Tuesday, April 26, 2011

Divers Middle Eastern Video Clips: Paschal Edition

First, this is how certain Syrian Christians celebrate the Resurrection:



This impressive explosion of joy took place in Latakia, اللاذقية, on the coast of Syria (the same region the ruling Alawite Assad family is from, incidentally).


This next clip is from Israeli late night television:

(be forewarned, this bit's pretty offensive)




Lastly, I share this clip of my favorite apparition and stigmatist, Myrna Nazour, from Soufanieh, near Damascus:

(this, the first installment in a 30 something part series, will give you the basic gist of the story)



Myrna of course (of course!) receives the stigmata every year at Easter.


When I was at DLI, one of my teachers, an Orthodox Christian woman from Basra, Iraq, gave me a copy of the icon of Our Lady of Soufanieh, which as that clip notes in the original bleeds oil. The events surrounding this icon and Myrna are known as the "Miracle of Damascus." It's an ecumenical phenomenon.. Myrna is Catholic but her husband is Orthodox, and my impression is that the apparition is hugely popular throughout the Arab world, amongst both Orthodox and Catholics.

The image:


One of my favorite icons, incidentally.

In any case, Our Lady of Soufanieh and Myrna both preach unity amongst the Catholic and Orthodox, and peace with the Muslims. One of main the reasons I dig it.


Anyway, just to let you all know, Syria ain't Kansas. Just a late newsflash from Damascus..



---

Monday, April 25, 2011

Film Review: Source Code

Review: Source Code. Liked it. Thumbs up, B+. 4 Stars out of 5.




This is like the Matrix crossed with the Bourne movies, but better, in that the "matrixy" aspect of this film doesn't suck, and is actually almost coherent and mildly intriguing, as opposed to merely unspooling into puerile stupidity like the Matrix trilogy does.

(I saw only one and a half of those three films, by the way. Mildly enjoyed the first one, but then fell asleep in the theater during the second, an honor I think is only shared by that Vanilla Ice film that came out back in 1991 - I saw it in Izmir, and fell asleep after 15 minutes.. )

The basic plot of the film is this: they've developed technology called the "source code" that allows us to project the mind of someone with similar biological parameters back upon "the halo" left in time of that person's consciousness for eight minutes before their death.

Or something like that.

If you accept this conceit, and are able to suspend disbelief that much, the rest of film is pretty straight forward.

Jake Gyllenhaal's character is sent back to inhabit the mind of a man on a train about to be destroyed by a terrorist bombing. In the beginning he doesn't understand what is happening to him, and is repeatedly blown up, each time to again be re-sent into that same eight minute time frame to investigate and discover who left the bomb, and what his plans for future mayhem are.. He's a detective feeding information to his handlers who control the "source code" and who interrogate him at the end of each of his subsequent missions into the code.

Like Jason Bourne, he's an almost clean slate within the immediate narrative arc. He knows his name, remembers that he's a captain in the Army who last he can remember was in Afghanistan flying helicopters.. He has no idea how he ended up in the situation he's in, getting sent back repeatedly onto this train.

Each time he gets set into the source code, he is in the same moment, but is able to use knowledge acquired in previous sorties to delve deeper into the situation, and further understand what is happening. He not only figures out what is happening on the train, but also starts to piece together the larger context, and understand things about himself he didn't know before.

Storytelling 101. Nicely done.

Jake's character's mind is able to retain memories of his previous experiences in the "source code" and in this the narrative emerges.

There's a nice twist at the end of the movie that I did not expect, that knocks it all up a level and makes the entire plot even a little more interesting.


In sum, this film, like the Matrix, is a gnostic fantasy, in which the material world is reduced to a numerical "matrix," the "source code." In this the mind is more real than matter, and in fact the mind eventually escapes matter altogether, becoming an angelic intelligence. The self is also reduced to consciousness, to thought and memory, and is in a perfect Cartesian fashion ontologically and existentially alienated from the body, which is finally understood to be a passing illusion like all other matter.

The real is knowledge and numbers. The "code" or "program." The material is a passing and imperfect illusion to be manipulated by the mind through accumulated knowledge and understanding.

The fact that each time he reenters the source code he has only eight minutes of halo to work with before the source code resets, is of course a numerological trope.

The shape of the number 8 is itself the infinity sign. The snake eating itself, time folding back in itself. The Resurrection of Christ occurs on the first day of the week, which is to say the day after the end of the beginning, the renewal after death.. The seventh day consummates time in rest, which is death, but is recapitulated in the the first of the new week which is also eighth day. There were also eight people on Noah's Ark, when God "reset" creation. I think there is much more esoteric meaning to that number, but can't be bothered to delve into that now.

If you stop the film at the beginning of the preview clip I post here above on the part around the 20 second mark where his watch is shown, you'll notice that he "comes to" at 8:40 am. Forty is 8 times 5. 5 is death. Friday (the day of the Crucifixion) is the Christian fifth or Jewish sixth day. Christ bore five wounds (each hand, each foot, the spear in his side. My blog thematically commemorates his head being left alone, and only crowned with thorns..)


His release comes at 8:48 am. 8 6 times 8.


It also occurs to me that Jake's character's name "Captain Stevens" which may possibly be a reference to the proto-martyr St. Stephen, the first Christian martyr whose feast is the day after Christmas. The man whose body he inhabits is named Sean, which is a Gaelic corruption of the French Jean or English John, which comes from the Hebrew "God is Gracious," and is of course the name of the "Forerunner" John the Baptist who baptizes with water (symbolizing death and rebirth) as well as John the Apostle, the only apostle who did not run away during the Crucifixion, but who stayed at the foot of the Cross. The Apostle John is also the only one of the apostles to die a natural death, the only one not to be finally martyred..

Furthermore, the girl Captain Stevens wants to "save" is named "Christina.."

(Christina being played by the very foxy Michelle Monaghan.. Note also that Vera Farmiga, playing the air force officer running the source code computer is also beautiful as always..)

The bomb is a release in fire, pentecostal (by 10 by 5) or something like that..


All of these details may take on a certain symbolic resonance after you've seen the film.


I'm a neophyte at all of this, fill in the punchlines for me, please.


My point is that the filmmaker's clearly a clever fellow, and I appreciate that.



So, the entire film is mildly entertaining, as well as another testament to our cultural fascination with computers and faith in progress.


Worth seeing, in other words.



---

Sunday, April 24, 2011

By the Way..

Human desire is consummated and both at once parodied in itself.


Sin and love are both sublime sacred jokes.


Just an odd notation.



Blessed Pascha.



---

Resurrexit vere! Χριστός ἀνέστη! Ἀληθῶς ἀνέστη!

Yesterday (Good Friday) I went to McDonald's and ate four filet o'fishes and three one buck side salads with balsamic vinaigrette for my one Good Friday meal. Sat there for a few hours and drank lot's o' iced tea (I gave up all hot n' heinous "soft drinks" for penance's sake, and only broke that abstention once in 40 days..)

Today, I got up late and went to McDonald's again, and ate chicken salad with bacon, another side salad, a McChicken sandwich (also off the dollar menu!) and then a couple hours later got a large wildberry yogurt smoothie. I sat there for maybe six hours all told, drinking more unsweetened iced tea dashed with slight amounts of lemonade, and reading.

Ave Sancta Claudia Procula, uxor Pilati, ora pro nobis..


A rousing finale to my Lent.

But not exactly in keeping with the Athonite fast.


But I'm a broken lapsed Orthodox, now. Just a poor Catholic.


On the way home I stopped and bought a gallon of rich red table wine, came home and did some work on my new will. I'm writing it on my own, following a model and reading Vermont inheritance law as I do it. I'm specifying that they not cremate my remains, and that they pay all my taxes before charity or my nieces and nephew get a thing. I'm adamant about that. Pay my taxes dammit. Also, make sure that Comcast and AT&T get theirs, too.

You know, the only black mark on my credit report is when I broke my cell phone contract with AT&T before leaving for Europe a few years ago, and then flipped them the bird. I owe just under 300 bucks, I think. If I want an iPhone in purgatory, I may need to pay them.

(I may need ask Tommy forgive me too.. But not for the sake of my cell phone..)


Just over an hour ago I broke the seal on that bottle, and my lips touched wine for the second time in over two months.

I've not kept the fast fully nor prayed well, and I am a guilty man..

Yet tonight I keep the vigil.


