Afrolantica’s Haunting Conclusion: ‘Let’s Get Back to the Struggle’
I concluded my previous post, “Strange Sex & Human Sacrifice in Bluebeard’s Castle,” with this series of questions:
But why does Bell need to express this through talk of human sacrifice, an enslaved wife, and a polygamous husband? Why does he again cast American blacks in the role of a woman doomed to a life of sex with a man she doesn’t love (recall the fifth Afrolantica Legacy)?
The flip side of his imagery of the degraded woman: why does he use Geneva Crenshaw, the idealized female version of himself, throughout his writings? How come the first Afrolantica Legacy presents a beautiful black alien goddess — Chiara, a “brown-skinned Joan of Arc” — coming down from heaven to give Bell his wisdom? How come in the second Afrolantica Legacy Bell made the hero a woman? Why does Bell repeat over and hover how “black women will ultimately save our people”? How come Bell surrounded his Critical Race Theory world with idols of strong females?
Antisemites don’t actually hate Jews. In fact it’s not even the Jewish people who are really their target. Antisemites hate what the Jews created, a cornerstone of Western civilization that now transcends Judaism: ethical monotheism. Antisemites hate the idea that there is only one true, invisible, faceless God and thus one Rule of Law and one standard of behavior for all. They would rather worship the idols they have created. For Bell, he worshiped a mother goddess — a symbol of nature and sex. His political theology reinvents the functions of the fertility cults of antiquity.
If one God doesn’t exist and every culture’s customs and gods are equally valid and should be tolerated — an idol today called “multiculturalism” — then why is child sacrifice wrong? Why is ritual prostitution — religiously-mandated rape and slavery — not permissible?
Yesterday I blogged at PJ Lifestyle about a 9-page letter written by screenwriter Joe Eszterhas in which he accuses actor Mel Gibson of antisemitism, conspiracy thinking, violent anger problems, and shocking sexual fantasies shared with a child. Here’s a very disturbing — but revealing — excerpt exposing a root pathology within the antisemitic mind:
This morning, the Today show interviewed Eszterhas and pressed him for proof of his allegations and wanted to know why he continued working with Gibson after this episode (which he mentioned in non-explicit terms on the show). He answered that there were other witnesses and that his son had shot a video of Gibson’s behavior. He also explained that this was the last straw and after this incident with his son he cut off contact with Gibson.
Thank you very mush for this great work.
And this is just perfect:
“The story of Sodom and Gomorrah wasn’t about sex. It was about idolatry. When secular critics relate the war stories from the Old Testament of the Jewish conquests of Canaan here’s what they don’t tell you: these other tribes the ancient Israelites went to war against practiced child sacrifice. That’s why they couldn’t be tolerated then and why we must win the war against them today.
Human sacrifice is the end result of any idolatry taken to its conclusion. Worship something other than a variant of the God of ethical monotheism and you’ll end up doing evil things. Worship nature, man-made images and ideas, people and politicians, Harvard professors, one’s own ego… and the result is that people become what they worship — they become death.”
Indeed.
I repeat my appreciation for the great work done in the analysis of the racist “Afrolantica” and my special appreciation for the two paragraphs that I have quoted in my comment: those paragraphs represent, from a theological and philosophical point of view, a perfect synthesis of the greatest difference between the Judeo/Christian civilization and the many cultures of death that bloom today.
Comments based on personal interpretations of the Scriptures and on “archeology” miss the theological and philosophical center of the discussion: idolatry can only end up for being the cult of one’s own ego and this inevitably leads to a culture of death.
Is this true or not ?
Do we live in a society in which babies are sacrificed to the man made idols or not ?
Does this society murder millions upon millions of babies or not ?
These questions cannot be avoided with empty blathering and “personal” interpretations.
Nihilism has indeed led to a culture of death.
The last two centuries of the human history have been marred by world wars, weapons of mass destruction, the greatest crime ever committed – the Holocaust – and the attempt to transform the society in a chaos.
The Scriptures had always warned that this would have happened if we had listened to ourselves instead of listening to the Law of the God Who Is Infinite Love.
Murdering babies by the millions is a FACT that cannot be “deconstructed”.
And the two paragraphs quoted above are a masterpiece of theology and philosophy.
Thank you very much for your encouragement and for getting it. (And that’s a good excerpt to make sure everybody passes over before commenting.)
I plan to have more analyses of various political cults in the coming weeks and hope you’ll comment.
Thank you for carrying on the heavy work of discussing this monstrous work of racist literature, and of discussing its (pseudo-) philosophical (but certainly lethal) roots.
