress.com/2015/03/02/stellar-flybys-new-way-to-lifes-extinction/

(A red dwarf star zoomed through the Solar System 70,000 years ago, at 20% of the distance to Proxima Centauri, the (red dwarf) star closest to the Sun.)

In 2014, an ex-postdoc of Brown’s, Chad Trujillo, and a colleague, Scott Shepherd, noted just that: 13 of the most distant objects in the Kuiper Belt are similar in some orbital features. To explain that similarity, they suggested the possible presence of a small planet.

The six most distant objects from Trujillo and Shepherd’s original collection all follow elliptical orbits that point in the same direction in physical space (with a thirty degree angle off the plane of the ecliptic, the plane of planets). That is particularly surprising because the outermost points of their orbits (“perihelions”) move around the solar system, and they travel at different speeds.

“It’s almost like having six hands on a clock all moving at different rates, and when you happen to look up, they’re all in exactly the same place,” says Brown. The odds of having that happen are something like 1 in 100, he says. But on top of that, the orbits of the six objects are also all tilted in the same way — pointing about 30 degrees downward in the same direction relative to the plane of the eight known planets. The probability of that happening is about 0.007 percent. “Basically it shouldn’t happen randomly,” Brown says. “So we thought something else must be shaping these orbits.”

The researchers tried different possibilities, quite a bit as Kepler did with Mars. Whereas Kepler, using Tycho’s work, took decades, modern computers compute fast. It soon became obvious that only a massive planet explained what was observed. In particular it explains the orbits of  Sedna and 2012 VP113 which never get very close to Neptune, yet behave as if they were “kicked” by something (as Pluto and others which, coming close to Neptune, are kicked by Neptune).

The Ninth Planet would also explain the weird orbits perpendicular to the ecliptic of some objects, which were recently discovered…

Science is not over. Actually, it’s barely starting. Ironically only telescopes based in Hawai’i have enough light gathering capability to detect the hypothetical Ninth Planet, if it is close to its furthest point from the Sun. It’s ironical: these telescopes are on one of two giant volcanoes in Hawai’i (the other, just as tall, explodes periodically). Those telescopes, the largest functioning telescopes in the world, ten meters across, profits from the fact they are, atmospherically speaking, half way to space.

The savages in Hawai’i, apparently gravely offended by all this science, persuaded the Hawaiian Supreme Court to order to stop the construction of a giant Thirty Meter Telescope (TMT) in Hawai’i. The TMT offends the Hawaiian gods. So Planet Nine now has a good chance to not be discovered in Hawai’i, and the savages there can keep on roasting people according to their old religion.

For those who forgot: the famous Captain Cook was captured, roasted and devoured in Hawai’i. (Hence the allusion to roasting, as this was not just culinary, but religious.) And the global mood, promoted by the powers that be is to respect all religions, especially if they are gravely offended by common sense and basic humanism. Or offended by free, unaccompanied German women in front of Cologne’s cathedral.

Hawaiians, I am afraid, learned nothing. In spite of their tragic history.

In the early Nineteenth Century, American missionaries came to Hawai’i and persuaded the authorities of that independent nation, to persecute Catholics.  That was promptly done, maybe in the hope of Hawaiian authorities to ingratiate themselves with American plutocracy. The French military intervened twice to force Hawaiian authorities to stop abusing Catholics (the first treaty was signed, but then violated, bringing the second French intervention, a decade later).

Ultimately American plutocrats and their Protestant missionaries acting as a fifth column, staged a coup against the legitimate Queen of Hawai’i. The Hawaiian Constitutional monarchy and its national assembly was then destroyed and annexed by the USA, to plant pineapple, sugar cane, and now tourists and pot. Fortunes were made. By American plutocrats. Hawai’i, for 15 centuries independent, and a civilization, not to say a culinary hot spot, became an other possession of the American empire.

One would think that Hawaiians would have learned that blind anger, irrationality and scorn for common sense only bring their doom. But apparently, not so. Instead of contributing to the Enlightenment, Hawai’i has decided to contribute to Obscurantism, in a frantic rage against astronomy, and the discovery of worlds untold.

You would think that Barack Obama, who was born in Honolulu, on the island of Oahu, Hawai’i, would have said something loud, along the preceding lines. Not so.

Abysmal. Astronomically abysmal.