I'm thinking of how much fun it would be to be at a good Orthodox parish tonight.

Fifty days of strict fasting, nuts and water on Holy Saturday, then a two hour long vigil liturgy begun late in the evening..

Cyclical chants for well over an hour, standing the entire time (feel how the spirit is willing..) dim candle lit incense ridden anticipation..


Light breaks darkness some point after midnight.


After the mystery is made consummate, Father comes into the church hall, where there is a cornucopia laden table overflowing with food and drink like something out of Paschal Slavic version of Dickens.

He blesses it all and us..


Then all heaven breaks loose. It's two in the morning, and everyone's feasting like it's the millennium: here there are ten year old kids and grandmothers gladly all about. My home brew is uncapped and praised like it's bordeaux. Old guys with barely understandable accents circulate with homemade vodka, filling my dixie cup to overflowing.


Every time I keep a long (Lenten or Advent) fast and then make the requisite vigil with the Orthodox, I somehow serendipitously find myself up bathed in a suffused breaking dawn..

One always shared with some few happy exhausted winsome friends still ready for breakfast, followed by a very long nap and yet *maybe* another liturgy..

(See how vapid and hedonistic my approach to my beloved.. Exi a me quia homo peccator sum Domine..)


Here I in all my tepidity and decadence nevertheless dare pray:

Κύριε Ιησού Χριστέ, Υιέ του Θεού, ελέησόν με τον αμαρτωλόν..


Bless us all, and keep us, may your your Face always shine upon us and be with us, forgive us all everyone of our sins.

That you my Lord Jesus Christ, our Savior, may grant us all Triumph and Victory over the temptations of our visible and invisible enemies.

That by your Grace we may all crush beneath our feet the prince of darkness and his powers.

That we may all rise with you and so rise from the tomb of our sins and offenses.

That you may fill us all with joy and happiness in your Holy Resurrection.

That we may all merit the Grace of entering into your Chamber at your Divine Wedding Feast, to rejoice beyond limit together with your Heavenly Attendants and the Host of Saints glorified through you, the Church Triumphant in Heaven.


Amen. Alleluia, Alleluia.



+++

Essential Texts: Saint John Chrysostom, Paschal Homily (c. 400)

This homily is read in every Orthodox parish throughout the world this night:

If anyone is devout and a lover of God, let him enjoy this beautiful and radiant festival.

If anyone is a wise servant, let him, rejoicing, enter into the joy of his Lord.

If anyone has wearied himself in fasting, let him now receive his recompense.

If anyone has labored from the first hour, let him today receive his just reward. If anyone has come at the third hour, with thanksgiving let him keep the feast. If anyone has arrived at the sixth hour, let him have no misgivings; for he shall suffer no loss. If anyone has delayed until the ninth hour, let him draw near without hesitation. If anyone has arrived even at the eleventh hour, let him not fear on account of his delay. For the Master is gracious and receives the last, even as the first; he gives rest to him that comes at the eleventh hour, just as to him who has labored from the first. He has mercy upon the last and cares for the first; to the one he gives, and to the other he is gracious. He both honors the work and praises the intention.

Enter all of you, therefore, into the joy of our Lord, and, whether first or last, receive your reward. O rich and poor, one with another, dance for joy! O you ascetics and you negligent, celebrate the day! You that have fasted and you that have disregarded the fast, rejoice today! The table is rich-laden; feast royally, all of you! The calf is fatted; let no one go forth hungry!

Let all partake of the feast of faith. Let all receive the riches of goodness.

Let no one lament his poverty, for the universal kingdom has been revealed.

Let no one mourn his transgressions, for pardon has dawned from the grave.

Let no one fear death, for the Saviour's death has set us free.

He that was taken by death has annihilated it! He descended into hades and took hades captive! He embittered it when it tasted his flesh! And anticipating this Isaiah exclaimed, "Hades was embittered when it encountered thee in the lower regions." It was embittered, for it was abolished! It was embittered, for it was mocked! It was embittered, for it was purged! It was embittered, for it was despoiled! It was embittered, for it was bound in chains!

It took a body and, face to face, met God! It took earth and encountered heaven! It took what it saw but crumbled before what it had not seen!

"O death, where is thy sting? O hades, where is thy victory?"

Christ is risen, and you are overthrown!

Christ is risen, and the demons are fallen!

Christ is risen, and the angels rejoice!

Christ is risen, and life reigns!

Christ is risen, and not one dead remains in a tomb!

For Christ, being raised from the dead, has become the First-fruits of them that slept.


To him be glory and might unto ages of ages. Amen.




+++

Thursday, April 21, 2011

Ma Chere Douce Kate: Difficile, Laisse-moi Tranquille.




Lyrics:

They say a girl like me should wed,
And take a man to lay in my bed.
But I would like to stay young and free,
And oh, I wish they would let me be.
Oh, I wish they would let me be..
Let me be.

Robin the miller he's fond of brass,
He sees a fool's face when he looks in glass,
Thinks he'll bargain like grain for me.
But oh, I wish he would let me be,
Oh, I wish he would let me be.
Robin, let me be.

There came a man named Bonnie Jim,
He looks so fine in his holiday trim.
Thinks he'll take me off to the sea,
But oh, I wish he would let me be.
Oh, I wish he would let me be.
Jim, let me be,
Jim, let me be.

La la la la la la la la la.
La la la la la la la la la..

Cousin Dick he has gold and land,
He thinks all this will win my hand.
My hand or lips he will never see,
But oh, I wish he would let me be.
Oh, I wish he would let me be.
Dick, let me be.

This young soldier boy is Ned,
His gun's like his own, he can shoot me dead.
His eyes are blue, but they don't see me.
Oh, why does he let me be?
Oh, why does he let me be?
Let me be,
Why do you let me be?

La la la la la la la la la.
La la la la la la la la la..

(Thanks to Sophie for these lyrics)



---

Tuesday, April 19, 2011

Freedom, Vermont & Unity: Bernie Rulz!!

Another economics/political post, it's a Lenten Tuesday:


I love my new home and senator. Stick it to them nasty Anti-Federalist corporatist libertarian trogs, Bernie!! I love you, man.


[That graphic came from here, where you can read it in a larger version.]



---

Matt Taibbi & Eliot Spitzer: Put the Bastards in Jail, Now.

This is straight up:



I say this in all seriousness: if and when things get worse, the archons in charge of our kleptocracy will pay for having broken the social contract so viciously and shamelessly. Six months in a maximum security prison (Taibbi's prescription here) will be in that context a light sentence.



---

Sunday, April 17, 2011

A comment of my so called creative process..

My last project (and only other adventure in blogging) I conceived as a series of postcards of my life abroad in Switzerland, but that got complicated by the fact that I was sharing it with friends and family each of whom constitutes individually a different audience in my mind.

Because I was living in a monastic community, I was automatically talking about religion with people whom I normally don't share that with in our friendships. I also kept spurting about all sorts of things I normally keep locked up in most contexts..

Like everyone, each of my friends shares different parts of my life, I have a different voice, am a different person to each of them, really. Writing for everyone - and then random strangers, too, who began reading it - hundreds of them - was a bit wrenching.

I also ran naively into privacy issues, when the Swiss and French schooled me on cultural differences regarding privacy.. Many of them when they found out I was putting stuff online told me to keep them out of it.

So I felt inhibited, and sometimes a bit paranoid. I posted off the cuff, and then wondered if I exposed too much or annoyed anyone by inflicting my crap on them, or else exposed my friends in ways they would resent.

Whenever I posted stuff of an "existential" nature, especially when I did it in a raw and rambling fashion, I felt some angst.

It felt self indulgent.. But I wanted to do it.. I liked it.. But wanted to do it without annoying my friends. So I canned the old blog, and started this one, meant to be much more focused and disciplined. I wanted to get things into writing that I'd been thinking about and struggling over, whether anyone read it or not.

The potential audience would be a foil for me getting the work done. And I would do it in a more concise manner.


This blog is the result.


The thing is, I'm still rent with a bit of angst. I don't know where to begin, there's so much, and when I do write I've been doing it in a haphazard and jerky fashion.


Posts here have generally been written in less than an hour, most often in under 20 or 30 minutes. I write something, post it.. And then re-read it and immediately see a dozen errors or things I should of added, and so do a 5 minute re-write and re-post. An hour later, I come back, notice more errors, fix them and re-post it again.

Very disciplined process, and perfectly suited to annoy anyone rss'ing this.