I’ll be there to discuss further: this is a cultural revolution, it is our long march through nihilism and its inevitable consequences, and it is the only possible foundation for a lasting victory of Freedom against totalitarianism.
“Let’s get back to Peace” (Hebrew Shalom, Latin Pax, Sanskrit Shanti).
The ancient Jews routinely practiced human sacrifice, later replacing it with animal sacrifice. This is a common theme in the Old Testament. It’s why Abraham was willing to make a burnt sacrifice of his own son, as requested by the evil Yahweh, who later changed his mind, claiming he was just testing Abraham. But, note, that while the child was saved, an innocent animal was put in his place, and cruelly sacrificed. Jewish altars were ceremonially drenched in blood: a detail modern apologists gloss over or ignore.
Blood sacrifice is the basis of Christianity, with believers “washed in the blood of the Lamb [Jesus],” all deriving from primitive beliefs about blood and the notion that gods needed it for their own survival. The official Roman religion Christianity co-opted, Mithraism–whose leader, called Petros, ruled from Vatican Hill, and wore a headdress called a Miter or Mitre, after the god Mithra–also had its followers washed in blood, literally, from a slaughtered bull representing Mithra (who supposedly died, and resurrected on the third day, to take away their sins). It also celebrated Mithra’s divine sacrifice by celebrating a holy eucharist with bread and wine standing in for his body and blood.
The ancient Jews were not more advanced, culturally or morally, than their neighbors; they were the same or worse. The fictional story of the Passover and Exodus gives the game away. There was nothing particularly ethical about Jewish monotheism: a feel-good nonsense perpetuated by believers. Anybody reading the Old Testament objectively is immediately struck by its cruelty and violence in the name of Yahweh, who orders his followers to rape their neighbors’ wives and daughters; to slaughter, steal from, and torture their neighbors (including children. babies, and animals); to stone to death their own disobedient children, and who curses an entire species, humans, for the supposed crime of their make-believe ancestors Adam and Eve. No pagan god in history comes across worse than the murderous Yahweh, who destroys every living creature on the entire planet, save one family and a few animals, because he gets angry, and even after this, is constantly “hardening” people’s hearts against him just so he can have the pleasure of cursing and butchering them. In modern vernacular, he is a psychopath.
To pretend that the early Abrahamic religions (Judaism, Christianity, and Islam) were in any way superior to those around them (from which they stole virtually all of their beliefs, myths, and practices) is indefensible in this day and age. Archeology, anthropology, astrotheology, and history have long since discarded this romantic fiction, but, obviously, many people cling to it because they want to. Sherab Zangpo’s comments, above, exemplify this devotion to historical nonsense. The god of modern Judaism and non-fundamentalist Christianity is most certainly not Yahweh, even if called by the same name. It has been so transformed by time, it is different conception altogether.
Nonsense. From the beginning, God reviled blood sacrifice. See Cain and Abel. God accepted Abel the Farmer’s burnt offerings, but rejected Cain’s animal sacrifice.
Were some the Christian themes understandings of the day? Mayhap. How else are you going to explain things to an illiterate people? Jesus gave them the ceremony of the Eucharist. It offers a symbolic veneration, rather than actual blood sacrifice, and it certainly does not venerate an actual blood sacrifice. (Of course, fools who insist that actual transformation into real blood and flesh simply miss the metaphor.)
Certainly, if you want to find it all in a bad light, and if you want to connect it to the same bad practices of preceding religions, you certainly will get the results you desire. However in your desire to find sameness, you miss the vast differences, differences which create vastly different results.
All those blood sacrifice cultures have been swept aside by Christianity. The ancient gods of the West of olden times are no more, crushed by Christianity. The Dark Ages were a period of Enlightenment, the liberation from cruel primitive beliefs. And so, the West rose to dominance over the whole world. (As we lose this faith, however, we also lose our dominance.)
The only reason Islam gained its original foothold, was by lying and claiming to be an Ibrahimic faith like Judaism and Christianity. ‘Twas foulest blasphemy. And it is a claim long since abrogated by Islamic “scholars”. it was merely a way for the old faiths of sacrifice to be reborn. The vile Moon god of Ur and the Morning Star. The Moon and Star. Islam, the Adversary. Jihad, the blood sacrifice to Him. The Devil howls His glee.
In short, ‘similar’ and ‘same’ are similar, not the same. Only fools can believe otherwise.
While “Florida” is certainly confused about many things, I think you need to check your Bible again:
4:3 An era ended. Cain brought some of his crops as an offering to G-d.
4:4 Abel also offered some of the firstborn of his flock, from the fattest ones. G-d paid heed to Abel and his offering,
4:5 but to Cain and his offering, He paid no heed. Cain became very furious and depressed.