Patrice Aymé

 

Christian Civilization Never Existed

Many fanatics, Christian or Muslim, insist that there was a “Christian Civilization”. Well, no. It’s not because people with vested interest repeat always the same thing, that it is decisively supported by the facts. It is not because some aspects of a civilization are of such and such a nature, that one particular aspect defines the whole thing. The philosophical, legal and behavioral foundations of the West were not “Christian”. Christianism was the fig leaf thrown, by the Roman plutocracy, over the apocalypse it preferred to the taxing continuance of civilization.

Although something called “Christianity” contributed to civilization considerably, the Christianism of bishop (Saint) Jerome, a “Founding Father of the Church“, in 400 CE Milan, was very different from the idiosyncratic Pagano-Christianism of Consul (and king of the Franks) Clovis in 500 CE (who re-invented Christianism thoroughly).

As so-called “Christmas” approaches, it’s good to remember that the Winter Solstice feast was Greco-Roman, and preceded the displacement of “Jesus” birth to the Winter Solstice, by more than a millennium.

“Christian” Hatred Of The Body Was Rejected By The Popes Themselves

[“What spirit is so empty and blind, that it cannot recognize the fact that the foot is more noble than the shoe, and skin more beautiful than the garment with which it is clothed?” Michelangelo.]

Christianism initially hated the body, in opposition to Greco-Roman civilization: love the body, and soon you will love the mind, and will want one of your own.

So Christianism closed and destroyed the baths (thus promoting devastating, civilization destroying, epidemics among the 99%) and longed for the Apocalypse (generously provided by the telling collaboration of Roman plutocrats and invading barbarians: the analogy with Islamism now is uncomfortable! Our plutocrats have been busy plotting with Islamists ever since before the Great Bitter Lake Conspiracy!)

Although some lunatics tried to force an authentic Christian civilization, it became, literally, a Non Sequitur: it’s now called the “Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire”. When one wishes for the Apocalypse as Christians and later Muslims, wished, it should be considered synonymous to the decline and fall of civilization, society, population, reading skills, security, economics, and all and any standards of sophistication.

See Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia, Pakistan, Sudan, Yemen… (And yes, Somalia, Sudan, and more specifically Yemen, can be compared to say, Ethiopia, which is doing incomparably better.)

What do I mean by the non-existence of “Christian Civilization”? Consider the tyrannical, self-obsessed, much adulated cretin, Louis XIV of France, the self-described, self-adoring “Sun-King” (a bloody dictator much celebrated in France this year, as he croaked 300 years ago, justly covered by gangrene, from his toes, to the top of his head. Louis’ painful and disgusting three weeks of gangrene is the only indication from his reign, which I can discern, that there may be, after all, a God).

Louis XIV tried to make France into a Catholic society, by revoking the Edict of Nantes of his excellent grandfather, Henri IV. That was more than weird: a century earlier, under Catherine of Medici, queen of France, a similar episode had been launched, the Massacre de la Saint-Barthélemy. Not only did that surprise assault in the middle of the night, killed immediately 30,000, and most of France’s intellectual elite (which could only condemn and despise Catholicism), but it launched no less than seven religious wars in 36 years, bleeding France, killing up to more than 20% of the population (so Syria has a way to go! By the way, those who wonder where the French hostility to Abraham’s god comes from, should study this).

I repeat: in less than 40 years, wars among Christians in France, killed more than 4 million people (and terrorized everybody).  Nor was it the first time: more tan a million Cathars, and all their works were annihilated by Christians around 1200 CE. And, in the Fifteenth Century, Protestants were hunted like wild beasts by Catholics (to the point Louis XI had to intervene, reminding all that killing people for religious reasons was against the law, and sending the army!)

How civilized is all that Christianism? When Rome was far removed from Christianism, no such massacre ever happened.

So here was that bloody imbecile, Louis the Blood King, trying the same trick all over again, all by himself (and his fanatical wife). It is still a great disease that such a creep is revered abjectly, by the French elite.

Thus Louis The Pervert threw out and abominably abused millions of Protestants. Many Protestants fled (that’s why there is winemaking in South Africa, and why so many Germans have French names). As protestants tended to be smarter, their flight made France much more idiotic, and thus more hospitable to Louis the Pervert and his vicious entourage of ill disguised monsters. Thus obnoxious critters make an environment hospitable to themselves

There is something in common between that so-called “Sun King” and the unfortunate fiction of Camus, Mr. Meursault, who kills an Arab, just because he can, and got too much sun, and could not care less. Louis XIV was the real life Meursault, and Camus channeling unconsciously that abomination of French history. Louis XIV killed the Protestants, just because he could, could not care less, and had too much sun.

Too bad Meursault and the Sun-King are still revered: it’s a sickness of the mood.