I've started writing a dozen different essays, though, and have notes (both dictated and written, as well as an accumulated archive of source materials & media to post) for many more. I need to start writing with discipline, here.


Take for example the last post: there are multiple typos in it, and at least one major factual error (Mosul is in northern Iraq - I was also thinking of Basra when I wrote that line on Iraqi cities, and the word "southern" just slipped in there..)


I leave them as they are, a testament to my editorial competence and my talent comme un ecrivan.


I'll try to keep this project coherent and not too absurd or sententious. I'll try to develop certain themes and lines of logic between my posts, to quilt them in a way that makes sense.


Even though my aim isn't to attract a lot of intention, I do want to be readable and interesting to anyone who does compliment me by following this.


Comments and criticism, always gratefully & sincerely accepted.


I'm posting this without a proofread as a Lenten mortification for you my dear audience. I have your spiritual well being in mind.

After Lent, I will proof read in earnest, I promise. I have to get back to my self flagellation now, though.

(I fibbed, I can't help myself. One slapdash revision. There.)


Cheers.



---

The Divine Comedy: the Gospel as Parody

Today is Palm Sunday. This is one of those blessed and relatively rare years in which the Eastern (Orthodox) and Western (Catholic) calendars are in harmony. We celebrate Holy Week and Pascha together this year. As the Universal Church always should.

During Lent I've been going almost daily to mass, and reading the psalter.


One of the things that keeps on striking me lately, is how funny the Bible is.



He rides in on an ass. He's making fun of us, of our pretensions.


When the French took Damascus from the Turks in 1920, the commanding General Henri Gouraud rode his charger into the tomb of Saladin in the great Ummayad Mosque, dismounted and planted his boot on the "Sword of Religion's" (that's what Salah al-Din literally means in Arabic) grave and declared, "Réveilles-toi Saladin, nous sommes revenus. Ma présence ici consacre la victoire de la croix sur le croissant!"

Get up Saladin, we've returned. My presence here consecrates the victory of the cross over the crescent!

That's how we like to do it. Charge in on a warhorse, all glory, then crush the enemy's head and spit on his grave. Then consecrate it all in pride and vanity.


We like to put boots up asses, see. That's definitely the American way.

(I love how this video of Toby Keith's immortal poetical expression of that sentiment begins with the image of a puppy wrapped in a flag.. Irony is dead.)


But God rides in barefoot, on an ass. And then goes to the religious and political authorities and allows them to slaughter him. He takes the boot upon himself.


The Gospel - in fact the entire bible - is rife with such inversions as God coming in glory on a donkey.


He's always making the most unexpected entrances, and turning our expectations upside down.


He shows up as a baby, is worshiped by donkeys and gets put in a box for feeding grain to asses (called in English a manger, from the French "to eat.." Taste and see..)

(there's great iconography of the animals in the stable worshiping him..)

Then he goes up on a hillside by the sea of Galilee, and preaches the "Sermon on the Mount," which is where he parodies Moses, and reveals himself to be God. See the sidebar, I've posted the Beatitudes he taught there. These are the Christian answer to the Ten Commandments.


I think they're really funny. Blessed are the poor? Says who?

Jesus, that's who.


And he sat down to teach them. He did not stand in the presence of the Lord as a rabbi does proclaiming scripture in the synagogue, or Moses did coming off the mountain with the written word. He went up and sat.


I've been to the "Mount," it's actually a great grassy hillside right next to Lake Tiberius (also called the Sea of Galilee, but it's not much of a sea at all, actually).. When I stood on it, I laughed. Not at all like majestic solemn old Mount Sinai.

Not exactly what I'd expected. Very gentle. A good joke.


He calmed that sea one night when his disciples were stuck out fishing in the middle of a storm. They were terrified by the storm, then terrified that he'd calmed it. He walks out onto the lake, and calls to them to come to him. Peter (our dearly loved pope) hops out, takes a few steps and sinks.


That my friends, about sums it all up. Very funny.


Stick your finger in me, Thomas. It is finished.


In the Name of the Rose, one of my favorite books, Emberto Eco tells this beautiful story about a Franciscan monk and a novice (played in the uneven late 80's movie version by Sean Connery and Christian Slater) who come to monastery where there's been foul play. The plot revolves around an newly discovered manuscript of Aristotle's ("The Philosopher," as Thomas Aquinas dubs him in the Summa) on laughter. The bad guys are bent on keeping this text from ever seeing the light, because the concept of laughter is so subversive to authority. They eventually kill almost everyone and burn the monastery down along with the book, because they can't handle a joke.

One of the characters (I think it's the arch-badguy, the abbot) makes the observation that in the Gospel Christ never laughs. He cries at the tomb of Lazarus..

(another funny story: "Lord, you're late! He's dead. You were supposed to come when we called you!" Open the tomb. "But he'll be stinky!" You still don't get it. Roll the stone away. They do it. Lazarus comes out dressed like a mummy.
That one had me silently belly laughing to in my pew when it was read at mass a couple weeks ago..)

He gets angry and whips the money changers like curs.

Lots of divine emotion gets expressed.


But no laughter.


Why? Because he's a straight comedian.


"I give them the sign of Jonas," he said.


And this is the thing: the Book of Jonah (like the Book of Job) is a comedy.

Go tell the people to repent, Jonah. "No. Stop bugging me." Jonah runs away, gets on a boat to Finisterra (the name of the end of land where Spain tapers out into the void just beyond Santiago de Compostelle), thinking he can hide from God. There's a storm, like that one on the Sea of Galilee. The sailors are terrified, so when Jonah confesses that God's out to get him, they throw him overboard and so calm the waves. Christ parodies this when he walks out onto the sea himself. Jonah is swallowed by Leviathan. He rests in the gut of a fish (the tomb of the sea) for three days..

(This is an inversion of when the fish leaps out of the Euphrates and Tobias grabs and eats it, then burns its liver to scare away Asmodeus from his beloved.. Or when Christ eats his last meal of grilled fish before he rises into heaven.. See how the symbols and the things signified, how all the referents proliferate? That's what a good comedy is all about..)

He gets spit up onto the beach, resurrected. He then grudgingly decides to obey God, and goes to preach repentance to the people of the great city (Ninevah, or Mosul- the capital of of what is now Southern or Kurdish Iraq, the northern twin of Baghdad, which is on the rivers of Babylon) whom he thinks are disgusting people not worthy of being pardoned. "I don't want to go preach forgiveness to those bastards. I want them to burn like Sodom and Gommorah did.." But he does it now anyway, because he didn't much enjoy being stuck in that fish. He preaches, and they all convert and put on sackcloth and ashes. A great revival. Billy Grahm's wet dream. The End.


It's out of control. And when the meaning dawns on you, you should laugh.


That's why fools who can't take a joke either think that the whole thing is contrived and "just a myth" or else run around saying that it's all "literally" true.

I hate the word literal. It's a nearly useless word that is its own deconstruction.


Our problem is that we need to control everything. We need to pretend we understand. We need to be right. Most of us are running around imposing our narratives on things, telling other people that they're wrong. Faith is parodied as a means of social control, of controlling our own insecurities.

Our tendency is to attempt to turn it all into a recipe for anathematizing and controlling other people..

("The Bible vs. Science," "Creation Science," nursing unhealthy obsessions with Darwin.. The Nazis, the eugenicists, militant atheists and the folks down at the Four Square Bible Church have got it all figured out, see.)

A means of categorizing and reducing or even annihilating the heretical other in all his scandal.


Grinding boots up Muslim asses, for example. Planting boots on their graves.


The irony of militant atheists like Christopher Hitchens or Sam Harris writing book length screeds condemning the many horrific things people have done while proclaiming religious motives and justification, but then themselves advocating massive violence and terror against Muslims is a classical example of this..

An example so idiotic and shameless that it traumatizes my mind.


"The Inquisition means the Catholic Church is evil!"

This, immediately followed by "Muslims are evil, and I support the U.S. government's enhanced interrogation and rendition of terrorists, and Israeli and U.S. coalition violence against them!"


Like I say, no sense of irony. Very stupid.


They cannot see that they are doing much what the Nazis did to the Jews, or what the inquisitors in the violent aftermath of the wars that expelled the Muslims and Jews from Spain, did.

It's not that different. It's coming from the same place: rectitude, ideology as tribalism, annihilation of dissent.