Cain was the farmer whose offerings were rejected, while Abel was the herdsman whose blood sacrifice of baby animals was accepted.
It’s not just Cain+Abel: there are plenty of detailed, repetitive descriptions of animal sacrifice in the Torah, which apparently Marc Malone and David Swindle have not read.
Having said that, it seems to me that Florida grew up in feral ignorance, and as a consequence was easily misled by antisemitic propaganda.
“Anybody reading the Old Testament objectively is immediately struck by its cruelty and violence in the name of Yahweh, who orders his followers to rape their neighbors’ wives and daughters; to slaughter, steal from, and torture their neighbors (including children. babies, and animals); to stone to death their own disobedient children, and who curses an entire species, humans, for the supposed crime of their make-believe ancestors Adam and Eve.”
I’ll correct one of your antisemitic lies so everyone knows not to take you seriously. Actually the Old Testament law states that parents CANNOT stone to death their own disobedient children. Judaism created a system of laws requiring that “disobedient children” (which isn’t 6-year-olds that won’t listen to their parents but rather grown children) be dealt with by the community. Parents cannot murder their own children. They have to submit them to others to be judged and for justice to be administered.
(And I say antisemitic because one of the ways we see antisemitism is when people hold Jews to a different standard than others.)
Here’s a question for “Florida” to answer: if there isn’t a God then why is child sacrifice wrong? If we’re all just space dust, and when we’re dead we’re dead, then why not engage in child sacrifice or any other “evil” act?
And BTW, I deleted the spam you left promoting your book. Please see the comment guidelines above before commenting further.
Interesting; so the author Dave Swindle gets to moderate and edit comments about his own article? Is this something unique to PJMedia? Talk about conflicted interests, and the ability to skew results.
The people responding defensively to my comments clearly have not read the bible, but only select portions of it, doubtlessly “guided” by some preacher or rabbi. It includes dozens of incidents of human slaughter ordered by Yahweh, and scores of battles, genocides, and worse. Parents ARE told to stone disobedient children to death. Human sacrifice is advocated, later replaced with animal sacrifice (it’s all the same to the victims). Google Yahweh & human sacrifice, Yahweh & animal sacrifice, Yahweh and anything else you want. If the David Swindle wants, I’ll furnish chapter and verse, but since he controls the thread, what’s the point? He can edit anything to suit himself.
I never said there isn’t a god; David Swindle INTERPRETED my comments in this way, as Yahweh believers tend to do, because they think anything that isn’t Yahweh can’t be God. But, the concept of a single god from which everything derives predates Yahweh by thousands of years. The Jews copied the idea; they didn’t originate it. The ancient Egyptians had a Prime Mover; so did the Bons, Taoists and Hindus. So did the Greeks, Romans, and even the Druids of Gaul and Britain. The difference is, their original God was all-inclusive, not exclusive, vain, petulant, and vindictive.
Harming innocent life forms isn’t wrong because Yahweh said so (he kills them right and left, and orders his follower to do so, too), but because it’s inherently wrong. Do Atheists kill and eat their children?
The Dark Ages were not ages of enlightenment, as bizarrely claimed by Marc Malone; only a Christian who believes up is down and right is left, and all the other language contradictions promoted by evangelists (“God is Love, and if you don’t bow down to Him and accept Jesus, He’ll throw you in burning hell forever”) could say such a stupid thing. They were the called the Dark Ages for a reason.
I Googled “Florida is an idiot”. I got 20,700,000 results.
“I never said there isn’t a god; David Swindle INTERPRETED my comments in this way, as Yahweh believers tend to do, because they think anything that isn’t Yahweh can’t be God.”
I am not a “Yahweh believer” and the term never appears in my article. (And I’m not a Jew or a Christian, btw.) There are certainly ethical monotheists outside of the Judeo-Christian tradition. They just weren’t the ones who built Western Civilization.
“Harming innocent life forms isn’t wrong because Yahweh said so (he kills them right and left, and orders his follower to do so, too), but because it’s inherently wrong. Do Atheists kill and eat their children?”
Did you read any of the other posts in this series analyzing this book by the racist, Marxist, antisemite Derrick Bell? He spends the book defending the equivalent of killing and eating children when he lionizes the Stalinist singer Paul Robeson.
Very telling when I write articles about genocidal antisemitism and the thing that comments are most eager to do is attack the Jews.
BTW David Swindle, that isn’t MY book I was promoting; just a book covering the stuff I was writing about. I have nothing to do with it or its author or its publisher. How convenient for you to delete the link so True Believers won’t have their blind faith challenged, or challenge your own claims. Lying by omission is still lying. You called my truthful, historically factual comments antisemitic lies (making your a bearer of false witness), and then turned around a lied yourself by (1) accusing me of linking to a book I wrote, and (2) by deleting the link to cover your own ass. After all, the book in question completely debunks much of your thesis.