Christian propagandists always insisted that there was such a thing as “Christian Civilization”. But there was not.

The West was NOT A CHRISTIAN CIVILIZATION. It looked like one twice: around 400 CE, and around 1400 CE. But, in either case, although an attempt was made, the basic law was NOT Christian, but Roman (or the Salic law of the Franks, which was Roman written).

The attempt around 400 CE, a government of bishops, petered out right away. True Milan’s Saint Jerome, the most prominent “Founding Father of the Church”, had emperor Theodosius begging forgiveness (for some massacre). But then the Roman State, short in cash, put the Franks in charge of defending the North West “Limes” (frontier).

A century later, having established a huge “Imperium” (= Roman military command), the Franks sort of converted to Catholicism, modifying it extensively in the process, and submitting the Popes, for centuries to come.

The Franks re-established Roman (Late) Republican tolerance for ALL religions.

In other words, the empire of the Franks, the “Imperium Francorum” of 600 CE, was much more civilized than today’s Saudi Arabia. Arguably Arabia of 600 CE was more civilized than today’s Arabia, in the sense that Christianism, Judaism and the Cult of the Moon in Mecca, were all practiced without known religious massacre (the first religious holocaust was Muhammad’s personal annihilation of a Jewish tribe, a bit later; Muhammad is on the record as of the opinion that whoever insulted him should die, a tradition Muslims are keen, to this day, to carry forward, in the name of their Rophet; don’t ask me what a Rophet is).

The tolerance was extended to much more than Jews, Pagans (the Franks were de facto Christianized Pagans for centuries), Muslims, etc. By 800 CE, the “Renovated Roman Empire” led by Charlemagne, was at peace and the world’s richest

The “Final Solution” was Nazi (although I have accused many times Christianism to have inspired it). The “Manifest Destiny” was not particularly Christian (Founding Fathers and their preceding generation were very anti-Christian, and for “Nature’s God”). The Crusades were, mostly, a counter-attack (although I am very anti-crusades, that’s what they were in first order).

The annihilation of the Natives did not have to be a consequence from the Christian nature of the invaders. A very good example is the French, who never eradicated a population of Natives (and that’s why they lost America!)

“Secular ideologies” may have been by far the biggest mass killers…. Because they suppress everything else. In primitive societies the kill ratio is more like 50% (or at least 25%), whereas the two World Wars killed rather around 2% to 4% (at most, directly and indirectly, through famines and diseases they contributed to)

The preceding has to be kept in mind when inanities about Islam, and an “Islamist Civilization” are proffered, just because people are conditioned to mouth them, and believe it’s the truth, because everybody says it. It’s not because all the sheep bleat the same, that bleating is the truth.

This being said, because of the insistence of raw Islam to apply Islamist Law, instead of secular law, made “Islamist Civilization” much more of a reality. Islam wants to be everything, leaving no space for anything else. Islam wants to be all of society, and even to occupy visual space. Islam wants to be more than a civilization, it wants to be an obsession.

However, an inspection of history shows that all period of really shining civilization under “Islam” seemed to have involved see through dresses more than niqab, chador, and other attempts to make women into something that should be hidden.he vast body). Contributions by non-Muslims (Jews and Christian) tend to dominate (they were the majority for centuries).

Regimes which interpreted the Qur’an literally were highly successful, especially initially, thanks to ruthless surprise: initial conquest, from Spain to Central Asia, assaults of India, Indonesia, conquest of Anatolia by the just Islamized Turks, and a reconquest of Spanish Caliphate by savage, Fundamentalist Muslims from the desert. It ultimately backfired (except in the case of the Turks, arguably). For example the re-reconquest of Spain, made the “Reconquista” by the Catholics much more savage and thorough…

Many supposed “characteristics” of “Christianism” were established centuries before Christianism was imposed on the Greco-Roman world by emperors from Constantine to Theodosius, in the fateful Fourth Century. For example welfare and scholarship for worthy students was established by 100 CE (under emperor Trajan).

The Roman world kept on going, even, and especially after the Decline and Fall of the Roman imperial state. When Saint Louis, a Christian Fundamentalist and Jihadist (“Crusader”) of the Twelfth Century expressed, in writing his burning desire to “plant a knife in the belly of a Jew or Unbeliever” (“nothing would please me more”) he recognized he could not do it, because, well the (Salic and Roman) Law forbid him to do so.

Sharia Christian, or not never ruled the West very long (although, sometimes, it made sparks: see Bruno being burned alive). We are not going to start now.

Patrice Ayme’