Assassination, terror, and violence as censorship.

The other and his ideas are so threatening we must crush him politically or else kill him. Islam (or Judaism, or Catholicism, or jahaliyah - that's a favorite term among Salafist Muslims, it means pagan ignorance and decadence, all that is not Islam, or whatever) is so dangerous, we must eradicate it.

Shut up. You're wrong. If you don't shut up and do what I tell you, and believe what I tell you to believe, we will kill you.


My earlier posts about the "Left Behind" novels and the Grand Inquisitor are all meant to be driving at this same thesis.


When I put all these things up, I mean it to be read in full context. A context that is to me one of irony, parody and amusement.


Because death and evil are either a joke, or nothing's funny.


For what God does is almost always unexpected, you can't prepare your mind or body for the revelation. You can store up a year's worth of food in your basement, buy guns and ammo, vote Republican and try to keep America pure from whatever you think is evil and threatening, but in the end none of that will matter.

You can prepare your heart and soul, though.

One last joke:

Did you hear the one about that guy that stood up in a Podunk hick town synagogue a couple thousand years ago, pointed at the book of Isaiah and said “Today this Scripture has been fulfilled in your hearing..”


Cymbal clash. Bada-bump.


Jews. They're pretty damn funny bunch. Always going for the best punchlines.


Blessed Holy Week, everyone. Let's keep one another in our prayers.



---

Saturday, April 16, 2011

Fun with Charts & Graphs: Contextualization of U.S. National Taxation & Debt, c. 1920 thru Present [revised]

(Note: I've revised this post and added material about 4 hours after my initial posting - I want to be sure that the post is long enough to keep your attention..)

Happy Tax Day! Remember: The IRS Loves You, Baby.

Belated wishes, anyway. I meant to post this yesterday.

Still, in the spirit of the celebration (which properly speaking ought to be marked with an octave..) I present you all some pertinent charts, mostly from this excellent site: Visualizing Economics.

As always, you may click on the images to expand them.


First item, a chart of the top marginal rates of the three major sorts of U.S. Federal income taxes - personal income, corporate income and capital gains (tax on investment gains) taxes - since 1910:



This all is still only a snapshot, there's of course much more to the overall story, such as questions concerning the percentages of the lower brackets, the adjusted dollar benchmarks for all brackets, as well as issues such as tax shelters and deductions and other complications in the code cannot that be crammed into one or any graph.. So it's all more complex than this graph can represent.

The graph "Lower Taxes for the Highest Earners" below and this explanation of the chart from the Visualizing Economics website explicate those complications a bit:

Green line is the top marginal rate for married couples filing jointly (most years dividends were tax like ordinary income until 2003), orange is the top rate for income from capital gains. The top corporate tax rate is included for comparison. Your marginal tax rate is the rate you pay on the “last dollar” you earn; but when you view the taxes you paid as a percentage of your income, your effective tax rate is less than your marginal rate, especially after you take into account the deductions and exemptions, i.e. income that is not subject to any tax.

Over the years, changing the amount of taxes people pay was accomplished not just by changing rates but by changing the income limits of the tax brackets. Just looking at the top rates does not give the whole picture about who is paying taxes. Before the 1986 tax reform, the income tax had 15 brackets. In the 1930s, there were more than 50. The Wealth Tax Act of 1935, applied the top rate to income over $5 million and had only a single taxpayer: John D. Rockefeller, Jr. As the number of tax brackets decrease, the the top rate was applied to more people over the decades. Since 1987 the income tax brackets were combined so now more than a million people “qualify” for the top marginal rate. If you are interested here is the first 1040 form for 1913.



The main thing to note is how the top marginal personal and corporate income taxes were *much* higher in the booming 40's & 50's through to the Reagan "Supply Side" Tax Break Revolution 1981.

The top marginal bracket peaked in the mid 90's and then settled at 90% from the early 50's until 1964. Those were the tax rates during the most expansive economic boom in human history, in the richest country in the world.

Here are two charts that put us into an international context:

First, an international comparison of both corporate and personal income tax rates:


Notice that the United States has relatively high corporate taxes, and low personal income taxes in international terms.


Next, I give you a narrower international comparison of the percentage of the GDP (tax-to-GDP ratio) taken by governments in tax revenue:




Today, Denmark is the most taxed country in the world with a tax-to-GDP ratio of only 48.9%.
While as you see here, the U.S. tax-to-GDP ratio hovers in the low to mid 20 percentiles.

Comparatively, amongst first world nations, the United States takes a very low percentage of GDP as taxes..


Interestingly, I found this graph which says that Danes report being the happiest people on earth, somewhat happier than Americans, despite making less and being taxed more:


They also report being equally happy, rich or poor, which is atypical.


Now, take that very first chart of American income tax history above, and compare it with these next two showing the national debt explosion over the same time period:




Some observations:

We now are at a similar level of debt in comparison to our GDP as we held during WW II.

Also, there seems to be some odd correlation between cutting taxes and our exploding debt.

Note 1981, which is the year of Reagan's tax reform. The debt explosion began there, briefly improves under Clinton and the economic boom of the late 90's, and then explodes again under Bush and then Obama.

Can anyone say "voodoo economics" or supply side catastrophe? Can you say trillions of dollars blown into the sands of Iraq and Afghanistan?

I knew you could.


Here's another interesting chart, showing a graph of the percentage of capital gains as a percentage of all national income against a chart of federal budget surpluses and deficits by year:



Note here how the late 90's surge in investment income (the tech bubble) corresponded with a series of Federal Budget surpluses under Clinton, but that the housing bubble surge under Bush did not.


This next chart gives a bit of perspective on the issue of tax brackets, lacking in the very first chart:



Notice how the income tax is still hugely regressive, in that the people making tens of millions (the upper 1%) pay less than 40% (and still can shelter much of that), while the lowest earners making tens of thousands still pay over ten percent..


Wikipedia has some interesting data on poverty in the United States, saying that it's cyclical in nature with roughly 13 to 17% of Americans living below the federal poverty line at any given point in time, and roughly 40% falling below the poverty line at some point within a 10-year time span. Poverty is defined as the state of one who lacks a usual or socially acceptable amount of money or material possessions. Approximately 43.6 (14.3%) million Americans were living in poverty in 2009, up from 39.8 million (13.2%) in 2008. Also note, and to put all of this into further context, that the poverty threshold in the United Sates in 2009 for a single person under 65 was US$11,161; the threshold for a family group of four, including two children, was US$21,756.

This last graph shows how that compares to poverty internationally:


Blue is good, yellow and orange not so much, red is very bad.


National estimates are based on population-weighted subgroup estimates from household surveys. Definitions of the poverty line may vary considerably among nations. For example, rich nations generally employ more generous standards of poverty than poor nations. Thus, the numbers are not comparable among countries.

The common international poverty line has in the past been roughly US$1 a day. In 2008, the World Bank came out with a revised figure of US$1.25 at 2005 purchasing-power parity..




Try driving your SUV to the McDonald's drive trough on $1.25 a day. You could fill the tank maybe half full once a month in the few before the repo men come, and starve.. Or else walk, and then when you got there you'd be able to buy one item off the dollar menu.

Accentuate the positive, you'd burn off flab.


But that's just a fantasy. You make US$8.50 an hour at Walmart. And you can still get a plum job at the U.S. Post Office, so no worries! They start you at $19 an hour and the median pay is well above that! You'll get benefits and a Federal pension too!

So cheer up my fellow Americans! Don't be glum! Life isn't so bad! Not when you can afford to send a check for thousands of dollars to the IRS to do your part in helping bail out Wall Street and pay bankers their well deserved bonuses! And still own a car and shop at an American supermarket and eat out once in a while..


I close with a really funny set of maps. These demonstrate in yet another way how weird our politics are. I'm going to use the first graphic again later, because I have another post in mind that will discuss how warped people's voting is, in terms of how their ideological discourse and voting habits often diverge from their economic interests.

Click to enlarge and read it:


The two maps are a bit confusing. Look at the chart at the bottom of the graphic that gives the proportion of taxes paid to benefits received. Then compare it with this map, the electoral results for the last (2008) presidential election, red states McCain, Blue Obama:



See the joke? States that voted for McCain and the Republican line (lie) of smaller government and forever lower taxes almost all get a much greater return on their tax input than do most states state that voted for Obama and "socialism."