“Nonsense” is a good way to describe this comment.
For example, crediting the story of Abraham in Genesis as an accurate account and then dismissing Exodus as the “fictional story of the Passover and Exodus “.
Abraham, in all likelihood, made up the story about the angel who stopped him from sacrificing Isaac. There were no witnesses. By doing so, he invented a religion that did away with child sacrifice.
http://www.jochnowitz.net/Essays/Abraham.html
– merely shown a Roman coin or did he touch the unclean thing? Why did he call the unclean tax collector Matthew?
Notice how quickly the focus gets of Øbama and Bell.
Bell was a hater/freak and Øbama was his young apprentice. This doesn’t bother lefties at all but it SHOULD greatly disturb every American.
I don’t see Bell or Obama as unwittingly theological pedants or pagans but as simply childish idiots. Bell’s writing’s display classic symptom’s of a third-class mind – one that is incapable of self-awareness or employing tools of context, proportion, originality or self-criticism – it is the philosophy of a child.
To me it is the result of black American’s almost overwhelming sharing closely held views, the kind you’d normally find in a tightly knit gang or age-group that shares certain beliefs or cliques.
Look at the video of the man knocked down and robbed in Baltimore – not only does it display shared behaviors black American’s accused white Americans of during the Zimmerman dust up, there is also no awareness that the black community sees this very predatory racialist trait in themselves; it’s like steel accusing jelly of being hard.
In that video, people who presumably don’t know each other, almost instantly not only devolved into criminal behavior, but one with a shared understanding, and in a public space. This might be something you’d see among white kids in a mosh pit at a giant concert or some trailer community, it’s not an agreed on behavior by white folks you’d see in a street at St. Patrick’s Day downtown in a major city. I’m trying to imagine a Fourth of July crowd of all whites where a guy knocks down a lone black guy and everyone descends on him like vultures, and instantly.
And there is this benediction by Joseph Lowery at Obama’s inauguration:
“Lord, in the memory of all the saints who from their labors rest, and in the joy of a new beginning, we ask you to help us work for that day when black will not be asked to get in back, when brown can stick around… when the red man can get ahead, man; and when white will embrace what is right. That all those who do justice and love mercy say Amen. Say Amen”
Really, for a culture so obsessed with racism, how much of a Greek philosopher do you have to be to replace the word white with black and get a clue? That’s not only just plain stupidity, it verges on delusional.
How can a culture cry and celebrate the election of America’s first black President and then revert to 1934 while the guy’s actually being sworn in?
It’s clear that in matters of race, the American black community up and down the line has no interest in justice in terms of the greater good, but only in themselves and what’s good for themselves. The entire philosophy, if you can even call it that, of the black community is in coming up with arguments that go increasingly far afield as Jim Crow recedes to find new and bizarre reasons it’s still 1934, like ‘white privilege’ and the ‘New Jim Crow.’ This serves to not only allow black Americans to not point the finger at their own depraved and monumentally shared value system and racialism but to never let white folks off the hook.
But this hook again is full of self-contradictory illusions whereby white people are responsible for things a few white folks did 200 years ago but reverse that finger and say black folks are the victims of their own shared criminal behaviors out of all proportion to their demographic and they go nuts with hoodie marches over profiling without even a trace of irony or proof other than anecdotes about taxi drivers who won’t pick them up and the police as assassination squads – the black community sees themselves part unlucky rocket scientists and part innocent boy scouts. Bell and the black Americans who so staunchly defend him are so deep in a perceptual trap they’re generations away from even a chance at getting out of their own obsessions with race and racial myths about others they are the sole proprietors of in mainstream American life. We’re talking about a culture so steeped in nonsense they can’t imagine the rest of the world not sharing that nonsense.
Gibson is a not-so-bright, uneducated guy with – as he says – a manic-depressive problem. That’s a big problem. I remember watching the first Lethal Weapon film he made (good movie) and the suicide scene in the beach trailer where he wants to kill himself because of his late (movie) wife Kelly Ann (?). I have a distinct recollection of thinking – ‘this actor is just a bit too authentic in this scene.’
I agree with the author that part of this is indeed a ‘hatred of G-d’ or of the presence and message of monotheism. While ‘Florida’ above makes some reasonable points, he also completely misses the positive imprint and values that Biblical Judaism brought to the world via those commandments. They’re still relevant. That some Kings, warriors, etc. violated certain commandments flagrantly (as Prime Ministers, Kings and so on do today) does not change the fact that Judaism and ‘the Judeao-Christian’ ethic eventually helped civilize the world.