New Mexico, which gets the highest return per dollar sent (2 to 1) hung in the balance and I think had a recount, so it's a near exception. My home state Maine, is a clear exception - voted Obama, and get the cash for our vote. We also have two of the most powerful - moderate female Republican - senators in the country, Collins and Snowe, whom I bet account for much of that money in pork.. Most of the other exceptions who voted for Obama and get slightly over parity on their return for the tax dollar (e.g. Iowa, Pennsylvania, Missouri) are close calls electorally and have recently been skewing Republican.

I think the overall pattern can be explained by senators from small states getting the goods for their constituents, ideological blather aside. They have much more influence per taxpayer head than senators from large, and they use it. Texas you'll notice is also an outlier, but has 24 million people for its 2 senators. Maine has 1.25 million for its 2. This disparity in the senate favors states with small (and incidentally mostly rural - look at the federal farm bill for a graphic demonstration of this effecting federal cash flow) constituencies.. That's the raw brutal math.

This disparity amuses me immensely. The banker and bubba both howl against "socialism" and then take the taxpayer to the cleaners with a crowbar up side the head.


God bless America. Land that I love.


The American dream's still alive. Yippee kay yay, eh?



---

Thursday, April 14, 2011

Essential Texts: Fydor Dostoevsky - The Grand Inquisitor, Chapter V of The Brothers Karamazov (1879)

Redacted, with some few emphases for clarity's sake. The paragraphing is a bit rough here, I highlight some of the fireworks..


Do you know, Alyosha -- don't laugh I made a poem about a year ago. If you can waste another ten minutes on me, I'll tell it to you."

"You wrote a poem?"

"Oh, no, I didn't write it," laughed Ivan, and I've never written two lines of poetry in my life. But I made up this poem in prose and I remembered it. I was carried away when I made it up. You will be my first reader -- that is listener. Why should an author forego even one listener?" smiled Ivan. "Shall I tell it to you?"

"I am all attention." said Alyosha.

"My poem is called The Grand Inquisitor; it's a ridiculous thing, but I want to tell it to you..

Chapter 5

[...]

Bearing the Cross, in slavish dress, Weary and worn, the Heavenly King Our mother, Russia, came to bless, And through our land went wandering.

And that certainly was so, I assure you.

"And behold, He deigned to appear for a moment to the people, to the tortured, suffering people, sunk in iniquity, but loving Him like children. My story is laid in Spain, in Seville, in the most terrible time of the Inquisition, when fires were lighted every day to the glory of God, and 'in the splendid auto da fe the wicked heretics were burnt.' Oh, of course, this was not the coming in which He will appear, according to His promise, at the end of time in all His heavenly glory, and which will be sudden 'as lightning flashing from east to west.' No, He visited His children only for a moment, and there where the flames were crackling round the heretics. In His infinite mercy He came once more among men in that human shape in which He walked among men for thirty-three years fifteen centuries ago. He came down to the 'hot pavements' of the southern town in which on the day before almost a hundred heretics had, ad majorem gloriam Dei, been burnt by the cardinal, the Grand Inquisitor, in a magnificent auto da fe, in the presence of the king, the court, the knights, the cardinals, the most charming ladies of the court, and the whole population of Seville.

"He came softly, unobserved, and yet, strange to say, everyone recognised Him. That might be one of the best passages in the poem. I mean, why they recognised Him. The people are irresistibly drawn to Him, they surround Him, they flock about Him, follow Him. He moves silently in their midst with a gentle smile of infinite compassion. The sun of love burns in His heart, and power shine from His eyes, and their radiance, shed on the people, stirs their hearts with responsive love. He holds out His hands to them, blesses them, and a healing virtue comes from contact with Him, even with His garments. An old man in the crowd, blind from childhood, cries out, 'O Lord, heal me and I shall see Thee!' and, as it were, scales fall from his eyes and the blind man sees Him. The crowd weeps and kisses the earth under His feet. Children throw flowers before Him, sing, and cry hosannah. 'It is He -- it is He!' repeat. 'It must be He, it can be no one but Him!' He stops at the steps of the Seville cathedral at the moment when the weeping mourners are bringing in a little open white coffin. In it lies a child of seven, the only daughter of a prominent citizen. The dead child lies hidden in flowers. 'He will raise your child,' the crowd shouts to the weeping mother. The priest, coming to meet the coffin, looks perplexed, and frowns, but the mother of the dead child throws herself at His feet with a wail. 'If it is Thou, raise my child!' she cries, holding out her hands to Him. The procession halts, the coffin is laid on the steps at His feet. He looks with compassion, and His lips once more softly pronounce, 'Maiden, arise!' and the maiden arises. The little girl sits up in the coffin and looks round, smiling with wide-open wondering eyes, holding a bunch of white roses they had put in her hand.

"There are cries, sobs, confusion among the people, and at that moment the cardinal himself, the Grand Inquisitor, passes by the cathedral. He is an old man, almost ninety, tall and erect, with a withered face and sunken eyes, in which there is still a gleam of light. He is not dressed in his gorgeous cardinal's robes, as he was the day before, when he was burning the enemies of the Roman Church- at this moment he is wearing his coarse, old, monk's cassock. At a distance behind him come his gloomy assistants and slaves and the 'holy guard.' He stops at the sight of the crowd and watches it from a distance. He sees everything; he sees them set the coffin down at His feet, sees the child rise up, and his face darkens. He knits his thick grey brows and his eyes gleam with a sinister fire. He holds out his finger and bids the guards take Him. And such is his power, so completely are the people cowed into submission and trembling obedience to him, that the crowd immediately makes way for the guards, and in the midst of deathlike silence they lay hands on Him and lead him away. The crowd instantly bows down to the earth, like one man, before the old Inquisitor. He blesses the people in silence and passes on' The guards lead their prisoner to the close, gloomy vaulted prison -- in the ancient palace of the Holy, inquisition and shut him in it. The day passes and is followed by the dark, burning, 'breathless' night of Seville. The air is 'fragrant with laurel and lemon.' In the pitch darkness the iron door of the prison is suddenly opened and the Grand Inquisitor himself comes in with a light in his hand. He is alone; the door is closed at once behind him. He stands in the doorway and for a minute or two gazes into His face. At last he goes up slowly, sets the light on the table and speaks.

"'Is it Thou? Thou?' but receiving no answer, he adds at once. 'Don't answer, be silent. What canst Thou say, indeed? I know too well what Thou wouldst say. And Thou hast no right to add anything to what Thou hadst said of old. Why, then, art Thou come to hinder us? For Thou hast come to hinder us, and Thou knowest that. But dost thou know what will be to-morrow? I know not who Thou art and care not to know whether it is Thou or only a semblance of Him, but to-morrow I shall condemn Thee and burn Thee at the stake as the worst of heretics. And the very people who have to-day kissed Thy feet, to-morrow at the faintest sign from me will rush to heap up the embers of Thy fire. Knowest Thou that? Yes, maybe Thou knowest it,' he added with thoughtful penetration, never for a moment taking his eyes off the Prisoner."

"I don't quite understand, Ivan. What does it mean?" Alyosha, who had been listening in silence, said with a smile. "Is it simply a wild fantasy, or a mistake on the part of the old man -- some impossible quid pro quo?"

"Take it as the last," said Ivan, laughing, "if you are so corrupted by modern realism and can't stand anything fantastic. If you like it to be a case of mistaken identity, let it be so. It is true," he went on, laughing, "the old man was ninety, and he might well be crazy over his set idea. He might have been struck by the appearance of the Prisoner. It might, in fact, be simply his ravings, the delusion of an old man of ninety, over-excited by the auto da fe of a hundred heretics the day before. But does it matter to us after all whether it was a mistake of identity or a wild fantasy? All that matters is that the old man should speak out, that he should speak openly of what he has thought in silence for ninety years."

"And the Prisoner too is silent? Does He look at him and not say a word?"

"That's inevitable in any case," Ivan laughed again. "The old man has told Him He hasn't the right to add anything to what He has said of old. One may say it is the most fundamental feature of Roman Catholicism, in my opinion at least. 'All has been given by Thee to the Pope,' they say, 'and all, therefore, is still in the Pope's hands, and there is no need for Thee to come now at all. Thou must not meddle for the time, at least.' That's how they speak and write too- the Jesuits, at any rate. I have read it myself in the works of their theologians. 'Hast Thou the right to reveal to us one of the mysteries of that world from which Thou hast come?' my old man asks Him, and answers the question for Him. 'No, Thou hast not; that Thou mayest not add to what has been said of old, and mayest not take from men the freedom which Thou didst exalt when Thou wast on earth. Whatsoever Thou revealest anew will encroach on men's freedom of faith; for it will be manifest as a miracle, and the freedom of their faith was dearer to Thee than anything in those days fifteen hundred years ago. Didst Thou not often say then, "I will make you free"? But now Thou hast seen these "free" men,' the old man adds suddenly, with a pensive smile. 'Yes, we've paid dearly for it,' he goes on, looking sternly at Him, 'but at last we have completed that work in Thy name. For fifteen centuries we have been wrestling with Thy freedom, but now it is ended and over for good. Dost Thou not believe that it's over for good? Thou lookest meekly at me and deignest not even to be wroth with me. But let me tell Thee that now, to-day, people are more persuaded than ever that they have perfect freedom, yet they have brought their freedom to us and laid it humbly at our feet. But that has been our doing. Was this what Thou didst? Was this Thy freedom?'"

"I don't understand again." Alyosha broke in. "Is he ironical, is he jesting?"

"Not a bit of it! He claims it as a merit for himself and his Church that at last they have vanquished freedom and have done so to make men happy. 'For now' (he is speaking of the Inquisition, of course) 'for the first time it has become possible to think of the happiness of men. Man was created a rebel; and how can rebels be happy? Thou wast warned,' he says to Him. 'Thou hast had no lack of admonitions and warnings, but Thou didst not listen to those warnings; Thou didst reject the only way by which men might be made happy. But, fortunately, departing Thou didst hand on the work to us. Thou hast promised, Thou hast established by Thy word, Thou hast given to us the right to bind and to unbind, and now, of course, Thou canst not think of taking it away. Why, then, hast Thou come to hinder us?'"


"And what's the meaning of 'no lack of admonitions and warnings'?" asked Alyosha.

"Why, that's the chief part of what the old man must say.

"'The wise and dread spirit, the spirit of self-destruction and non-existence,' the old man goes on, great spirit talked with Thee in the wilderness, and we are told in the books that he "tempted" Thee. Is that so? And could anything truer be said than what he revealed to Thee in three questions and what Thou didst reject, and what in the books is called "the temptation"? And yet if there has ever been on earth a real stupendous miracle, it took place on that day, on the day of the three temptations. The statement of those three questions was itself the miracle. If it were possible to imagine simply for the sake of argument that those three questions of the dread spirit had perished utterly from the books, and that we had to restore them and to invent them anew, and to do so had gathered together all the wise men of the earth -- rulers, chief priests, learned men, philosophers, poets -- and had set them the task to invent three questions, such as would not only fit the occasion, but express in three words, three human phrases, the whole future history of the world and of humanity -- dost Thou believe that all the wisdom of the earth united could have invented anything in depth and force equal to the three questions which were actually put to Thee then by the wise and mighty spirit in the wilderness? From those questions alone, from the miracle of their statement, we can see that we have here to do not with the fleeting human intelligence, but with the absolute and eternal. For in those three questions the whole subsequent history of mankind is, as it were, brought together into one whole, and foretold, and in them are united all the unsolved historical contradictions of human nature. At the time it could not be so clear, since the future was unknown; but now that fifteen hundred years have passed, we see that everything in those three questions was so justly divined and foretold, and has been so truly fulfilled, that nothing can be added to them or taken from them.

"Judge Thyself who was right -- Thou or he who questioned Thee then? Remember the first question; its meaning, in other words, was this: "Thou wouldst go into the world, and art going with empty hands, with some promise of freedom which men in their simplicity and their natural unruliness cannot even understand, which they fear and dread -- for nothing has ever been more insupportable for a man and a human society than freedom. But seest Thou these stones in this parched and barren wilderness? Turn them into bread, and mankind will run after Thee like a flock of sheep, grateful and obedient, though for ever trembling, lest Thou withdraw Thy hand and deny them Thy bread." But Thou wouldst not deprive man of freedom and didst reject the offer, thinking, what is that freedom worth if obedience is bought with bread? Thou didst reply that man lives not by bread alone. But dost Thou know that for the sake of that earthly bread the spirit of the earth will rise up against Thee and will strive with Thee and overcome Thee, and all will follow him, crying, "Who can compare with this beast? He has given us fire from heaven!" Dost Thou know that the ages will pass, and humanity will proclaim by the lips of their sages that there is no crime, and therefore no sin; there is only hunger? "Feed men, and then ask of them virtue!" that's what they'll write on the banner, which they will raise against Thee, and with which they will destroy Thy temple. Where Thy temple stood will rise a new building; the terrible tower of Babel will be built again, and though, like the one of old, it will not be finished, yet Thou mightest have prevented that new tower and have cut short the sufferings of men for a thousand years; for they will come back to us after a thousand years of agony with their tower. They will seek us again, hidden underground in the catacombs, for we shall be again persecuted and tortured. They will find us and cry to us, "Feed us, for those who have promised us fire from heaven haven't given it!" And then we shall finish building their tower, for he finishes the building who feeds them. And we alone shall feed them in Thy name, declaring falsely that it is in Thy name. Oh, never, never can they feed themselves without us! No science will give them bread so long as they remain free. In the end they will lay their freedom at our feet, and say to us, "Make us your slaves, but feed us." They will understand themselves, at last, that freedom and bread enough for all are inconceivable together, for never, never will they be able to share between them! They will be convinced, too, that they can never be free, for they are weak, vicious, worthless, and rebellious. Thou didst promise them the bread of Heaven, but, I repeat again, can it compare with earthly bread in the eyes of the weak, ever sinful and ignoble race of man? And if for the sake of the bread of Heaven thousands shall follow Thee, what is to become of the millions and tens of thousands of millions of creatures who will not have the strength to forego the earthly bread for the sake of the heavenly? Or dost Thou care only for the tens of thousands of the great and strong, while the millions, numerous as the sands of the sea, who are weak but love Thee, must exist only for the sake of the great and strong? No, we care for the weak too. They are sinful and rebellious, but in the end they too will become obedient. They will marvel at us and look on us as gods, because we are ready to endure the freedom which they have found so dreadful and to rule over them- so awful it will seem to them to be free. But we shall tell them that we are Thy servants and rule them in Thy name. We shall deceive them again, for we will not let Thee come to us again. That deception will be our suffering, for we shall be forced to lie.

"'This is the significance of the first question in the wilderness, and this is what Thou hast rejected for the sake of that freedom which Thou hast exalted above everything. Yet in this question lies hid the great secret of this world. Choosing "bread," Thou wouldst have satisfied the universal and everlasting craving of humanity -- to find someone to worship. So long as man remains free he strives for nothing so incessantly and so painfully as to find someone to worship. But man seeks to worship what is established beyond dispute, so that all men would agree at once to worship it. For these pitiful creatures are concerned not only to find what one or the other can worship, but to find community of worship is the chief misery of every man individually and of all humanity from the beginning of time. For the sake of common worship they've slain each other with the sword. They have set up gods and challenged one another, "Put away your gods and come and worship ours, or we will kill you and your gods!" And so it will be to the end of the world, even when gods disappear from the earth; they will fall down before idols just the same. Thou didst know, Thou couldst not but have known, this fundamental secret of human nature, but Thou didst reject the one infallible banner which was offered Thee to make all men bow down to Thee alone -- the banner of earthly bread; and Thou hast rejected it for the sake of freedom and the bread of Heaven. Behold what Thou didst further. And all again in the name of freedom! I tell Thee that man is tormented by no greater anxiety than to find someone quickly to whom he can hand over that gift of freedom with which the ill-fated creature is born. But only one who can appease their conscience can take over their freedom. In bread there was offered Thee an invincible banner; give bread, and man will worship thee, for nothing is more certain than bread. But if someone else gains possession of his conscience -- Oh! then he will cast away Thy bread and follow after him who has ensnared his conscience. In that Thou wast right. For the secret of man's being is not only to live but to have something to live for. Without a stable conception of the object of life, man would not consent to go on living, and would rather destroy himself than remain on earth, though he had bread in abundance. That is true. But what happened? Instead of taking men's freedom from them, Thou didst make it greater than ever! Didst Thou forget that man prefers peace, and even death, to freedom of choice in the knowledge of good and evil? Nothing is more seductive for man than his freedom of conscience, but nothing is a greater cause of suffering. And behold, instead of giving a firm foundation for setting the conscience of man at rest for ever, Thou didst choose all that is exceptional, vague and enigmatic; Thou didst choose what was utterly beyond the strength of men, acting as though Thou didst not love them at all- Thou who didst come to give Thy life for them! Instead of taking possession of men's freedom, Thou didst increase it, and burdened the spiritual kingdom of mankind with its sufferings for ever. Thou didst desire man's free love, that he should follow Thee freely, enticed and taken captive by Thee. In place of the rigid ancient law, man must hereafter with free heart decide for himself what is good and what is evil, having only Thy image before him as his guide. But didst Thou not know that he would at last reject even Thy image and Thy truth, if he is weighed down with the fearful burden of free choice? They will cry aloud at last that the truth is not in Thee, for they could not have been left in greater confusion and suffering than Thou hast caused, laying upon them so many cares and unanswerable problems.