That many Rage Kings hate this ethic is clear if you look at Hitler’s statements and speeches. In other words, Judaism and Christianity bore ‘soft’ humanizing messages along with the strict rules that G-d-replacers and self-appointed messiahs like Adolph Hitler absolutely hate – and for a reason.
As for the ‘cruel’ killing of animals, yes, killing animals is cruel. So everyone today who is not a vegetarian is also a murderer, etc.
Gibson needs to be shunned. He will eventually do himself in, or, perhaps, find some relief. In the meantime, we have to put up with his Holocaust-denying garbage a while longer.
Why is the killing of animals cruel? Carnivores from robins to wolves to human beings eat other animals. Most of the meat we human beings eat comes from animals raised for the purpose – cattle, sheep, pigs, goats, chickens, turkeys – who would not be alive except that they have been raised for meat. Domesticated meat cattle live far better lives and have more offspring than their wild relatives (if there are any), as do the other domesticated meat animals. All animals die – what is important is how they live.
On the theory that killing is cruel. Really, I was just trying to deflect Florida’s comments which seemed a little self-righteously enlightened. That’s all I was trying to do.
“While ‘Florida’ above makes some reasonable points, he also completely misses the positive imprint and values that Biblical Judaism brought to the world via those commandments.”
How about naming some. Many of the pagan religions attacked by Yahweh’s followers were far more enlightened and benign than Judaism or Christianity or Islam, all three of which attack each other endlessly in their quest to bring about the supposed End Times and usher in an imaginary age of bliss for a select few.
I did not claim the story of Abraham was true, as alleged by MarcH above. All the stories are false, but people who believe in them have caused infinite misery.
A misery index that pails in comparison to the record of the followers of Marx, and his enlightened “opiate of the asses”, kumbaya manifesto. Even the bloodthirsty worshipers of Allah are humbled by the blood lust of the Marxist.
The labels people use in these convesations is always perplexing, and amusing, to me.
Abraham was not a Jew. It is very clearly stated in the Old Testament that he was from Ur of the Chaldees (later babylonia? Im no scholar). So technically, it is true that the main belief systems and practices of what was later called Judaism originated with earlier existing peoples (mabey some of the first people, gosh imagine that
‘Jews’ did not exist until the establishment of………wait for it….JUDEA! Get it? Jews come from Jew-dea? Even the Old Testament doesnt use the word ‘Jew’ until the book of second Kings (#12), well after the Exodus. Anyone who tries to make the arguement that the religion of YHWH originated from earlier pagan religions makes the secular presumption that YHWH never existed, and that the earliest documented historical traditions must, in fact, be the earliest. The problem is in presenting that presumption as empirical science, which, sadly for you, cannot be done. Trying to prove what is beyond the realm of historic documented human observation is called philosophy (see Carl Sagan, Big Bang)
The term, Jew, comes from Judah, who was the fourth son of Jacob. It was from his line(or tribe) that produced King David and King Solomon, and Jesus, the Messiah. After Solomon’s death, there were the divided kingdoms of Israel and Judah. Israel fell to the Babylonians and the ten tribes of Israel were wiped out.
Abraham came from the line of Noah’s son, Shem (hence the term, “Semite”). From Shem came Eber, from whom we get the term “Hebrew”, and from Eber’s line came Terah, who was the father of Abraham.
I should have put my post in better chronicological order, but to clarify: Abraham lived around 2100 B.C. The establishment of Israel, after the exodus from Egypt was around 1400 B.C.; the divided kingdoms happened around 900 B.C.; the fall of Jerusalem happened around 570 B.C.
It is correct to say that Abraham was not a Jew, in the sense that it would not be correct to call a pre-Revolutionary War colonialist an American. However, they are our forefathers and it is from them we get our biblical values.
The difference is, secular(humanist) historians assume that the religion of YHWH did not exist prior to the earliest written records, while Judeo/Christian/Monotheistic et al believers ‘know’ that it did. If in fact the entire planet was populated originally from the offspring of ‘Adam & Eve’, and if, as it says in Genesis, Cain was sent away as a rebel (or pagan
) to start his own city, and raise his own families who naturally looked to him for guidance and leadership, since ‘God’ did not favor them (like adams family, or seths), then you would have a plausible explanation as to how the two opposing systems could develop over a thousand years or more, side by side, as it were. And that, dear friends, is exactly how it happened, very generally of course. Im off topic so ill let other posters commence to posting. (Just bugs me when i hear abraham called a Jew)