"'So that, in truth, Thou didst Thyself lay the foundation for the destruction of Thy kingdom, and no one is more to blame for it. Yet what was offered Thee? There are three powers, three powers alone, able to conquer and to hold captive for ever the conscience of these impotent rebels for their happiness those forces are miracle, mystery and authority. Thou hast rejected all three and hast set the example for doing so. When the wise and dread spirit set Thee on the pinnacle of the temple and said to Thee, "If Thou wouldst know whether Thou art the Son of God then cast Thyself down, for it is written: the angels shall hold him up lest he fall and bruise himself, and Thou shalt know then whether Thou art the Son of God and shalt prove then how great is Thy faith in Thy Father." But Thou didst refuse and wouldst not cast Thyself down. Oh, of course, Thou didst proudly and well, like God; but the weak, unruly race of men, are they gods? Oh, Thou didst know then that in taking one step, in making one movement to cast Thyself down, Thou wouldst be tempting God and have lost all Thy faith in Him, and wouldst have been dashed to pieces against that earth which Thou didst come to save. And the wise spirit that tempted Thee would have rejoiced. But I ask again, are there many like Thee? And couldst Thou believe for one moment that men, too, could face such a temptation? Is the nature of men such, that they can reject miracle, and at the great moments of their life, the moments of their deepest, most agonising spiritual difficulties, cling only to the free verdict of the heart? Oh, Thou didst know that Thy deed would be recorded in books, would be handed down to remote times and the utmost ends of the earth, and Thou didst hope that man, following Thee, would cling to God and not ask for a miracle. But Thou didst not know that when man rejects miracle he rejects God too; for man seeks not so much God as the miraculous. And as man cannot bear to be without the miraculous, he will create new miracles of his own for himself, and will worship deeds of sorcery and witchcraft, though he might be a hundred times over a rebel, heretic and infidel. Thou didst not come down from the Cross when they shouted to Thee, mocking and reviling Thee, "Come down from the cross and we will believe that Thou art He." Thou didst not come down, for again Thou wouldst not enslave man by a miracle, and didst crave faith given freely, not based on miracle. Thou didst crave for free love and not the base raptures of the slave before the might that has overawed him for ever. But Thou didst think too highly of men therein, for they are slaves, of course, though rebellious by nature. Look round and judge; fifteen centuries have passed, look upon them. Whom hast Thou raised up to Thyself? I swear, man is weaker and baser by nature than Thou hast believed him! Can he, can he do what Thou didst? By showing him so much respect, Thou didst, as it were, cease to feel for him, for Thou didst ask far too much from him -- Thou who hast loved him more than Thyself! Respecting him less, Thou wouldst have asked less of him. That would have been more like love, for his burden would have been lighter. He is weak and vile. What though he is everywhere now rebelling against our power, and proud of his rebellion? It is the pride of a child and a schoolboy. They are little children rioting and barring out the teacher at school. But their childish delight will end; it will cost them dear. Mankind as a whole has always striven to organise a universal state. There have been many great nations with great histories, but the more highly they were developed the more unhappy they were, for they felt more acutely than other people the craving for world-wide union. The great conquerors, Timours and Ghenghis-Khans, whirled like hurricanes over the face of the earth striving to subdue its people, and they too were but the unconscious expression of the same craving for universal unity. Hadst Thou taken the world and Caesar's purple, Thou wouldst have founded the universal state and have given universal peace. For who can rule men if not he who holds their conscience and their bread in his hands? We have taken the sword of Caesar, and in taking it, of course, have rejected Thee and followed him. Oh, ages are yet to come of the confusion of free thought, of their science and cannibalism. For having begun to build their tower of Babel without us, they will end, of course, with cannibalism. But then the beast will crawl to us and lick our feet and spatter them with tears of blood. And we shall sit upon the beast and raise the cup, and on it will be written, "Mystery." But then, and only then, the reign of peace and happiness will come for men. Thou art proud of Thine elect, but Thou hast only the elect, while we give rest to all. And besides, how many of those elect, those mighty ones who could become elect, have grown weary waiting for Thee, and have transferred and will transfer the powers of their spirit and the warmth of their heart to the other camp, and end by raising their free banner against Thee. Thou didst Thyself lift up that banner. But with us all will be happy and will no more rebel nor destroy one another as under Thy freedom. Oh, we shall persuade them that they will only become free when they renounce their freedom to us and submit to us. And shall we be right or shall we be lying? They will be convinced that we are right, for they will remember the horrors of slavery and confusion to which Thy freedom brought them. Freedom, free thought, and science will lead them into such straits and will bring them face to face with such marvels and insoluble mysteries, that some of them, the fierce and rebellious, will destroy themselves, others, rebellious but weak, will destroy one another, while the rest, weak and unhappy, will crawl fawning to our feet and whine to us: "Yes, you were right, you alone possess His mystery, and we come back to you, save us from ourselves!"

"'Receiving bread from us, they will see clearly that we take the bread made by their hands from them, to give it to them, without any miracle. They will see that we do not change the stones to bread, but in truth they will be more thankful for taking it from our hands than for the bread itself! For they will remember only too well that in old days, without our help, even the bread they made turned to stones in their hands, while since they have come back to us, the very stones have turned to bread in their hands. Too, too well will they know the value of complete submission! And until men know that, they will be unhappy. Who is most to blame for their not knowing it?-speak! Who scattered the flock and sent it astray on unknown paths? But the flock will come together again and will submit once more, and then it will be once for all. Then we shall give them the quiet humble happiness of weak creatures such as they are by nature. Oh, we shall persuade them at last not to be proud, for Thou didst lift them up and thereby taught them to be proud. We shall show them that they are weak, that they are only pitiful children, but that childlike happiness is the sweetest of all. They will become timid and will look to us and huddle close to us in fear, as chicks to the hen. They will marvel at us and will be awe-stricken before us, and will be proud at our being so powerful and clever that we have been able to subdue such a turbulent flock of thousands of millions. They will tremble impotently before our wrath, their minds will grow fearful, they will be quick to shed tears like women and children, but they will be just as ready at a sign from us to pass to laughter and rejoicing, to happy mirth and childish song. Yes, we shall set them to work, but in their leisure hours we shall make their life like a child's game, with children's songs and innocent dance. Oh, we shall allow them even sin, they are weak and helpless, and they will love us like children because we allow them to sin. We shall tell them that every sin will be expiated, if it is done with our permission, that we allow them to sin because we love them, and the punishment for these sins we take upon ourselves. And we shall take it upon ourselves, and they will adore us as their saviours who have taken on themselves their sins before God. And they will have no secrets from us. We shall allow or forbid them to live with their wives and mistresses, to have or not to have children according to whether they have been obedient or disobedient -- and they will submit to us gladly and cheerfully. The most painful secrets of their conscience, all, all they will bring to us, and we shall have an answer for all. And they will be glad to believe our answer, for it will save them from the great anxiety and terrible agony they endure at present in making a free decision for themselves. And all will be happy, all the millions of creatures except the hundred thousand who rule over them. For only we, we who guard the mystery, shall be unhappy. There will be thousands of millions of happy babes, and a hundred thousand sufferers who have taken upon themselves the curse of the knowledge of good and evil. Peacefully they will die, peacefully they will expire in Thy name, and beyond the grave they will find nothing but death. But we shall keep the secret, and for their happiness we shall allure them with the reward of heaven and eternity. Though if there were anything in the other world, it certainly would not be for such as they. It is prophesied that Thou wilt come again in victory, Thou wilt come with Thy chosen, the proud and strong, but we will say that they have only saved themselves, but we have saved all. We are told that the harlot who sits upon the beast, and holds in her hands the mystery, shall be put to shame, that the weak will rise up again, and will rend her royal purple and will strip naked her loathsome body. But then I will stand up and point out to Thee the thousand millions of happy children who have known no sin. And we who have taken their sins upon us for their happiness will stand up before Thee and say: "Judge us if Thou canst and darest." Know that I fear Thee not. Know that I too have been in the wilderness, I too have lived on roots and locusts, I too prized the freedom with which Thou hast blessed men, and I too was striving to stand among Thy elect, among the strong and powerful, thirsting "to make up the number." But I awakened and would not serve madness. I turned back and joined the ranks of those who have corrected Thy work. I left the proud and went back to the humble, for the happiness of the humble. What I say to Thee will come to pass, and our dominion will be built up. I repeat, to-morrow Thou shalt see that obedient flock who at a sign from me will hasten to heap up the hot cinders about the pile on which I shall burn Thee for coming to hinder us. For if anyone has ever deserved our fires, it is Thou. To-morrow I shall burn Thee. Dixi.'"*

* I have spoken.

Ivan stopped. He was carried away as he talked, and spoke with excitement; when he had finished, he suddenly smiled.

Alyosha had listened in silence; towards the end he was greatly moved and seemed several times on the point of interrupting, but restrained himself. Now his words came with a rush.

"But... that's absurd!" he cried, flushing. "Your poem is in praise of Jesus, not in blame of Him -- as you meant it to be. And who will believe you about freedom? Is that the way to understand it? That's not the idea of it in the Orthodox Church.... That's Rome, and not even the whole of Rome, it's false-those are the worst of the Catholics the Inquisitors, the Jesuits!... And there could not be such a fantastic creature as your Inquisitor. What are these sins of mankind they take on themselves? Who are these keepers of the mystery who have taken some curse upon themselves for the happiness of mankind? When have they been seen? We know the Jesuits, they are spoken ill of, but surely they are not what you describe? They are not that at all, not at all.... They are simply the Romish army for the earthly sovereignty of the world in the future, with the Pontiff of Rome for Emperor... that's their ideal, but there's no sort of mystery or lofty melancholy about it.... It's simple lust of power, of filthy earthly gain, of domination-something like a universal serfdom with them as masters-that's all they stand for. They don't even believe in God perhaps. Your suffering Inquisitor is a mere fantasy."

"Stay, stay," laughed Ivan. "how hot you are! A fantasy you say, let it be so! Of course it's a fantasy. But allow me to say: do you really think that the Roman Catholic movement of the last centuries is actually nothing but the lust of power, of filthy earthly gain? Is that Father Paissy's teaching?"

"No, no, on the contrary, Father Paissy did once say something rather the same as you... but of course it's not the same, not a bit the same," Alyosha hastily corrected himself.

"A precious admission, in spite of your 'not a bit the same.' I ask you why your Jesuits and Inquisitors have united simply for vile material gain? Why can there not be among them one martyr oppressed by great sorrow and loving humanity? You see, only suppose that there was one such man among all those who desire nothing but filthy material gain-if there's only one like my old Inquisitor, who had himself eaten roots in the desert and made frenzied efforts to subdue his flesh to make himself free and perfect. But yet all his life he loved humanity, and suddenly his eyes were opened, and he saw that it is no great moral blessedness to attain perfection and freedom, if at the same time one gains the conviction that millions of God's creatures have been created as a mockery, that they will never be capable of using their freedom, that these poor rebels can never turn into giants to complete the tower, that it was not for such geese that the great idealist dreamt his dream of harmony. Seeing all that he turned back and joined -- the clever people. Surely that could have happened?"

"Joined whom, what clever people?" cried Alyosha, completely carried away. "They have no such great cleverness and no mysteries and secrets.... Perhaps nothing but Atheism, that's all their secret. Your Inquisitor does not believe in God, that's his secret!"

"What if it is so! At last you have guessed it. It's perfectly true, it's true that that's the whole secret, but isn't that suffering, at least for a man like that, who has wasted his whole life in the desert and yet could not shake off his incurable love of humanity? In his old age he reached the clear conviction that nothing but the advice of the great dread spirit could build up any tolerable sort of life for the feeble, unruly, 'incomplete, empirical creatures created in jest.' And so, convinced of this, he sees that he must follow the counsel of the wise spirit, the dread spirit of death and destruction, and therefore accept lying and deception, and lead men consciously to death and destruction, and yet deceive them all the way so that they may not notice where they are being led, that the poor blind creatures may at least on the way think themselves happy. And note, the deception is in the name of Him in Whose ideal the old man had so fervently believed all his life long. Is not that tragic? And if only one such stood at the head of the whole army 'filled with the lust of power only for the sake of filthy gain' -- would not one such be enough to make a tragedy? More than that, one such standing at the head is enough to create the actual leading idea of the Roman Church with all its armies and Jesuits, its highest idea. I tell you frankly that I firmly believe that there has always been such a man among those who stood at the head of the movement. Who knows, there may have been some such even among the Roman Popes. Who knows, perhaps the spirit of that accursed old man who loves mankind so obstinately in his own way, is to be found even now in a whole multitude of such old men, existing not by chance but by agreement, as a secret league formed long ago for the guarding of the mystery, to guard it from the weak and the unhappy, so as to make them happy. No doubt it is so, and so it must be indeed. I fancy that even among the Masons there's something of the same mystery at the bottom, and that that's why the Catholics so detest the Masons as their rivals breaking up the unity of the idea, while it is so essential that there should be one flock and one shepherd.... But from the way I defend my idea I might be an author impatient of your criticism. Enough of it."

"You are perhaps a Mason yourself!" broke suddenly from Alyosha. "You don't believe in God," he added, speaking this time very sorrowfully. He fancied besides that his brother was looking at him ironically. "How does your poem end?" he asked, suddenly looking down. "Or was it the end?"

"I meant to end it like this. When the Inquisitor ceased speaking he waited some time for his Prisoner to answer him. His silence weighed down upon him. He saw that the Prisoner had listened intently all the time, looking gently in his face and evidently not wishing to reply. The old man longed for him to say something, however bitter and terrible. But He suddenly approached the old man in silence and softly kissed him on his bloodless aged lips. That was all his answer. The old man shuddered. His lips moved. He went to the door, opened it, and said to Him: 'Go, and come no more... come not at all, never, never!' And he let Him out into the dark alleys of the town. The Prisoner went away."

"And the old man?"

"The kiss glows in his heart, but the old man adheres to his idea."

"And you with him, you too?" cried Alyosha, mournfully.

Ivan laughed.

"Why, it's all nonsense, Alyosha. It's only a senseless poem of a senseless student, who could never write two lines of verse. Why do you take it so seriously? Surely you don't suppose I am going straight off to the Jesuits, to join the men who are correcting His work? Good Lord, it's no business of mine. I told you, all I want is to live on to thirty, and then... dash the cup to the ground!"

"But the little sticky leaves, and the precious tombs, and the blue sky, and the woman you love! How will you live, how will you love them?" Alyosha cried sorrowfully. "With such a hell in your heart and your head, how can you? No, that's just what you are going away for, to join them... if not, you will kill yourself, you can't endure it!"

"There is a strength to endure everything," Ivan said with a cold smile.

"The strength of the Karamazovs -- the strength of the Karamazov baseness."

"To sink into debauchery, to stifle your soul with corruption, yes?"

"Possibly even that... only perhaps till I am thirty I shall escape it, and then-"

"How will you escape it? By what will you escape it? That's impossible with your ideas."

"In the Karamazov way, again." "'Everything is lawful,' you mean?

Everything is lawful, is that it?"

Ivan scowled, and all at once turned strangely pale.

"Ah, you've caught up yesterday's phrase, which so offended Muisov -- and which Dmitri pounced upon so naively and paraphrased!" he smiled queerly. "Yes, if you like, 'everything is lawful' since the word has been said, I won't deny it. And Mitya's version isn't bad."

Alyosha looked at him in silence.

"I thought that going away from here I have you at least," Ivan said suddenly, with unexpected feeling; "but now I see that there is no place for me even in your heart, my dear hermit. The formula, 'all is lawful,' I won't renounce -- will you renounce me for that, yes?"

Alyosha got up, went to him and softly kissed him on the lips..




---